I don't think that will work. Unless the police, FBI, or whomever grabbed your computer at random, they took your computer because they greatly suspect you have something illegal on it (child porn, terrorist material, etc.) If they don't find it, no amount of embarrassing, but legal material is going to convince them. There's an ok chance they'll have to let you go, but like another poster mentioned, you'll have to endure considerable harassment beforehand.
Actually, going by Christian dogma, we're imperfect beings, and there's nothing in the Bible about changing our physical bodies (at least to my knowledge). Even if we ignore that, lets face it, scripture says woman should obey man, nonbelievers will go to hell so do NOT tolerate of their faith, slavery is morally just, etc. When the time comes, there will be some purists who'll refuse to be augmented, but most folks will find some way to merge their beliefs with everyday life. Just like they do today.
What's commercial about taking a product that would have no legal protection and giving it away for free? Sure, it might be impolite to do it with a competitor's product, but hardly commercial.
I don't think sharing or other noncommercial use should be illegal
I don't know if this would be a good thing or a bad thing, but it would lead to a rather interesting world where corporations would probably end up sharing stuff... that their competitors produce. Would be rather amusing to see a release of say Windows 8 freely patched and distributed with the authenticity and quality we expect from Apple.
Personally, I found ScriptNo to be a better option. If nothing else, unlike NoScript, you don't have to manually input a password into a textfile to get it to work.
My euthanize, do you mean they'd kill animals who're beyond medical care, or that they just kill willy nilly? Imo, there's nothing wrong with the former, it's something vets are known to do for starters.
Yet, despite the negative reputation, Windows remains the dominant OS. Not saying that this won't cause any harm to Apple, just that the thing that'll cause real damage is if people start looking at the Galaxy as a legitimate replace for the iPad. And to be honest, no matter how good Galaxy is, I think the Apple tablet like Windows have too much momentum for that to happen anytime soon.
I'm a bit perplexed. So, these actual child molesters will be told to mail CP to a specific location, and the cops can't infiltrate this system because they lack means, and the desire to make the porn? What stops law enforcement from promising to send the porn then simply watching the mailing address like a hawk until they get a suspect?
Yes, people DO get it. Now do you get that people use the word theft because they wish to stretch the definition of the word for whatever reason (exaggeration, to empathize, emotional appeal, belief that copyright violation deprive enough to equal theft, etc). It's not a case of stupidity, just yet another case of where language is perhaps too mutable.
Anon and Lulzsec are about as effective as someone spray painting on some mob boss's house, and Wikileak's does what it does so that the rest of a nation will get off their asses and demand justice/change for the better. In short, we're pretty much on our own when it comes to the TSA. Better start thinking up some plan against them.
Well, there's the social stigma of coasting through life with your looks. And to be frank, even if you're drop dead gorgeous, you still need considerable social and financial skills if you want to market that aspect of yourself. Otherwise at best, you're just going to be one of hundreds of folks who appear in porn until you get middle aged.
And that brings up a more important point. No matter how dumb a attractive person is, they all know looks fade. There are unmotivated idiots who wouldn't care, and have crappy jobs for the rest of their lives. But any other person who has even a shred of self-respect would be compelled to mentally improve themselves just for that reason. Or join the military at the very least.
Sorry, I don't follow. The documentary was just an easy to access example for those not familiar with deaf culture. My opinions are in no way formed exclusively form that one documentary!
Fair enough, and my mistake for assuming so. To be honest though, you really should have supplied more than one source if you wanted to sell the idea that deaf people are strongly against the implant. Especially since the documentary only got like less than a dozen deaf people's opinions on the matter, and most of them were from old people.
Also, just to note, there's a sequel to the documentary called Sound and Fury 6 Years Later. Turns out the two deaf parents decided to implant Heather 3 years later when she was 9, and even the mom got implanted. All in all, I think the parents acted in a fairly understandable way. Initially, they were against implanting since it brought up too much emotions about deaf people being inferior, but they later accepted that it'd be better if the kids were able to walk two worlds so to speak. Frankly their issues were so similar to the ones faced by immigrant cultures that it was rather eerie.
Just what in the documentary made it possible to claim that about several million people? Admittedly I'm not deaf, but I am a bilingual from a country that's homogeneous, and there's a handful of people who'd always think of me as somehow... culturally tainted cause I'm familiar with American language and culture. But the important part is, it's only a handful of people. I doubt the deaf community is any different. Hell, deaf folks don't even have to worry about crap like loss of an ancient culture due to westernization and stuff.
I don't think they portrayed anything. Unless one holds the view that simply mentioning Mannings personal problems means they believe it's the reason why he leaked data. Not to mention, the episode also mentioned he started hanging out with a bunch of computer geeks, and that he was morally offended by some of the things he saw.
Also, I think it was fairly clear Assange thinks Mannings leaked the documents for moral reason, and I don't think Frontline should be editorializing. Nor can I recall them ever doing that.
To be honest though, there's a part of me that wishes Frontline waited until they could actually talk to Mannings.
