I would beg to differ. I was merely pointing out that this happened, and that I see it as abuse by the government. It has been pointed out that Dr King was, in some fashion a criminal. I would ask then whether we believe that merely being a criminal of some sort, makes this invasion of his private phone conversations somehow ok?
I think that this is an example of abuse, based on where I draw the line of what appropriate use of power is. The thing is that when it comes to the law, we have to ask two questions. The first is what should be prohibited, the second is the question of what powers are appropriate to be used to find, and prosecute such crimes.
Its true, that accomplishments and identity do not make this abuse. However, they do inform us. Because we all know who Dr King was, by invoking his name, we establish the context in which this invasion of privacy happened. If I said "Jack Papaidunno" had his conversations wiretapped, then I would have to explain what he was known for, and why the powers that were wanted to investigate him.
When I invoke the name of Dr King, one of the few examples that I have and can invoke off the top of my head, much of that work is done already.
How about if I were to add that one of the stated goals of the wiretapping was to find information which could be used to discredit Dr King? (apparently it was said that the only dirt that they ever dug up was that he liked to tell dirty jokes)
In my view, it was a fine example of why the watchers can't be trusted without, at least, oversight.
Ahem. This all makes it sound very rhetorical or academic.
"Oh, if we give them power, they might be corrupt"... you sound paranoid, you sound like you might be hiding something. Try this...
This is not about what they "might do", its about what they HAVE DONE.
It is well known fact that before the requirement that warrants be issued and that there was review of wiretaps, that the FBI wiretapped none other than the Reverend Doctor Martin Luther King Jr. Are we to believe that the good reverend, one of the heroic leaders of the civil rights movement was a dangerous criminal and needed to be watched?
Forget the theoretical, we need not look far to find real tangible cases of abuse of power. It is not the ability of power to be abused, it is the fact that it has been abused. The watchers have already been proven untrustworthy. There is more than ample real indisputable evidence.
Sure we can understand why a person in power in the 60s would have felt the need to watch the good reverend doctor. However, doesn't that make all the more certain the case that it is folly to allow their whims to direct such powers without real oversight?
I actually signed up for a drug trial for an experimental ADD treatment, and the drug was one of these nicotine based drugs. So yes, I can say, it would be a pill. The same researcher was also askinging me if i was a smoker (I am not) because they have another study for people looking to quit smoking.
The researchers doing some of this research work NOT for a tobacco company, but for one of the worlds most well renowned research hospitals.
It turns out I was not a good candidate for the study, so I can't speak to how well it works, but since then I did smoke a couple of cloves out of curiosity and yah, I can see it. Though its been known for a long time that tobacco was one of the things people with ADD often use to self medicate.
Too bad regular smoking is so bad for you. Maybe I should get on the gum or patch:)
I would think some sort of really strong dopamine antagonist would be a much more worthwhile endeavor. It would be utterly incapacitating. Suddenly the whole crowd is hit with a cloud and nobody can stay focused on anything, they just move from thought to thought naturally and freely as in a dream, everything would suddenly have equal low importance, with no way of differenciating between the importance of topics, events, ideas.
Here is a description of "low dopamine levels" from a site that talks about various mental states in relation to dopamine (each being associated with different disorders):
Low levels impair our ability to focus on our environment or to "lock on" to tasks, activities, or conversations. Low levels of Dopamine make concentration and focus very difficult with low levels also associated with Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD).
Seems like if you could inhibit dopamine from an aerosol or direct delivery, you could easily turn even the most gung ho army into the equivalent of a hoarde of unfocused slackers... just round em up before it wears off.
Right, but oxidizers still need heat and fuel to burn. One would assume that the bullet wont oxidize at those temps in the presnese of nitrous oxide, and that the minute quanitiy on impact wont cause blood to oxidize at the temp. I would think these would need to break the skin and deliver the gas directly into the blood stream, i don't see them putting enough in a capsule that could be fired to do the job in open air...
All those assumptions being true, I could see this maybe working. nitrous would at least make a crowd less able to fight. Especially if you hit them with enough to incpacitate them.
Tho I agree... I have never "laughed" from laughing gas, though I have taken it in various qunatities. It certainly is incapacitating...but only for like... 30 seconds in open air.
My last place of employment (and this one) both also mandated it. However, they had the ability to cut a check if they had to (the last place) in fact, one of my coworkers was having issues with the IRS (oops stock options/capital gains screwup) and his lawyer advised he get a checks cut rather than doing direct deposit.
