I just think someone who seems fond of the straw man (as Mr. Beck is) would be more at home in the Yahoo Answers Religion & Spirituality section. They eat that stuff up....
Never read a 'version' Bible. They are just paraphrased from previous version (i.e. the KJV is a nearly a word-for-word lift from the Anglican Bible). Read Bibles that are 'translations'. These have been translated from the oldest existing manuscripts and are less prone (though not immune) to alterations by the authors.
Okay, whatever buddy. You can see things however you like. Revelation also says there are angels with trumpets in heaven. Maybe that's literal too. Whatever gets you through the night. The Bible says to 'make sure of the more important things'. I have to my own satisfaction, as you have to yours. No need to go all Glen Beck on me.
Let me know when they take vows of poverty and subsist on small living stipends. I only contributes to charities that do not have highly paid leadership.
Voilà! In view, a humble vaudevillian veteran cast vicariously as both victim and villain by the vicissitudes of Fate. This visage, no mere veneer of vanity, is a vestige of the vox populi, now vacant, vanished. However, this valorous visitation of a bygone vexation stands vivified and has vowed to vanquish these venal and virulent vermin vanguarding vice and vouchsaving the violently vicious and voracious violation of volition! The only verdict is vengeance; a vendetta held as a votive, not in vain, for the value and veracity of such shall one day vindicate the vigilant and the virtuous. [laughs] Verily, this vichyssoise of verbiage veers most verbose, so let me simply add that it's my very good honor to meet you and you may call me "V".
These can actually be more dangerous when they don't go off as planned. There have been at least two little children in my county serious hurt because someone threw one of these into someone else's yard and drove off (probably as a prank). But there didn't go off. The next day (or days) as soon as the child touched then they exploded lacerating their faces.
I have the pimped out (by US standards) Comcast 50Mbps setup. And I agree that TV was just a throw in. But I have had to have a box (or a cable card) ever since the Comcast 'digital transition'. My DVR is a TiVo which works for me. Does you Sage take cable cards?...because that would be awesome.
...books [seriously?], trains, cars, radio television [sic], internet, cell phones...
And the shoe-fitting fluoroscope, lead paint, Thalidomide, and this darling little number. Good thing none of those things were really dangerous after all.
1) That's exactly right. A video/image/whatever that is intended to cause sexual arousal, no matter what it actually depicts, is porn. This agrees with the primary and secondary definitions (the tertiary is about non-sexual "pornography"). From the big-boy dictionary (and all others I'd imagine): 1 : the depiction of erotic behavior intended to cause sexual excitement 2 : material that depicts erotic behavior and is intended to cause sexual excitement 3 : the depiction of acts in a sensational manner so as to arouse a quick intense emotional reaction (the pornography of violence)
2) We don't have to don't have to determine the intent, the creator does that themselves by choice. If it's not being openly presented as porn then it's might not be. That's where the legal issue come into play. Can you show an example of something fitting that description? It's hard to find. The closest I can think of are nudist sites.
First of all, it's not my definition. It's the dictionary definition.
Secondly, if the owners of the site (not one of thousands of contributors) intended its' contents to be sexually arousing, then yes. It's all about the intent of the creator/publisher. So Flickr can have little kids in bathing suits frolicking in a pool and it's nothing. But if they had a section called 'preteen hotties get wet'' then it's meets the 'porn' standard.
It gets a little tricky though when the creator or publishers' intentions are not very clear (nudists sites for example)
So he wanted to test security and was caught. Sounds like his test worked great. He should be very please with himself. When he gets out he should test US government security by pulling a gun during on the POTUS during a speech.
They buy large quantities at a discount and sell small quantities at a profit. Since they do lots of business during Summer, they can easily sell through a delivery in a day or two (I don't think selling it within seconds is really an issue). The consumer could go direct to the wholesaler if they wanted to buy a few thousand cubic feet of, say, beauty bark.
Not necessarily. There are many that only buy locally and sell locally. For example there is a small landscape company in my town that buys large quantities of landscape supplies from a wholesaler in the same town and retails said supplies locally (in smaller quantities).
Slashdot Mirror
I just think someone who seems fond of the straw man (as Mr. Beck is) would be more at home in the Yahoo Answers Religion & Spirituality section. They eat that stuff up....
I thought B was found to have a 'unfixable' security flaw years ago?
Never read a 'version' Bible. They are just paraphrased from previous version (i.e. the KJV is a nearly a word-for-word lift from the Anglican Bible). Read Bibles that are 'translations'. These have been translated from the oldest existing manuscripts and are less prone (though not immune) to alterations by the authors.
Okay, whatever buddy. You can see things however you like. Revelation also says there are angels with trumpets in heaven. Maybe that's literal too. Whatever gets you through the night. The Bible says to 'make sure of the more important things'. I have to my own satisfaction, as you have to yours. No need to go all Glen Beck on me.
