Mod that funny! However, it doesn't work like that. It affects short term memory rather than causing amnesia. It's more like this:
So here's the second chip fan offing my CPU in only a couple of years. It's a conspiracy, dammit!!
Being around Christmas, and having just bought a thousand dollar television, I just let the computer gather dust for a while. I mean, that CPU frying was surely God's way of telling me to set it aside for a while.
Speaking of which, I read that Pat Robertson said that God told him that Bush would win again.
So, when Kerry [insert appropriate sports term here] him in a fucking landslide, does that make God a liar? Right wing Christians rejoice, you don't have to go to the polls this year! Bush has God on his side and doesn't need your vote.
I forgot what I was talking about.
Oh yeah, the computer. Any way, After paying for a thousand dollar TV, a Playstation for my oldest daughter and a nice Jenson car stereo for my youngest daughter and an $800 repair three weeks after I bought the $500 car, I was a little short for computer parts.
Ah, prohibition. I've always wondered why they needed a Constitutional amendment to outlaw alcohol, but not to outlaw any other drug? That document doesn't grant rights to citizens; your rights are granted by "the creator". The Constitution grants powers to the Federal Government. Where does it say it's legal for government to outlaw any drug?
Also, why are so many "pro-choice" people also FOR the drug laws? Why should a woman have the right to remove tissue but not insert a drug? (And OT but why are so many "pro-life" people FOR the death penalty?)
It's estimated that we would have to cut our police and prison budgets by 80% if we legalized cannabis.
Best reason for legalizing it I've heard yet!
I wish they'd legalize prostitution, because I'm addicted to the crack between a woman's legs.
Thank you. However, KJV says "Calamus", which the dictionary says is "any of various tropical Asian palms of the genus Calamus, some of which are a source of rattan". I tried looking up "kana bith" in both the dictionary and wikipedia and came up with no results.
A Google search for ""kana bith" oddly turns up the Koran, but I can't understand a word of it.
Torrents are useful when... large amounts of data are wanted by lots of people in disparate locations
Like for instance a Linux distro. Torrents aren't very useful for a small file like an MP3. Yes, BT doesn't benefit an obscure program or a small program but a CD sized file that's wanted by thousands of people is exactly what BT is for. MP3s are usually small files; eDonkey would not be as good as Morpheus for them. OTOH with a zip of FLAC files eDonkey would work well.
Note that most FLACs and SHNs you'll find are authorized by the people who created them, as is open source software. Of course, if your ISP is mirroring you all bets are off.
Yes, but it's devalued. You have it for free, I worked hard to create it.
If I steal your car by tricking you into signing it over, the blue book value is the same. But it's not yours any more, it's mine.
You can also steal from my bank account. I still have my bank account, it's just been devalued.
I can steal from a child, but that doesn't mean I've stolen a child. Either you're a fucking moron or you think I am. Either way, there's no point in continuing this stupid conversation, I believe others have succinctly argued my point for me. If you're too stupid or stubborn to understand, you're at the wrong web site.
PS- Marijuana laws themselves lead to harder drugs! Often the folks selling pot also sell other drugs; I remember when Reagan started his "WO(s)D" the pot supply dried up. "No, man, it's dry. Want some coke?" Then there are unscrupulous dealers who will take shitweed and spice it up with crack, heroin, PCP, downers, you name it. If you could buy it at the liquor store it would NOT lead to harder drugs.
G.W.'s diary reportedly said "nothing settles the evening meal like a good bowl of hemp".
I don't suppose you can quote chapter and verse about the Bible thing? I'm pretty sure it has no taboos on intoxication, as the apostles were all shitfaced drunk after the last supper.
Google has failed me this morning. I remember reading in New Scientist (whose anti-drug propaganda I ranted about a couple of years ago) that they did a study of baby boomers; the generation that started smoking ganja in their youth and are now geezers. They were trying to prove, as all these government studies from all the world's governments do, that pot is bad for you. The object of the study was to look at cancer rates in potheads vs non-potheads. They were certain that reefer causes cancer because there are carcinogens in it.
What they found instead was that (IIRC) potsmokers who did not smoke tobacco had a 10% lower incidence of all cancers than nonsmokers. More striking, however, was the difference between cigarette smokers who also smoked hemp and buttheads who only smoked butts. The cancer incidence of those who smoked both marijuana and tobacco was half the number of those who only smoked cigarettes.
So your study is done, the results are that cannibis prevents cancer.
So we have a substance that is non-addictive (habit forming but not addictive), non-lethal, fights cancer, helps MS sufferers, is the best anti-nausea agent known, stimulates appetite, yet it is illegal. So why is it illegal?
