Their lives are not ruined by the Porn. Their ruined by their choice to view it and to lust because of it. The true cause of those ruined lives you speak of is lust, and the choice to indulge that lust.
Beer doesn't make you get drunk. Kissing doesn't make babies. A gun doesn't make a murderer. And Porn doesn't ruin people's lives. It's all about the user's choices that they make.
We like to blame things, instead of blaming ourselves.
Your thinking about Masturbation, not Porn. Enjoy Rosey all you want, but please realize that Porn is just to help you with your Maturbation fantisies.
Without lonely people not getting any sex, except through Masterbation, there would be no such thing as Porn.
All that would do is cause large companies to move their "home" location to some obscure 3rd world country, where they pay a few peanuts to some secretaries that forward calls and paperwork, back to the executives "personal" offices back in the states, and then the company would only be required to pay the peanuts that this new 3rd world local's regular wage is, allowing them to keep their current pay practices in effect, and then de-value other jobs that rely on the "minimum" wage of their original local, because now that doesn't apply.
It's a circular thing. So, no everyone does not win.
btw: If you want to talk about funding, then I believe that all organizations that are educational based, should be required to meet guidelines for set course material only in order to recieve government funding. Then anything beyond the scope of those core requirements of education, would be up to the specific institution, and any funding needed for those extra functions would be the responcibility of that institution. Testing of students in specific catagories would be used to rate the institution's quality of education in those core requirements.
Then again if we actually did that half of our "public" schools would fail. Then again maybe that would be a good thing.
Seperation of Church and State was designed to keep the Government from regulating religion. It's what our country was founded on. The ability to practice any religion you choose without a government controlled religion. That is not the same as keeping Church out of the Government. If you think that is the case, then you should look at the constitution and the dollar bill a little closer.
That is why the USA does not have a national religion, such as China, Iran, England, Saudi Arabia, and many others. We in the USA have the right to practice religion in the way we choose. (Ironic that goes back to what I said about choice.)
Please realize that I am talking about 2 extremes, and if you read the ending you will realize that I personally fall nearer to the middle of the road then either extreme. I am merely pointing out that both extremes tend to think the extreme about the opposite in general. If you try and understand me I'm saying that all should be a little more willing to meet in the middle. But you seem to have made sweeping speculation about me.
What you call same-sex relations leftists do believe in diversity, and in order to get there society has to be accepting of those who are different from the "norm." Saying that supporting gay rights is trampling on diversity because it excludes people who oppose gays is ludicris. What we're talking about is having equal rights for all people, and not having something as stupid as boys kissing each other in a video game become a major issue (more of a free speech issue, but I digress). People who want equal rights for homosexuals welcome the opinions of those who don't approve of it. You don't have to like homosexuality, but you have to accept the fact that homosexuals live in your world, and they are human and deserve equal treatment.
You want equal rights, yet things like BET are ok, but there would be an uproar if there was the opposing station of WET. Everyone is selfish, that's human nature also. I would dare say that a White Heterosexual Male has less rights then any other humanity group, at least in the USA that is.
Or how about wanting Federal support for Homosexuals, but not wanting Federal Support for Private Educational Institutions that have a faith basis (you pick the religion, Jewish, Muslim, or any other)?
Homophobia, is a fear or contempt towards a person in or thought of the homosexual/lesbian lifestyle.
Please understand that a "moral stance" is a direct reference to one's personal beliefs in the morality of such actions, and not that of fear or contempt towards the idea of homosexuality or homosexual individuals.
If I hold that my belief in a God who considers such a lifestyle as an act that is not good, then it would be the morality of my convictions that would preclude me from such actions myself. This is not to say that the far-right is not homophobic, but that those of us who hold a more centralized view, do not believe that my moral decisions should be placed on someone else, nor should their's on me.
But then again your a Coward, afraid of his own "Karma" so where does that leave you?
More so I would say that those who do sway to the preference of same sex relations and who promote such lifestyles, tend to have more of a bigotry towards those who hold a moral stance to heterosexual relations.
If Bigot is to mean:
"One who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ."