Let me know when they take vows of poverty and subsist on small living stipends. I only contributes to charities that do not have highly paid leadership.
Some Bibles say 'signify' others more plainly say 'in signs'. Look up the word 'signify' and you will see what he meant:
Main Entry: signified
Function: noun
: a concept or meaning as distinguished from the sign through which it is communicated
So the mark represents what a person does (the hand) and what a person thinks (the forehead).
In the original Greek and Hebrew Hell=Sheol=Hades=Gehenna=Tartarus. They all mean 'grave' not 'place where God tortures people for eternity'.
Voilà! In view, a humble vaudevillian veteran cast vicariously as both victim and villain by the vicissitudes of Fate. This visage, no mere veneer of vanity, is a vestige of the vox populi, now vacant, vanished. However, this valorous visitation of a bygone vexation stands vivified and has vowed to vanquish these venal and virulent vermin vanguarding vice and vouchsaving the violently vicious and voracious violation of volition! The only verdict is vengeance; a vendetta held as a votive, not in vain, for the value and veracity of such shall one day vindicate the vigilant and the virtuous. [laughs] Verily, this vichyssoise of verbiage veers most verbose, so let me simply add that it's my very good honor to meet you and you may call me "V".
Indeed. They should be asking for donated server administration, bandwidth, and legal services. Not for cash.
These can actually be more dangerous when they don't go off as planned. There have been at least two little children in my county serious hurt because someone threw one of these into someone else's yard and drove off (probably as a prank). But there didn't go off. The next day (or days) as soon as the child touched then they exploded lacerating their faces.
More like:
1: Record a video of your 7 year-old acting funny while under the fading influence of necessary sedatives.
2: Save it for a while
3: Put it up on this "youToob' you've heard so much about because everyone who had seen it at your home thought it was cute
4: See it's getting a monster amount a traffic
5: Say 'Holeee crap! Is this a check from YouTube?!'
6: Keep the profit party going by then exploiting your whacked out 7-year-old
I have the pimped out (by US standards) Comcast 50Mbps setup. And I agree that TV was just a throw in. But I have had to have a box (or a cable card) ever since the Comcast 'digital transition'. My DVR is a TiVo which works for me. Does you Sage take cable cards?...because that would be awesome.
Yep. Free HD standard channels with ads. But no recurring cost whatsoever....
Most people only pay for cable these days to get cable Internet? I seriously doubt that. Do you have a source?
As opposed to where exactly?
And the shoe-fitting fluoroscope, lead paint, Thalidomide, and this darling little number. Good thing none of those things were really dangerous after all.
Because 'almost' means "nearly in it's entirety", and 'completely' means "in entirety". So it's like saying 'it's nearly entirely entirely normal.
You know this is inevitable.
Also, something can be 'completely normal' or 'almost normal', but not 'almost completely normal'
Just put fake names on the petition. Personally I put Amanda Hugginkis on all the ones I sign. ~kidding
1) That's exactly right. A video/image/whatever that is intended to cause sexual arousal, no matter what it actually depicts, is porn. This agrees with the primary and secondary definitions (the tertiary is about non-sexual "pornography"). From the big-boy dictionary (and all others I'd imagine):
1 : the depiction of erotic behavior intended to cause sexual excitement
2 : material that depicts erotic behavior and is intended to cause sexual excitement
3 : the depiction of acts in a sensational manner so as to arouse a quick intense emotional reaction (the pornography of violence)
2) We don't have to don't have to determine the intent, the creator does that themselves by choice. If it's not being openly presented as porn then it's might not be. That's where the legal issue come into play. Can you show an example of something fitting that description? It's hard to find. The closest I can think of are nudist sites.
First of all, it's not my definition. It's the dictionary definition.
Secondly, if the owners of the site (not one of thousands of contributors) intended its' contents to be sexually arousing, then yes. It's all about the intent of the creator/publisher. So Flickr can have little kids in bathing suits frolicking in a pool and it's nothing. But if they had a section called 'preteen hotties get wet'' then it's meets the 'porn' standard.
It gets a little tricky though when the creator or publishers' intentions are not very clear (nudists sites for example)
There is really only one definition of sexual pornography. Any media intended to arouse one sexually.
In a completely unrelated story, the University of Waterloo has an unexpected ~$16,000 shortfall this quarter.
So he wanted to test security and was caught. Sounds like his test worked great. He should be very please with himself. When he gets out he should test US government security by pulling a gun during on the POTUS during a speech.
They buy large quantities at a discount and sell small quantities at a profit. Since they do lots of business during Summer, they can easily sell through a delivery in a day or two (I don't think selling it within seconds is really an issue). The consumer could go direct to the wholesaler if they wanted to buy a few thousand cubic feet of, say, beauty bark.
Not necessarily. There are many that only buy locally and sell locally. For example there is a small landscape company in my town that buys large quantities of landscape supplies from a wholesaler in the same town and retails said supplies locally (in smaller quantities).