Because it makes you lazy and forgetful, and what's worse for our corporate overlords, makes you think. You can forget about any substance that makes you think ever being legalized; thinking is the VERY last thing your government (wherever you may live) wants you to to do.
Yes, I'm a geezer. No, I wasn't in the study. Yes, I've smoked dope.
I think Beckerman is the perfect guy. I certainly wouldn't WANT a disinterested party fighting for me! If I'm in court, I want everyone on my side to be passionate about helping me win.
While I believe the RIAA is doing the right thing defending their IP
Thank you for using the acronym for "imaginary property" rather than pretending that anything that's only in your head bears any resemblance to actual, real, concrete property.
And can you imagine fifty lawyers a day, I said fifty lawyers a day, defending against infringement of Alice's Reataurant? They'd think it was a movement! The Alice's Restaraunt Massacree Lawyer movement, and all you have to do is walk in to the judge's chamber, hum a few bars of Alice's Restaraunt and walk out...
-mcgrew
(apologies to Arlo. The RIAA should be apologizing to Arlo's late father Woodie, whose guitar sported the motto "this machine kills facists").
RTFA? Dude, this is slashdot! You must be new here!
I personally RTFA quite often, but I'm wierd even for a nerd. perhaps the AT (anonymous troll) couldn't RTFA; it's firewalled off at my workplace.
I would think that having their victims get a little ammo might be a nightmare for the RIAA, but I think an even worse nightmare is the fact that neither musicians nor fans need the major labels any more.
You assume P2P's only use is "illegal downloads"*. BitTorrent is the perfect way to distribute free software, but its very existance is threatened by the record companies' war againsg ANY file sharing. Share a perfectly legal song that its writer/performer WANTS shared (and there are likely more legal than illegal) with the same name as an RIAA song, and you risk a lawsuit. Even naming your software "master of puppets" or "Penny Lane" may get you sued. So the FSF is indeed in the middle of this already.
-mcgrew
*Why do they keep talking about "illegal downloads" when it's UPLOADING that is illegal?
I seem to recall reading that there is no scientific study validating the uniqueness of fingerprints.
Science doesn't prove, it disproves. You test your theory, and if it's not found to be invalid it's assumed to be valid, until further or different tests disprove it. If on the unlikley event the second law of thermodynamics is shown to be false, or false under some circumstances, it will be dropped or modified.
When it is shown that two people can, indeed, have identical fingerprints then fingerprints can no longer honestly be used as evidence.
That's why former Illinois Governor George Ryan commuted all the death sentences in Illinois to life after DNA evidence proved that half the men on death row were innocent.
Huh? I wasn't the one to call the judge a "motherfucker". It was just my bad luck to have the State's Attorney's office send me some dimwit who was freash out of law school. had never been inside a courtroom before, and was intimidated by the ex's lawyer.
It was just my dumb luck to be born male so the SQA would appoint such an inexperienced lawyer.
Angry? Yes, I was. Bitter? Yes, I was. It hurt my children. Impotent? After I started taking the Paxils. Abusive, shallow, abrazive, and a sore loser? No.
No it doesn't; it says that the early church shared possessions.
That's what "communism" is.
Within communism, it would be a requirement
No, within Communism it would be a requirement. I didn't say they were Marxists, but communists. Lower case "c". As in "hippie commune".
It's important to take verses in context
That's right, and the context of this verse is what makes a member of the flock stray - in the case of the quoted text, MONEY and the cares of the world. "The love of money is the root of all evil".
Wealth in of itself wasn't the problem here; it as the man's dependance on it.
Do you know any wealthy people who aren't dependant on their wealth? I don't. Money is more addictive than any drug. The word "jaded" comes to mind.
there are no prohibitions against members of the church having homes
I didn't say there was. My point in quoting that is that most of your Republican money worshipers look down on poor people, and look at the homeless with even more disdain. No Christian would look at a homeless person and think anything except "there but for the grace of God goes me".
Would you care to point out where I did that?
Sorry, not targeting you specifically, but anyone who happened to read the comment.
I'd suggest using a more modern translation
Some time in the 1970s my Grandmother gave me a "modern translation" called "The Way". Rather than saying "thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor" it said "do not lie". Nope, lying is NOT a sin according to the King James scholars; the sin referred to there is slander, not lying.
So no thanks, I'll stick to the KJV if you don't mind. It's been around for over a thousand years now.
And one more thing: what do you make of Anias and Sapphira in acts 5?
Slashdot Mirror
Failing? Wrong tense, I think. "Failed" would be a better term. And they've failed precicely because we have the best legislators money can buy.
-mcgrew
-mcgrew
Lobotomies? That would explain it.
I'd rather have a bottle in front of me than a frontal lobotomy.