At this point, I really got to ask, what is your rationale(s) for believing that PBS is propaganda? How are they going aginst The Public Broadcasting Act of 1967?
For what it's worth I do think what Assange is doing is a positive thing overall, but I dislike the word hero. It elevates people to an unrealistic pedestal, and encourages an uncritical view of people that ignores any negatives. It makes us expect too much from those that inherit the title, and to an extent, makes us expect too much from ourselves as well.
If you didn't know about LulzSec's motivations, ya really shouldn't have brought them as supporters for your vendetta against PBS...
You think the Frontline Wikileaks episode was the sole reason? Sorry, pal, but PBS has done way more than that to harm the causes of freedom in the world, and the Wikileaks episode isn't the only government propaganda their guilty of spewing.
It's the reason why LulzSec did what they did according to security week. If you have any additional information, I am genuinely interested.
Also, you appear to have bought the propaganda hook line and sinker. Assange is a hero and anyone who tells you otherwise is lying, pure and simple. There is no "other side" to the story, any more than there's an "other side" to the belief that the Earth orbits the Sun.
And it seems you didn't watch the episode in question. Most of it dealt with Mannings, not Assange. The only really critical thing I can recall being mentioned about Assange is that the NY Times and Daniel Domscheit-Berg both mentioned that he was a difficult person to work with. Sure, Frontline did ask him to opine on some of the negative repercussions and views his actions might create, but such questions are vital to understanding his mindset, and maybe nabbing some fence sitters. An interview that simply praised Assange would be a rather pointless one after all.
I saw the alleged "anti freedom propaganda." The worst thing you could say about that Frontline episode is that they asked hard questions, and didn't portray the people in the episode as automatic heroes. What propaganda was in that show exactly?
Oh pooh. If you don't have a full ensemble of things to make you feel big (depending on various factors it could be things like an iPhone, Rolex Watch, Armani Bag, trendy cloths, etc) then you're just a poser just like those poor schlubs.
Slashdot Mirror
Where did you find this? I went to https://www.penfed.org/productsandrates/creditcards/rewardcards.asp and the rewards for the Platinum Rewards Card is like LordKronos said. 5% gas, 3% groceries, and 1% everything else. The only problem I have with the card is that if you want to redeem the points for cash, they pay you in Prepaid Visa Reward Cards.
Huh, my thought was these folks are trying to drum up subscriptions for VPNs. To he honest, I'm surprised they haven't suggested some sites.
I don't think that will work. Unless the police, FBI, or whomever grabbed your computer at random, they took your computer because they greatly suspect you have something illegal on it (child porn, terrorist material, etc.) If they don't find it, no amount of embarrassing, but legal material is going to convince them. There's an ok chance they'll have to let you go, but like another poster mentioned, you'll have to endure considerable harassment beforehand.
Actually, going by Christian dogma, we're imperfect beings, and there's nothing in the Bible about changing our physical bodies (at least to my knowledge). Even if we ignore that, lets face it, scripture says woman should obey man, nonbelievers will go to hell so do NOT tolerate of their faith, slavery is morally just, etc. When the time comes, there will be some purists who'll refuse to be augmented, but most folks will find some way to merge their beliefs with everyday life. Just like they do today.
What's commercial about taking a product that would have no legal protection and giving it away for free? Sure, it might be impolite to do it with a competitor's product, but hardly commercial.
I don't think sharing or other noncommercial use should be illegal
I don't know if this would be a good thing or a bad thing, but it would lead to a rather interesting world where corporations would probably end up sharing stuff... that their competitors produce. Would be rather amusing to see a release of say Windows 8 freely patched and distributed with the authenticity and quality we expect from Apple.
Personally, I found ScriptNo to be a better option. If nothing else, unlike NoScript, you don't have to manually input a password into a textfile to get it to work.
https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/oiigbmnaadbkfbmpbfijlflahbdbdgdf
My euthanize, do you mean they'd kill animals who're beyond medical care, or that they just kill willy nilly? Imo, there's nothing wrong with the former, it's something vets are known to do for starters.
Yet, despite the negative reputation, Windows remains the dominant OS. Not saying that this won't cause any harm to Apple, just that the thing that'll cause real damage is if people start looking at the Galaxy as a legitimate replace for the iPad. And to be honest, no matter how good Galaxy is, I think the Apple tablet like Windows have too much momentum for that to happen anytime soon.
I'm a bit perplexed. So, these actual child molesters will be told to mail CP to a specific location, and the cops can't infiltrate this system because they lack means, and the desire to make the porn? What stops law enforcement from promising to send the porn then simply watching the mailing address like a hawk until they get a suspect?
What kind of sadistic dogs would want their owners to go see a cruel creature who cuts off genitalia, and occasionally jabs them with pointy things?
Why not politely tell someone to fuck off then? Something like: I'm sorry, but I've a lot of work to do. Perhaps we can talk some other time?