Then I would say that both extreme sides would be called bigots. ..
as well as hypocrites. Let me explain:
A hypocrite is one who says one things but then does another, or "one who pretends to be what he is not."
Same-sex relations leftist. . . . Says they believe in diversity, yet in practice they do not want diversity as much as they want approval/acceptance/recongnition. But in effect this flies in the face of true diversity, because they should be more accepting of someone's opposing beliefs and stance on this very issue, which in practice they are not.
Heterosexual relations rightist. . . . Says they believe in love, and family, and caring for their fellow man. But in turn shows hate and anger and vengence towards those who need loved the most. Those who are their "enemies" on this particular subject.
I prefer to be s centralist. . . I may not agree with one's choices or beliefs, but I also don't want someone censoring my choices and beliefs either.
**** READ AT YOUR OWN RISK ****
Christian reference to follow.
On a farther note, (that might cause some to flame me from either the right or left parties) I believe in a God, that loves us so much that He gives us the choice to choose what we do with our lives in all aspects. He loves us all the same amount, and He loves us so much that He allows us to choose to follow His ways or to not.
You don't get it do you????? Diseny is not paying for the bandwidth of all those downloads, Apple is. It's the same relation of cost, that Target pays for the stock boy to load the shelves, and for their lights to be on, and for the floors to be swept, and for their doors to be open. Bandwidth is an expense of the retailer, not of the supplier. In this case, the supplier is the studios, and all they have to do is send one "master" digital copy to Apple, and then It's Apple's responsibility to host that file on their servers, and then Apple pays the studio for the amount of times that particular file is purchased and downloaded from Apple's Servers.
So, Disney has the expense of sending the movie one time to Apple, and then collecting the money for each download that Apple processes. That, my friend is very cheap for the studios.
we only have a few years' worth of oil left. Duh! It's been that way for DECADES!
So your saying that a few years is equal to decades huh???? So Decades ago we only had a few years' worth of oil left???? Wow we must be really conserving then to ration those few years for a couple of decades. Go us!!!
Could just be me, but I'm guessing that the studios are not paying for the server and maintenance costs, but the online stores themselves are covering those costs, as a cost of their business model. That is non-related to the cost of the product being sold the said retailers.
Think about it this way. . . . Target orders 500 DVD's of a new release to stock on it's shelves. Apple orders 1 digital copy of the same release to host on Apple's servers, and to resell on itunes 500+ times, then just cuts the studio a check for the total of number of copies purchased.
Which model costs more to produce and distribute??????? Target has to pay up front for whatever quantity of movies they want to stock. Normally, if they don't sell them, there is a slim chance they will get the investment back, and be able to send the DVD's back. However with the online model, there is no stock needed to be purchased, and it is much cheaper for the studio to send the release to the online retailer's servers. So it is cheaper for the studios and it is cheaper for the online retailers as well.
And if Target and Walmart stop stocking the releases, do you really think people will stop buying them????? Heck no. They will look for another distribution source. And what does that mean for the online retailers?????? More business!
In the Keynote, Jobs stated that iTV was just the code name, and that before distribution, another name would take it's place. It's a code name. It's a name that will generate buzz, and that is, afterall, why they showed the box at the media event to begin with.
I've had Y-mail for well over 6-8 years, and I don't have any issues with spam, for the most part. I mean you will always get spam, but the spam filter works great, and if one slips through you mark it for spam, and your good to go in the future. In fact I use the spam feature to sort out periodic messages I get from user groups, and communities, that I am a part of. Not because I don't want to read them, but because I only want the meat to show up in my inbox, and the rest in the spam folder for me to sift through in my spare time.
Now my wife has a yahoo account as well, and she get's 50-100 spam emails a day I would say. . . but then again she doesn't use email the same way I do, and every interesting site she visits that asks for her email addy, she gives it. So really it is mostly solicited mail for the most part, but trash non the less.
properly maintaining your email address and submitting the remove requests, and using the spam filter in Y-mail, and your good to go. But just like house keeping, if you maintain, then you don't have to spend days cleaning, and picking up. A little work upfront, and you save a lot of hassle later.