Something about slowing the IRS down while they negotiated, because they could it the money in his account easier than actual wage garnishing, and they didn't want the IRS just taking the money while they were still trying to work out a settlement with them.
Oh I hadn' thought of that. Come to think of it... I see structures like that all the time...
Thats how they build docks. Floating platforms anchored by a series of large poles. When the water level rises, the platform slides up the pole. When the water level goes down, it slides down the pole. Its actually pretty inpressive the difference between high and low tide.
yah a floating house would really need proper anchoring.
I was thinking a system of vertical tubes for chains to run through, with appropriate anchor weights at the bottom and enough chain to let it float up with the water several feet, an then be returned to proper place as the water recedes.
Then it would need to have the first few feet reincorced to withsttand floating dibris.
Yup. And maybe emptying their clips into your back and your pet in the process.
Seriously tho... thats the thing... they can bust in the door, or they can install keyloggers. Once they break in the door, their hand is tipped, you know they are on to you. Its a little late to install a keylogger.
Thats the beauty of the encryption... they bust down the door, confiscate all your equipment... and still, one hopes, get nothing. Not that I am actually much of a criminal. I think the last law I broke involved rolling a joint. Shit, they barely arrest you for that around here anymore... worst I have ever gotten is a stern talking to about "keep it inside your house".
there would be a safe deposit box, opened in the name of some bum off the street that I paid $50 to, paid up in cash for the next 5 years, that I NEVER visit, which would have 2 or 3 USB keys with copies of the keys in question, and encrypted.
I mean seriously... if your thinking in terms of disaster, don't you want to plan for disaster recovery?
if its the gummint comming after me, I would prefer not to have to rely on magnets. Too time consuming to do right, and, well... I guess in the end it matters how much they want it.
For my laptop, I just keep the hard drive encrypted. Entire file system (ok, cept for/boot). Very simple, and no worries. Obviously it comes down to the question of whats worst, decrypting the hard drive for them, or being accused of withholding evidence?
Then, if its someone who can't threaten me with violence (aka big armed men dragging me away under threat of escalating violence until I am dead or comply, off to jail)
Well... someone like that is just screwed. (ok if they were pretty smart and could trojan my initramfs.... they coul dprobably scrape my passphrase... but they would have to know to do that before they tip their hand to me)
I know. I think part of it is sensativity to the subject matter. I have friends who have been raped. I have friends who were molested by parents and other adults. I in no way want to come off as condoning those.
However, consensual sex with a 16 year old? I mean, there is "grass on the field". Or "streaking" I mean seriously... how fucked up of a society do we live in where seeing a person naked is considered "damaging to children"? I have seen myself naked every day of the last 29 years. Often twice a day!
Your right, its ludacris!
People who want to lump these minor indecencies with real crimes disgust me.
You know... I actually find myself having to agree here.
"Sex Offender" can really mean many things. Of course, rapists and child molesters come to mind. However, I have a friend who was in his early 20s, met a girl who claimed she was 18, had her stay with him a few nights, and the next thing he knew the police came knocking at his door.... she was 16, and a friend of hers told her parents where she was.
Eventually they pleaded the case down and he did not end up having to register as a sex offender, but it was clearly possible. I need to check, but I have heard that public exposure can lead to a sex crime conviction... shit... who doesn't know someone who got drunk some night and took a piss in a park or alley way at 3 am? Does a person really deserve to be on a sex offender list for taking a piss against natures original urinal?
I mean there are some truly heinous sex crimes, and some really scary people. However, theres also some really pretty innocuous stuff too. I am not sure I can support lumping them all together.
Heh, and don't you think the SEC will start looking for who is shorting the stock and investigate?
Overall though, this could work. Frankly, this seems to me to be the end result of turning finances into a game. Someone will look for a loophole or other problem with the way the game works, and exploit it. So you make new rules to try to fix it, and they find new ways to game the game.
Reminds me of Magic. New edition/expansion comes out. Someone builds a deck that can hit you consistantly for 300 points on the third turn. Cards end up restricted, or banned. New edition comes out... someone builds a new deck that can hit you consistantly for 300 points on the third turn... Cards get restricted or banned...