Ah, prohibition. I've always wondered why they needed a Constitutional amendment to outlaw alcohol, but not to outlaw any other drug? That document doesn't grant rights to citizens; your rights are granted by "the creator". The Constitution grants powers to the Federal Government. Where does it say it's legal for government to outlaw any drug?
Also, why are so many "pro-choice" people also FOR the drug laws? Why should a woman have the right to remove tissue but not insert a drug? (And OT but why are so many "pro-life" people FOR the death penalty?)
It's estimated that we would have to cut our police and prison budgets by 80% if we legalized cannabis.
Best reason for legalizing it I've heard yet!
I wish they'd legalize prostitution, because I'm addicted to the crack between a woman's legs.
Thank you. However, KJV says "Calamus", which the dictionary says is "any of various tropical Asian palms of the genus Calamus, some of which are a source of rattan". I tried looking up "kana bith" in both the dictionary and wikipedia and came up with no results.
A Google search for ""kana bith" oddly turns up the Koran, but I can't understand a word of it.
I would certainly hope so. BTW, I appreciate what you're doing.
As always, YMMV.
Torrents are useful when... large amounts of data are wanted by lots of people in disparate locations
Like for instance a Linux distro. Torrents aren't very useful for a small file like an MP3. Yes, BT doesn't benefit an obscure program or a small program but a CD sized file that's wanted by thousands of people is exactly what BT is for. MP3s are usually small files; eDonkey would not be as good as Morpheus for them. OTOH with a zip of FLAC files eDonkey would work well.
Note that most FLACs and SHNs you'll find are authorized by the people who created them, as is open source software. Of course, if your ISP is mirroring you all bets are off.
Yes, that's true. And some folks wonder why black people are afraid of cops!
I hate having my intelligence insulted.
Yes, but it's devalued. You have it for free, I worked hard to create it.
If I steal your car by tricking you into signing it over, the blue book value is the same. But it's not yours any more, it's mine.
You can also steal from my bank account. I still have my bank account, it's just been devalued.
I can steal from a child, but that doesn't mean I've stolen a child. Either you're a fucking moron or you think I am. Either way, there's no point in continuing this stupid conversation, I believe others have succinctly argued my point for me. If you're too stupid or stubborn to understand, you're at the wrong web site.
The judge said she didn't make enough money to pay child support, after jailing two men for being unemployed.
Pot makes you think. Governments hate that.
-mcgrew
PS- Marijuana laws themselves lead to harder drugs! Often the folks selling pot also sell other drugs; I remember when Reagan started his "WO(s)D" the pot supply dried up. "No, man, it's dry. Want some coke?" Then there are unscrupulous dealers who will take shitweed and spice it up with crack, heroin, PCP, downers, you name it. If you could buy it at the liquor store it would NOT lead to harder drugs.
G.W.'s diary reportedly said "nothing settles the evening meal like a good bowl of hemp".
I don't suppose you can quote chapter and verse about the Bible thing? I'm pretty sure it has no taboos on intoxication, as the apostles were all shitfaced drunk after the last supper.
The article notes that smoking cannabis will not deliver significant quantities of CBD.
Sounds like a challenge to me!
I see the article's authors never met my friends.
-mcgrew
Google has failed me this morning. I remember reading in New Scientist (whose anti-drug propaganda I ranted about a couple of years ago) that they did a study of baby boomers; the generation that started smoking ganja in their youth and are now geezers. They were trying to prove, as all these government studies from all the world's governments do, that pot is bad for you. The object of the study was to look at cancer rates in potheads vs non-potheads. They were certain that reefer causes cancer because there are carcinogens in it.
What they found instead was that (IIRC) potsmokers who did not smoke tobacco had a 10% lower incidence of all cancers than nonsmokers. More striking, however, was the difference between cigarette smokers who also smoked hemp and buttheads who only smoked butts. The cancer incidence of those who smoked both marijuana and tobacco was half the number of those who only smoked cigarettes.
So your study is done, the results are that cannibis prevents cancer.
As I said, a google search for "marijuana boomer study" yielded only one hit (he he he said), to a site I'd never heard of. So I searched New Scientist and found some other interesting tidbits:
Cannabis compound reduces skin allergies in mice
Cannabis compound slows lung cancer in mice
Cannabis extract shrinks brain tumours
Cannabis can help MS sufferers
Cannabis can protect the brain from damage from stroke
So we have a substance that is non-addictive (habit forming but not addictive), non-lethal, fights cancer, helps MS sufferers, is the best anti-nausea agent known, stimulates appetite, yet it is illegal. So why is it illegal?
Because it makes you lazy and forgetful, and what's worse for our corporate overlords, makes you think. You can forget about any substance that makes you think ever being legalized; thinking is the VERY last thing your government (wherever you may live) wants you to to do.