Yes, people DO get it. Now do you get that people use the word theft because they wish to stretch the definition of the word for whatever reason (exaggeration, to empathize, emotional appeal, belief that copyright violation deprive enough to equal theft, etc). It's not a case of stupidity, just yet another case of where language is perhaps too mutable.
Anon and Lulzsec are about as effective as someone spray painting on some mob boss's house, and Wikileak's does what it does so that the rest of a nation will get off their asses and demand justice/change for the better. In short, we're pretty much on our own when it comes to the TSA. Better start thinking up some plan against them.
So, while I'm at it, should I learn how to read traditional, or simplified Chinese?
Well, there's the social stigma of coasting through life with your looks. And to be frank, even if you're drop dead gorgeous, you still need considerable social and financial skills if you want to market that aspect of yourself. Otherwise at best, you're just going to be one of hundreds of folks who appear in porn until you get middle aged.
And that brings up a more important point. No matter how dumb a attractive person is, they all know looks fade. There are unmotivated idiots who wouldn't care, and have crappy jobs for the rest of their lives. But any other person who has even a shred of self-respect would be compelled to mentally improve themselves just for that reason. Or join the military at the very least.
Cause y'know, despite the arrogance, we geeks do have our pop culture, and love to bring it up like all the so called unwashed masses. :)
Sorry, I don't follow. The documentary was just an easy to access example for those not familiar with deaf culture. My opinions are in no way formed exclusively form that one documentary!
Fair enough, and my mistake for assuming so. To be honest though, you really should have supplied more than one source if you wanted to sell the idea that deaf people are strongly against the implant. Especially since the documentary only got like less than a dozen deaf people's opinions on the matter, and most of them were from old people.
Also, just to note, there's a sequel to the documentary called Sound and Fury 6 Years Later. Turns out the two deaf parents decided to implant Heather 3 years later when she was 9, and even the mom got implanted. All in all, I think the parents acted in a fairly understandable way. Initially, they were against implanting since it brought up too much emotions about deaf people being inferior, but they later accepted that it'd be better if the kids were able to walk two worlds so to speak. Frankly their issues were so similar to the ones faced by immigrant cultures that it was rather eerie.
Just what in the documentary made it possible to claim that about several million people? Admittedly I'm not deaf, but I am a bilingual from a country that's homogeneous, and there's a handful of people who'd always think of me as somehow... culturally tainted cause I'm familiar with American language and culture. But the important part is, it's only a handful of people. I doubt the deaf community is any different. Hell, deaf folks don't even have to worry about crap like loss of an ancient culture due to westernization and stuff.
I don't think they portrayed anything. Unless one holds the view that simply mentioning Mannings personal problems means they believe it's the reason why he leaked data. Not to mention, the episode also mentioned he started hanging out with a bunch of computer geeks, and that he was morally offended by some of the things he saw.
Also, I think it was fairly clear Assange thinks Mannings leaked the documents for moral reason, and I don't think Frontline should be editorializing. Nor can I recall them ever doing that.
To be honest though, there's a part of me that wishes Frontline waited until they could actually talk to Mannings.
At this point, I really got to ask, what is your rationale(s) for believing that PBS is propaganda? How are they going aginst The Public Broadcasting Act of 1967?
For what it's worth I do think what Assange is doing is a positive thing overall, but I dislike the word hero. It elevates people to an unrealistic pedestal, and encourages an uncritical view of people that ignores any negatives. It makes us expect too much from those that inherit the title, and to an extent, makes us expect too much from ourselves as well.
If you didn't know about LulzSec's motivations, ya really shouldn't have brought them as supporters for your vendetta against PBS...
You think the Frontline Wikileaks episode was the sole reason? Sorry, pal, but PBS has done way more than that to harm the causes of freedom in the world, and the Wikileaks episode isn't the only government propaganda their guilty of spewing.
It's the reason why LulzSec did what they did according to security week. If you have any additional information, I am genuinely interested.
Also, you appear to have bought the propaganda hook line and sinker. Assange is a hero and anyone who tells you otherwise is lying, pure and simple. There is no "other side" to the story, any more than there's an "other side" to the belief that the Earth orbits the Sun.
And it seems you didn't watch the episode in question. Most of it dealt with Mannings, not Assange. The only really critical thing I can recall being mentioned about Assange is that the NY Times and Daniel Domscheit-Berg both mentioned that he was a difficult person to work with. Sure, Frontline did ask him to opine on some of the negative repercussions and views his actions might create, but such questions are vital to understanding his mindset, and maybe nabbing some fence sitters. An interview that simply praised Assange would be a rather pointless one after all.
I saw the alleged "anti freedom propaganda." The worst thing you could say about that Frontline episode is that they asked hard questions, and didn't portray the people in the episode as automatic heroes. What propaganda was in that show exactly?
Oh pooh. If you don't have a full ensemble of things to make you feel big (depending on various factors it could be things like an iPhone, Rolex Watch, Armani Bag, trendy cloths, etc) then you're just a poser just like those poor schlubs.