Honestly, I really think the stock market, in general, is a corrupting influence. It encourages the use of money for no other reason than to make more money with no social responsibility or ethics... and they wonder why it attracts the attention of every crook and shady dealer with a few bucks to toss into a scam.
I think the problem here is that the boy has been crying wolf for too long, and this has always been a place that picks up on these sorts of cries... so we have heard it every single time. Is it any wonder we just yawn and dismiss it?
I would like as much as anything to give every issue a credible review of the real evidence. However, the fact is, we can't. Theres too much stuff out there, too many claims. We often have to go with what we know from the past rather than engaging every new bit of news with unbiased eyes.
The same will happen the next time someone claims to have invented a novel method for cold fusion.
I just learned to type on a normal keyboard with my hands at a natural position.
The motions that my hands make are, essentially, a very fast version of the motions that I learned when I had to look at the keys, I use, maybe 7 fingers total. However, I type as fast as I reasonably need to, and don't need to buy a special keyboard, which is good, since I spend most of my time on a laptop.
Well the thing is there arn't any real "liberal people". People have different issues that they care about and vote on and pay attention to. Bush may agree with "Liberal people" on some things, but its often on the issues that the people who are bashing him don't vote on.
I agree, he is no conservative, but, the whole liberal/conservative thing ceased to have real meaning a long time ago.
I mean, if you want to apply the actual meanings of terms and logic associated with them to an issue like say abortion... Roe V Wade was a very conservative decision in its logic. The pro-life movement are a bunch of radicals trying to assert new meaning and new reasons that simply were not the reason the laws were originally passed in the first place. The essential crux of the issue was that the court realised that the law, as passed, came about to regulate circumstances that were no longer the case, the law had outlived its usefulness. The "moral argument" was never why the law was passed in the first place, it was a new radical addition.
Hell, William F Buckley came out in favor of gays in the military. Yet, who is calling him a liberal?
Me? My stances tend to be pro Civil rights (which I include abortion as part of), Pro universal health care (partially because it really is cheaper and more efficient), anti gun control, pro states rights (where they don't conflict with civil rights), pro real corrections programs (its about rehabilitation not retribution).... generally in that order.
Thats only a partial list, but its issues based... Bush's immigration stance? I mostly am ok with but...its not an issue I vote on. Going to war for oil profits against our national interest? Not ok with that...and I care a lot more about that than his stance on immigration.
Admittedly, I am far more of a "liberal" than most "liberals" but... I still am anti gun control
We both know the real danger is that your friends will take the pill and see that the gorgeous girl is some common broad... no... some fat chick, and they are going to make fun of you.
Or worst, that she will take the pill and change her mind, afterall, its usually the women who make the final decision on who gets laid, not the men.
Then its back to myspace trolling for 13 year olds and telling women old enough to be your mother how much you "love the experiance of an older woman who can teach me things" (and btw, boy can they...wow...)
I could see that. To be honest, I was getting into some OSS stuff, Debian development, starting to look at more projects. That was back before I got my first girlfriend, and we lived together, it lasted a bit through it... (it was a pointless relationship and centered mostly around sex, we had little in common, which left me free to mostly continue my non-social hobbies..eventually it ended and she moved out)
but overall, I can't bring myself to take on new projects anymore. Its left me very bored sometimes. I took a break originally because, I found I was spending all my time at work and at home in front of a PC and feeling very socially isolated, I wasn't meeting new girls, I wasn't dating, I disliked this... so I decided to cut off some of the activities that I liked, to make more time.
Then I found out I was socially retarded and shy. So I found myself really bored and took up smoking pot (which had been something i did once in a while for fun) to take up the time. This ended up not helping one but at being more socially adept, meeting people etc.
In the end I found myself just bored as hell, and not doing anything. Very productive.
All in all, chasing away boredom is a pretty common motivator. I think its great that people choose productive things to do with their time. Personally, I wont be going back to OSS development anytime soon, I found I have too much other stuff to work on. The key, I have found, is to be sure you are actually spending your time working on something, and not just doing something that helps you forget that you are bored... or other needs aren't being met.
Its really good to do things in moderation, sometimes I wish I hadn't taken on things that take up so much time. I would like to develop OSS again.
I understand your frustration. Though, there is a difference between something causing frustration and something being "wrong". Its like, going back to my own analogies, a casual lover who gets upset when they found out their fuckbuddy is seeing other people.
Its quite understandable. People get attached. That doesn't mean you have some real entitlement to stop them. It doesn't mean they have done anything wrong because they hurt your feelings.