Well I love it when I'm at work. because it works at work on my Windoz box. But it does not work on my Mac at home. I use firefox both at work and home (sometimes safari at home as well) and doesn't matter what browser I use at home cause it doesn't work. Now I did get an error message back when I first started using the beta, and it said something to the effect that Yahoo does not currently support Mail Beta on OS X, and that it would revert to standard mail, until further notice.
So the biggest question is. . . Why Firefox on XP but not Firefox on OS X??? AND. . . With it being now publicly available, does it now work with OS X as well?
So PC only does that mean only Windows based PC's or does that include other Operating Systems?
I hate it when people use PC as a title for Windows only Computers. PC stands for Personal Computer. That includes all operating systems. So when this Article states it is PC only are they really meaning Windows only or just that it won't be available on consoles?
I was responding to someone who was talking about cracking Windows software DRM or cracking Apple software DRM. . . This has nothing to do with what OS you are using, because iTnues for Windows OS is still an Apple software, and the DRM is still Apple's. And sorry Microsoft does not have any where near the market share that Apple has in this market. (again, who is talking OS?????? Man, you can't say anything about Apple or Microsoft without someone thinking it is an OS flame war.)
Coward. . . please realize that I specificly stated, among those on this website. Which I would wager, the linux, mac, and windows user percentage numbers are close to even, if not much more so then the general public. But, I did of course specify use of Apple and windows software (ie: WMP or iTunes, since that is what we are talking about), and not that of the prefered OS in use. So I wasn't speaking about OS usage numbers. Also my comment was using, as a basis, the premise of the person I responded to to begin with.
. . . and for ad hominen*(correct spelling), I agree with you completely. I guess that is why I didn't attack the original poster personally and only attacked the merit of his/her comments. But I also see your irony. Don't you just love it.
I only stated that out of those on this website, there is a higher percentage of those who prefer Windows software that would be willing to do such things, based on the statement made by the parent of my original comment.
You're making a very big moral judgement there, i.e. that Apple users don't break DRM, only Microsoft users do
Sounds to me like you are the one making sweeping generalizations and readying something that wasn't there. How does "higher percentage" mean all, and only? Wait, should I add in some choice vulgarities to make my post more sarcastic and demeaning????? Or is it only fair to attack those who make a comment about those who prefer Apple software over Windows, like the parent of my original post?
Slashdot Mirror
Their lives are not ruined by the Porn. Their ruined by their choice to view it and to lust because of it. The true cause of those ruined lives you speak of is lust, and the choice to indulge that lust.
Beer doesn't make you get drunk. Kissing doesn't make babies. A gun doesn't make a murderer. And Porn doesn't ruin people's lives. It's all about the user's choices that they make.
We like to blame things, instead of blaming ourselves.
Your thinking about Masturbation, not Porn. Enjoy Rosey all you want, but please realize that Porn is just to help you with your Maturbation fantisies.
Without lonely people not getting any sex, except through Masterbation, there would be no such thing as Porn.
Your a very bitter person, and that should be very self-degrading for you.
All that would do is cause large companies to move their "home" location to some obscure 3rd world country, where they pay a few peanuts to some secretaries that forward calls and paperwork, back to the executives "personal" offices back in the states, and then the company would only be required to pay the peanuts that this new 3rd world local's regular wage is, allowing them to keep their current pay practices in effect, and then de-value other jobs that rely on the "minimum" wage of their original local, because now that doesn't apply.
It's a circular thing. So, no everyone does not win.
btw: If you want to talk about funding, then I believe that all organizations that are educational based, should be required to meet guidelines for set course material only in order to recieve government funding. Then anything beyond the scope of those core requirements of education, would be up to the specific institution, and any funding needed for those extra functions would be the responcibility of that institution. Testing of students in specific catagories would be used to rate the institution's quality of education in those core requirements.
Then again if we actually did that half of our "public" schools would fail. Then again maybe that would be a good thing.