Yes, I'm a geezer. No, I wasn't in the study. Yes, I've smoked dope.
-mcgrew
I think Beckerman is the perfect guy. I certainly wouldn't WANT a disinterested party fighting for me! If I'm in court, I want everyone on my side to be passionate about helping me win.
-mcgrew
While I believe the RIAA is doing the right thing defending their IP
Thank you for using the acronym for "imaginary property" rather than pretending that anything that's only in your head bears any resemblance to actual, real, concrete property.
-mcgrew
And can you imagine fifty lawyers a day, I said fifty lawyers a day, defending against infringement of Alice's Reataurant? They'd think it was a movement! The Alice's Restaraunt Massacree Lawyer movement, and all you have to do is walk in to the judge's chamber, hum a few bars of Alice's Restaraunt and walk out...
-mcgrew
(apologies to Arlo. The RIAA should be apologizing to Arlo's late father Woodie, whose guitar sported the motto "this machine kills facists").
RTFA? Dude, this is slashdot! You must be new here!
I personally RTFA quite often, but I'm wierd even for a nerd. perhaps the AT (anonymous troll) couldn't RTFA; it's firewalled off at my workplace.
I would think that having their victims get a little ammo might be a nightmare for the RIAA, but I think an even worse nightmare is the fact that neither musicians nor fans need the major labels any more.
-mcgrew
Personally I'd reather die now than spend my life in prison. Everybody has to die, not everybody has to go to prison.
You assume P2P's only use is "illegal downloads"*. BitTorrent is the perfect way to distribute free software, but its very existance is threatened by the record companies' war againsg ANY file sharing. Share a perfectly legal song that its writer/performer WANTS shared (and there are likely more legal than illegal) with the same name as an RIAA song, and you risk a lawsuit. Even naming your software "master of puppets" or "Penny Lane" may get you sued. So the FSF is indeed in the middle of this already.
-mcgrew
*Why do they keep talking about "illegal downloads" when it's UPLOADING that is illegal?
I don't know, and can only guess that it was some sort of control tone used by phone technicians.
I seem to recall reading that there is no scientific study validating the uniqueness of fingerprints.
Science doesn't prove, it disproves. You test your theory, and if it's not found to be invalid it's assumed to be valid, until further or different tests disprove it. If on the unlikley event the second law of thermodynamics is shown to be false, or false under some circumstances, it will be dropped or modified.
When it is shown that two people can, indeed, have identical fingerprints then fingerprints can no longer honestly be used as evidence.
That's why former Illinois Governor George Ryan commuted all the death sentences in Illinois to life after DNA evidence proved that half the men on death row were innocent.
Ryan himself is now in a Federal slammer.
-mcgrew
Huh? I wasn't the one to call the judge a "motherfucker". It was just my bad luck to have the State's Attorney's office send me some dimwit who was freash out of law school. had never been inside a courtroom before, and was intimidated by the ex's lawyer.
It was just my dumb luck to be born male so the SQA would appoint such an inexperienced lawyer.
Angry? Yes, I was. Bitter? Yes, I was. It hurt my children. Impotent? After I started taking the Paxils. Abusive, shallow, abrazive, and a sore loser? No.
No it doesn't; it says that the early church shared possessions.
That's what "communism" is.
Within communism, it would be a requirement
No, within Communism it would be a requirement. I didn't say they were Marxists, but communists. Lower case "c". As in "hippie commune".
It's important to take verses in context
That's right, and the context of this verse is what makes a member of the flock stray - in the case of the quoted text, MONEY and the cares of the world. "The love of money is the root of all evil".
Wealth in of itself wasn't the problem here; it as the man's dependance on it.
Do you know any wealthy people who aren't dependant on their wealth? I don't. Money is more addictive than any drug. The word "jaded" comes to mind.
there are no prohibitions against members of the church having homes
I didn't say there was. My point in quoting that is that most of your Republican money worshipers look down on poor people, and look at the homeless with even more disdain. No Christian would look at a homeless person and think anything except "there but for the grace of God goes me".
Would you care to point out where I did that?
Sorry, not targeting you specifically, but anyone who happened to read the comment.
I'd suggest using a more modern translation
Some time in the 1970s my Grandmother gave me a "modern translation" called "The Way". Rather than saying "thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor" it said "do not lie". Nope, lying is NOT a sin according to the King James scholars; the sin referred to there is slander, not lying.
So no thanks, I'll stick to the KJV if you don't mind. It's been around for over a thousand years now.
And one more thing: what do you make of Anias and Sapphira in acts 5?
I agree with your take on it.
LET THE games BEGIN!
I WIN!!!!
-mcgrew