Your annoyed.... why? Cuz they didn't enjoy the early stages of the game and paid to skip it? You feel somehow entitled because you got there by playing yourself?
How do you FEEL when you are standing in line at the airport and the guy who bought first class tickets strolls past you to a VIP line and checks in in under 5 mins when you are stuck in the line for coach?
Not that I am saying your feelings are invalid, or I don't understand them, just that you know... Blizzard are the only people with the right to make them stop.
Exactly, did I not say that I wont pick up another one?:)
My current dru^H^H^Hgame of choice is BF2142. In theory I really like the idea of MMORPGs, and even the RP aspects could be fun. In practice though, I just like playing against other people and want to game in a casual manner. I really don't want to have to keep up with the joneses, and thats a big aspect of those games. I don't like playing for hours every night, for weeks on end, just to find out no....i still have not powerleveld enough to play.
At least in BF even if I start a new char, the base level char can have an effect in the game and be effective. So I can game casually and the ranks give me new bonuses and new things to shoot for in the game... but its still damned fun even as a "recruit"
Its much like my attitude in other areas of life. Sure, sometimes I see the allure of a "relationship" but overall... I want something casual, something fun. If it turns out to be something I devote a lot to, thats fine.... but I am not looking for something that I HAVE to devote lots to if I want to get anything out of it at all. And much like the analogy I am using, I have learned that its best to be honest and upfront about that, both with myself and the "games" I choose.
I may play for weeks and weeks and end up devoting the rest of my life to a game... but if its all or nothing, I am not going to play at all. And generally, I am no early adopter either. I like to know a game has been around and gotten a lot of play before I start with it....wait... what was I talking about?
Meh I don't see how its such a problem really. In the end, it comes down to why you are playing the game, and that varies from person to person.
The problem is that, the real purists. The people who actually WANT to "role play" or see the game model a real "economy in a vaccuume" (where there isn't some unseen force outside that makes things move around... think about it... real money makes for a "supernatural" force making people move in game goods around for reasons that don't make sense in game)... well... guess what... RPers and their ilk are far and few between.
Alot of people like to casually play. I mean some lvl whatever something or other gets on (Ive played these games but not WoW itself), does it really matter, in the grand scheme of things, whether he got that way by playing for days and days on his own, or bought a char last week?
The reason I will never pick up another MMORPG is very simple... I am a casual gamer. I am not looking for a relationship damnit! I want to come in, play the game, and then go do something else. I don't care what happens day to day... I don't care who else plays. I enjoy the time I play, and I make the best of it... and then... I want to do something else.
Hence, I totally understand buying a char. You get to skip all the powerleveleing, skip all of the "job" aspect of the game, and get right into the PvP, which would have been why I bought the god damned game in the first place.
I also see why people hate it... but honestly... who are they going to cater to?
What interests me more is the possibilities for money laundering. Think about it... there is now a total virtual economy. If I wanted to give you a million dollars and obscure where it came from, and was willing to pay the associated "fees" (differences in buying and selling exchange rates basically would be amounting to a fee), I could just transfer you gold and things in game until you had enough to trade for the amount of money I was trying to give you.
Hell if we do it right, it should be damned hard to trace whats really going on, it could be made to either look legit or at least hard to figure out.
Maybe this isn't robust enough for signifigant laundering... but... as these sorts of economies flourish, I do have to wonder.....
You know... I am all for things being different than what I am used to, or different from what I prefer... I don't however like having smoke blown up my ass.
Its like tofu. I LIKE tofu in some things. Tofu can be good. It is not meat... it doesn't ever taste like meat. Stop trying to tell me you can make it taste like meat god damnit. Its tofu, its its own thing.
And for the record, I can't believe anyone can't believe its not butter. It tastes nothing like real butter. In fact, neither does margarine. Nearest I can figure... they can't believe its not margarine, and have long since forgotten what real butter tastes like. (butter is, btw one area where I will not compromise... its either sweet cream salted butter or I don't buy it. Maybe if I cooked with it every day I would learn to like margarine...)
Warmup time? Fuck who cares! I have been using these CFLs for a few years now... you get used to them. Now, I don't even notice. They arn't as "good" as incandencents in some ways... big deal. They use way less energy...I can deal... I got used to them...
Now the real tragedy is dimables. I have several fixtures with dimmer switches, and the "dimmable" CFLs are still just crap. I want LEDs now!