Seperation of Church and State was designed to keep the Government from regulating religion. It's what our country was founded on. The ability to practice any religion you choose without a government controlled religion. That is not the same as keeping Church out of the Government. If you think that is the case, then you should look at the constitution and the dollar bill a little closer.
That is why the USA does not have a national religion, such as China, Iran, England, Saudi Arabia, and many others. We in the USA have the right to practice religion in the way we choose. (Ironic that goes back to what I said about choice.)
You want equal rights, yet things like BET are ok, but there would be an uproar if there was the opposing station of WET. Everyone is selfish, that's human nature also. I would dare say that a White Heterosexual Male has less rights then any other humanity group, at least in the USA that is.
Or how about wanting Federal support for Homosexuals, but not wanting Federal Support for Private Educational Institutions that have a faith basis (you pick the religion, Jewish, Muslim, or any other)?
Homophobia, is a fear or contempt towards a person in or thought of the homosexual/lesbian lifestyle.
Please understand that a "moral stance" is a direct reference to one's personal beliefs in the morality of such actions, and not that of fear or contempt towards the idea of homosexuality or homosexual individuals.
If I hold that my belief in a God who considers such a lifestyle as an act that is not good, then it would be the morality of my convictions that would preclude me from such actions myself. This is not to say that the far-right is not homophobic, but that those of us who hold a more centralized view, do not believe that my moral decisions should be placed on someone else, nor should their's on me.
But then again your a Coward, afraid of his own "Karma" so where does that leave you?
If Bigot is to mean:
Then I would say that both extreme sides would be called bigots. .
as well as hypocrites. Let me explain:
A hypocrite is one who says one things but then does another, or "one who pretends to be what he is not."
Same-sex relations leftist. . . . Says they believe in diversity, yet in practice they do not want diversity as much as they want approval/acceptance/recongnition. But in effect this flies in the face of true diversity, because they should be more accepting of someone's opposing beliefs and stance on this very issue, which in practice they are not.
Heterosexual relations rightist. . . . Says they believe in love, and family, and caring for their fellow man. But in turn shows hate and anger and vengence towards those who need loved the most. Those who are their "enemies" on this particular subject.
I prefer to be s centralist. . . I may not agree with one's choices or beliefs, but I also don't want someone censoring my choices and beliefs either.
**** READ AT YOUR OWN RISK ****
Christian reference to follow.
On a farther note, (that might cause some to flame me from either the right or left parties) I believe in a God, that loves us so much that He gives us the choice to choose what we do with our lives in all aspects. He loves us all the same amount, and He loves us so much that He allows us to choose to follow His ways or to not.
Next word you should look up on dictionary.com is rhetorical. Thanks for playing.
You don't get it do you????? Diseny is not paying for the bandwidth of all those downloads, Apple is. It's the same relation of cost, that Target pays for the stock boy to load the shelves, and for their lights to be on, and for the floors to be swept, and for their doors to be open. Bandwidth is an expense of the retailer, not of the supplier. In this case, the supplier is the studios, and all they have to do is send one "master" digital copy to Apple, and then It's Apple's responsibility to host that file on their servers, and then Apple pays the studio for the amount of times that particular file is purchased and downloaded from Apple's Servers.
So, Disney has the expense of sending the movie one time to Apple, and then collecting the money for each download that Apple processes. That, my friend is very cheap for the studios.
So your saying that a few years is equal to decades huh???? So Decades ago we only had a few years' worth of oil left???? Wow we must be really conserving then to ration those few years for a couple of decades. Go us!!!
Could just be me, but I'm guessing that the studios are not paying for the server and maintenance costs, but the online stores themselves are covering those costs, as a cost of their business model. That is non-related to the cost of the product being sold the said retailers.
Think about it this way. . . . Target orders 500 DVD's of a new release to stock on it's shelves. Apple orders 1 digital copy of the same release to host on Apple's servers, and to resell on itunes 500+ times, then just cuts the studio a check for the total of number of copies purchased.
Which model costs more to produce and distribute??????? Target has to pay up front for whatever quantity of movies they want to stock. Normally, if they don't sell them, there is a slim chance they will get the investment back, and be able to send the DVD's back. However with the online model, there is no stock needed to be purchased, and it is much cheaper for the studio to send the release to the online retailer's servers. So it is cheaper for the studios and it is cheaper for the online retailers as well.
And if Target and Walmart stop stocking the releases, do you really think people will stop buying them????? Heck no. They will look for another distribution source. And what does that mean for the online retailers?????? More business!
Forget Ninjas. . . . What about a virus? I thought everyone knew that Windows suck at security.
reminds me of a favorite joke. . .
What does Captin Kirk and toliet paper have in common???
They both circle Urans in search of Klingons.
Um, that could only be one of them, and I even have my doubts about that. But thanks for coming.
In the Keynote, Jobs stated that iTV was just the code name, and that before distribution, another name would take it's place. It's a code name. It's a name that will generate buzz, and that is, afterall, why they showed the box at the media event to begin with.
I've had Y-mail for well over 6-8 years, and I don't have any issues with spam, for the most part. I mean you will always get spam, but the spam filter works great, and if one slips through you mark it for spam, and your good to go in the future. In fact I use the spam feature to sort out periodic messages I get from user groups, and communities, that I am a part of. Not because I don't want to read them, but because I only want the meat to show up in my inbox, and the rest in the spam folder for me to sift through in my spare time.
Now my wife has a yahoo account as well, and she get's 50-100 spam emails a day I would say. . . but then again she doesn't use email the same way I do, and every interesting site she visits that asks for her email addy, she gives it. So really it is mostly solicited mail for the most part, but trash non the less.
properly maintaining your email address and submitting the remove requests, and using the spam filter in Y-mail, and your good to go. But just like house keeping, if you maintain, then you don't have to spend days cleaning, and picking up. A little work upfront, and you save a lot of hassle later.
And I love it.
Well I love it when I'm at work. because it works at work on my Windoz box. But it does not work on my Mac at home. I use firefox both at work and home (sometimes safari at home as well) and doesn't matter what browser I use at home cause it doesn't work. Now I did get an error message back when I first started using the beta, and it said something to the effect that Yahoo does not currently support Mail Beta on OS X, and that it would revert to standard mail, until further notice.
So the biggest question is. . . Why Firefox on XP but not Firefox on OS X??? AND. . . With it being now publicly available, does it now work with OS X as well?
Guess I'll find out when I get home.
You don't smoke the root.
So PC only does that mean only Windows based PC's or does that include other Operating Systems?
I hate it when people use PC as a title for Windows only Computers. PC stands for Personal Computer. That includes all operating systems. So when this Article states it is PC only are they really meaning Windows only or just that it won't be available on consoles?
No. . . but he does have the largest sole ownership of stock in Disney. . .
138 million shares, or 6.3 percent of outstanding stock
ok, in case you don't read english very well. . .
I was responding to someone who was talking about cracking Windows software DRM or cracking Apple software DRM. . . This has nothing to do with what OS you are using, because iTnues for Windows OS is still an Apple software, and the DRM is still Apple's. And sorry Microsoft does not have any where near the market share that Apple has in this market. (again, who is talking OS?????? Man, you can't say anything about Apple or Microsoft without someone thinking it is an OS flame war.)
Coward. . . please realize that I specificly stated, among those on this website. Which I would wager, the linux, mac, and windows user percentage numbers are close to even, if not much more so then the general public. But, I did of course specify use of Apple and windows software (ie: WMP or iTunes, since that is what we are talking about), and not that of the prefered OS in use. So I wasn't speaking about OS usage numbers. Also my comment was using, as a basis, the premise of the person I responded to to begin with.
. . . and for ad hominen*(correct spelling), I agree with you completely. I guess that is why I didn't attack the original poster personally and only attacked the merit of his/her comments. But I also see your irony. Don't you just love it.
Wait, should I add in some choice vulgarities to make my post more sarcastic and demeaning????? Or is it only fair to attack those who make a comment about those who prefer Apple software over Windows, like the parent of my original post?