I just wish some of the other people who like them would stop trying to blow smoke up my ass like I am too oblivious to notice that its not fucking butter!
Actually from the reading I have done thats even relatively safe. Elemental mercury will pretty much just pass right through your digestive tract, much like it rolls all over the table.
Now, it evaporates, and inhaling the fumes isn't quite as nice.
Never mind the fact that there is a little selection going on here... a migrant is someone who moved. That right there shows they are more ambitious than the average person in some way. Not to say all ambitous people move, just that slackers tend not to.
All groups have crime. How many ethnic groups don't have a large international organized crime syndicate or two? We Italians made it popular, but its as old as dirt. Ever since there were laws to break, someone has been breaking them. It really works like any other market.
In any population, no matter how big the crime, its only going to be a small small percentage of the population "involved" (obviously I mean directly taking part, I wouldn't call the small time shopkeeper who pays protection "involved"). I mean, shit... what percentage of the population is involved in any individual industry?
Its like saying they leave their butchers at home.
Slashdot Mirror
I would beg to differ. I was merely pointing out that this happened, and that I see it as abuse by the government. It has been pointed out that Dr King was, in some fashion a criminal. I would ask then whether we believe that merely being a criminal of some sort, makes this invasion of his private phone conversations somehow ok?
I think that this is an example of abuse, based on where I draw the line of what appropriate use of power is. The thing is that when it comes to the law, we have to ask two questions. The first is what should be prohibited, the second is the question of what powers are appropriate to be used to find, and prosecute such crimes.
Its true, that accomplishments and identity do not make this abuse. However, they do inform us. Because we all know who Dr King was, by invoking his name, we establish the context in which this invasion of privacy happened. If I said "Jack Papaidunno" had his conversations wiretapped, then I would have to explain what he was known for, and why the powers that were wanted to investigate him.
When I invoke the name of Dr King, one of the few examples that I have and can invoke off the top of my head, much of that work is done already.
How about if I were to add that one of the stated goals of the wiretapping was to find information which could be used to discredit Dr King? (apparently it was said that the only dirt that they ever dug up was that he liked to tell dirty jokes)
In my view, it was a fine example of why the watchers can't be trusted without, at least, oversight.
-Steve
Ahem. This all makes it sound very rhetorical or academic.
"Oh, if we give them power, they might be corrupt"... you sound paranoid, you sound like you might be hiding something. Try this...
This is not about what they "might do", its about what they HAVE DONE.
It is well known fact that before the requirement that warrants be issued and that there was review of wiretaps, that the FBI wiretapped none other than the Reverend Doctor Martin Luther King Jr. Are we to believe that the good reverend, one of the heroic leaders of the civil rights movement was a dangerous criminal and needed to be watched?
Forget the theoretical, we need not look far to find real tangible cases of abuse of power. It is not the ability of power to be abused, it is the fact that it has been abused. The watchers have already been proven untrustworthy. There is more than ample real indisputable evidence.
Sure we can understand why a person in power in the 60s would have felt the need to watch the good reverend doctor. However, doesn't that make all the more certain the case that it is folly to allow their whims to direct such powers without real oversight?
-Steve
it wont be.
:)
I actually signed up for a drug trial for an experimental ADD treatment, and the drug was one of these nicotine based drugs. So yes, I can say, it would be a pill. The same researcher was also askinging me if i was a smoker (I am not) because they have another study for people looking to quit smoking.
The researchers doing some of this research work NOT for a tobacco company, but for one of the worlds most well renowned research hospitals.
It turns out I was not a good candidate for the study, so I can't speak to how well it works, but since then I did smoke a couple of cloves out of curiosity and yah, I can see it. Though its been known for a long time that tobacco was one of the things people with ADD often use to self medicate.
Too bad regular smoking is so bad for you. Maybe I should get on the gum or patch
-Steve
I would think some sort of really strong dopamine antagonist would be a much more worthwhile endeavor. It would be utterly incapacitating. Suddenly the whole crowd is hit with a cloud and nobody can stay focused on anything, they just move from thought to thought naturally and freely as in a dream, everything would suddenly have equal low importance, with no way of differenciating between the importance of topics, events, ideas.
Here is a description of "low dopamine levels" from a site that talks about various mental states in relation to dopamine (each being associated with different disorders):
See http://www.enotalone.com/article/4115.html
Seems like if you could inhibit dopamine from an aerosol or direct delivery, you could easily turn even the most gung ho army into the equivalent of a hoarde of unfocused slackers... just round em up before it wears off.
-Steve
Right, but oxidizers still need heat and fuel to burn. One would assume that the bullet wont oxidize at those temps in the presnese of nitrous oxide, and that the minute quanitiy on impact wont cause blood to oxidize at the temp. I would think these would need to break the skin and deliver the gas directly into the blood stream, i don't see them putting enough in a capsule that could be fired to do the job in open air...
All those assumptions being true, I could see this maybe working. nitrous would at least make a crowd less able to fight. Especially if you hit them with enough to incpacitate them.
Tho I agree... I have never "laughed" from laughing gas, though I have taken it in various qunatities. It certainly is incapacitating...but only for like... 30 seconds in open air.
-Steve
My last place of employment (and this one) both also mandated it. However, they had the ability to cut a check if they had to (the last place) in fact, one of my coworkers was having issues with the IRS (oops stock options/capital gains screwup) and his lawyer advised he get a checks cut rather than doing direct deposit.
Something about slowing the IRS down while they negotiated, because they could it the money in his account easier than actual wage garnishing, and they didn't want the IRS just taking the money while they were still trying to work out a settlement with them.
-Steve
Oh I hadn' thought of that. Come to think of it... I see structures like that all the time...
Thats how they build docks. Floating platforms anchored by a series of large poles. When the water level rises, the platform slides up the pole. When the water level goes down, it slides down the pole. Its actually pretty inpressive the difference between high and low tide.
-Steve
yah a floating house would really need proper anchoring.
I was thinking a system of vertical tubes for chains to run through, with appropriate anchor weights at the bottom and enough chain to let it float up with the water several feet, an then be returned to proper place as the water recedes.
Then it would need to have the first few feet reincorced to withsttand floating dibris.
-Steve
Yup. And maybe emptying their clips into your back and your pet in the process.
Seriously tho... thats the thing... they can bust in the door, or they can install keyloggers. Once they break in the door, their hand is tipped, you know they are on to you. Its a little late to install a keylogger.
Thats the beauty of the encryption... they bust down the door, confiscate all your equipment... and still, one hopes, get nothing. Not that I am actually much of a criminal. I think the last law I broke involved rolling a joint. Shit, they barely arrest you for that around here anymore... worst I have ever gotten is a stern talking to about "keep it inside your house".
-Steve
Seriously.... if I had an operation THAT big...
there would be a safe deposit box, opened in the name of some bum off the street that I paid $50 to, paid up in cash for the next 5 years, that I NEVER visit, which would have 2 or 3 USB keys with copies of the keys in question, and encrypted.
I mean seriously... if your thinking in terms of disaster, don't you want to plan for disaster recovery?
-Steve
I dunno...
/boot). Very simple, and no worries. Obviously it comes down to the question of whats worst, decrypting the hard drive for them, or being accused of withholding evidence?
if its the gummint comming after me, I would prefer not to have to rely on magnets. Too time consuming to do right, and, well... I guess in the end it matters how much they want it.
For my laptop, I just keep the hard drive encrypted. Entire file system (ok, cept for
Then, if its someone who can't threaten me with violence (aka big armed men dragging me away under threat of escalating violence until I am dead or comply, off to jail)
Well... someone like that is just screwed. (ok if they were pretty smart and could trojan my initramfs.... they coul dprobably scrape my passphrase... but they would have to know to do that before they tip their hand to me)
-Steve
I know. I think part of it is sensativity to the subject matter. I have friends who have been raped. I have friends who were molested by parents and other adults. I in no way want to come off as condoning those.
However, consensual sex with a 16 year old? I mean, there is "grass on the field". Or "streaking" I mean seriously... how fucked up of a society do we live in where seeing a person naked is considered "damaging to children"? I have seen myself naked every day of the last 29 years. Often twice a day!
Your right, its ludacris!
People who want to lump these minor indecencies with real crimes disgust me.
-Steve
You know... I actually find myself having to agree here.
"Sex Offender" can really mean many things. Of course, rapists and child molesters come to mind. However, I have a friend who was in his early 20s, met a girl who claimed she was 18, had her stay with him a few nights, and the next thing he knew the police came knocking at his door.... she was 16, and a friend of hers told her parents where she was.
Eventually they pleaded the case down and he did not end up having to register as a sex offender, but it was clearly possible. I need to check, but I have heard that public exposure can lead to a sex crime conviction... shit... who doesn't know someone who got drunk some night and took a piss in a park or alley way at 3 am? Does a person really deserve to be on a sex offender list for taking a piss against natures original urinal?
I mean there are some truly heinous sex crimes, and some really scary people. However, theres also some really pretty innocuous stuff too. I am not sure I can support lumping them all together.
Heh, and don't you think the SEC will start looking for who is shorting the stock and investigate?
Overall though, this could work. Frankly, this seems to me to be the end result of turning finances into a game. Someone will look for a loophole or other problem with the way the game works, and exploit it. So you make new rules to try to fix it, and they find new ways to game the game.
Reminds me of Magic. New edition/expansion comes out. Someone builds a deck that can hit you consistantly for 300 points on the third turn. Cards end up restricted, or banned. New edition comes out... someone builds a new deck that can hit you consistantly for 300 points on the third turn... Cards get restricted or banned...
Honestly, I really think the stock market, in general, is a corrupting influence. It encourages the use of money for no other reason than to make more money with no social responsibility or ethics... and they wonder why it attracts the attention of every crook and shady dealer with a few bucks to toss into a scam.
-Steve
I agree with you on this, you make a valid point.
I think the problem here is that the boy has been crying wolf for too long, and this has always been a place that picks up on these sorts of cries... so we have heard it every single time. Is it any wonder we just yawn and dismiss it?
I would like as much as anything to give every issue a credible review of the real evidence. However, the fact is, we can't. Theres too much stuff out there, too many claims. We often have to go with what we know from the past rather than engaging every new bit of news with unbiased eyes.
The same will happen the next time someone claims to have invented a novel method for cold fusion.
-Steve
Ive never had this problem.
I just learned to type on a normal keyboard with my hands at a natural position.
The motions that my hands make are, essentially, a very fast version of the motions that I learned when I had to look at the keys, I use, maybe 7 fingers total. However, I type as fast as I reasonably need to, and don't need to buy a special keyboard, which is good, since I spend most of my time on a laptop.
-Steve
Well the thing is there arn't any real "liberal people". People have different issues that they care about and vote on and pay attention to. Bush may agree with "Liberal people" on some things, but its often on the issues that the people who are bashing him don't vote on.
I agree, he is no conservative, but, the whole liberal/conservative thing ceased to have real meaning a long time ago.
I mean, if you want to apply the actual meanings of terms and logic associated with them to an issue like say abortion... Roe V Wade was a very conservative decision in its logic. The pro-life movement are a bunch of radicals trying to assert new meaning and new reasons that simply were not the reason the laws were originally passed in the first place. The essential crux of the issue was that the court realised that the law, as passed, came about to regulate circumstances that were no longer the case, the law had outlived its usefulness. The "moral argument" was never why the law was passed in the first place, it was a new radical addition.
Hell, William F Buckley came out in favor of gays in the military. Yet, who is calling him a liberal?
Me? My stances tend to be pro Civil rights (which I include abortion as part of), Pro universal health care (partially because it really is cheaper and more efficient), anti gun control, pro states rights (where they don't conflict with civil rights), pro real corrections programs (its about rehabilitation not retribution).... generally in that order.
Thats only a partial list, but its issues based... Bush's immigration stance? I mostly am ok with but...its not an issue I vote on. Going to war for oil profits against our national interest? Not ok with that...and I care a lot more about that than his stance on immigration.
Admittedly, I am far more of a "liberal" than most "liberals" but... I still am anti gun control
-Steve
oh please....
We both know the real danger is that your friends will take the pill and see that the gorgeous girl is some common broad... no... some fat chick, and they are going to make fun of you.
Or worst, that she will take the pill and change her mind, afterall, its usually the women who make the final decision on who gets laid, not the men.
Then its back to myspace trolling for 13 year olds and telling women old enough to be your mother how much you "love the experiance of an older woman who can teach me things" (and btw, boy can they...wow...)
-Steve
I could see that. To be honest, I was getting into some OSS stuff, Debian development, starting to look at more projects. That was back before I got my first girlfriend, and we lived together, it lasted a bit through it... (it was a pointless relationship and centered mostly around sex, we had little in common, which left me free to mostly continue my non-social hobbies..eventually it ended and she moved out)
but overall, I can't bring myself to take on new projects anymore. Its left me very bored sometimes. I took a break originally because, I found I was spending all my time at work and at home in front of a PC and feeling very socially isolated, I wasn't meeting new girls, I wasn't dating, I disliked this... so I decided to cut off some of the activities that I liked, to make more time.
Then I found out I was socially retarded and shy. So I found myself really bored and took up smoking pot (which had been something i did once in a while for fun) to take up the time. This ended up not helping one but at being more socially adept, meeting people etc.
In the end I found myself just bored as hell, and not doing anything. Very productive.
All in all, chasing away boredom is a pretty common motivator. I think its great that people choose productive things to do with their time. Personally, I wont be going back to OSS development anytime soon, I found I have too much other stuff to work on. The key, I have found, is to be sure you are actually spending your time working on something, and not just doing something that helps you forget that you are bored... or other needs aren't being met.
Its really good to do things in moderation, sometimes I wish I hadn't taken on things that take up so much time. I would like to develop OSS again.
-Steve
I understand your frustration. Though, there is a difference between something causing frustration and something being "wrong". Its like, going back to my own analogies, a casual lover who gets upset when they found out their fuckbuddy is seeing other people.
Its quite understandable. People get attached. That doesn't mean you have some real entitlement to stop them. It doesn't mean they have done anything wrong because they hurt your feelings.
Your annoyed.... why? Cuz they didn't enjoy the early stages of the game and paid to skip it? You feel somehow entitled because you got there by playing yourself?
How do you FEEL when you are standing in line at the airport and the guy who bought first class tickets strolls past you to a VIP line and checks in in under 5 mins when you are stuck in the line for coach?
Not that I am saying your feelings are invalid, or I don't understand them, just that you know... Blizzard are the only people with the right to make them stop.
-Steve
Exactly, did I not say that I wont pick up another one? :)
My current dru^H^H^Hgame of choice is BF2142. In theory I really like the idea of MMORPGs, and even the RP aspects could be fun. In practice though, I just like playing against other people and want to game in a casual manner. I really don't want to have to keep up with the joneses, and thats a big aspect of those games. I don't like playing for hours every night, for weeks on end, just to find out no....i still have not powerleveld enough to play.
At least in BF even if I start a new char, the base level char can have an effect in the game and be effective. So I can game casually and the ranks give me new bonuses and new things to shoot for in the game... but its still damned fun even as a "recruit"
Its much like my attitude in other areas of life. Sure, sometimes I see the allure of a "relationship" but overall... I want something casual, something fun. If it turns out to be something I devote a lot to, thats fine.... but I am not looking for something that I HAVE to devote lots to if I want to get anything out of it at all. And much like the analogy I am using, I have learned that its best to be honest and upfront about that, both with myself and the "games" I choose.
I may play for weeks and weeks and end up devoting the rest of my life to a game... but if its all or nothing, I am not going to play at all. And generally, I am no early adopter either. I like to know a game has been around and gotten a lot of play before I start with it....wait... what was I talking about?
-Steve
Meh I don't see how its such a problem really. In the end, it comes down to why you are playing the game, and that varies from person to person.
The problem is that, the real purists. The people who actually WANT to "role play" or see the game model a real "economy in a vaccuume" (where there isn't some unseen force outside that makes things move around... think about it... real money makes for a "supernatural" force making people move in game goods around for reasons that don't make sense in game)... well... guess what... RPers and their ilk are far and few between.
Alot of people like to casually play. I mean some lvl whatever something or other gets on (Ive played these games but not WoW itself), does it really matter, in the grand scheme of things, whether he got that way by playing for days and days on his own, or bought a char last week?
The reason I will never pick up another MMORPG is very simple... I am a casual gamer. I am not looking for a relationship damnit! I want to come in, play the game, and then go do something else. I don't care what happens day to day... I don't care who else plays. I enjoy the time I play, and I make the best of it... and then... I want to do something else.
Hence, I totally understand buying a char. You get to skip all the powerleveleing, skip all of the "job" aspect of the game, and get right into the PvP, which would have been why I bought the god damned game in the first place.
I also see why people hate it... but honestly... who are they going to cater to?
What interests me more is the possibilities for money laundering. Think about it... there is now a total virtual economy. If I wanted to give you a million dollars and obscure where it came from, and was willing to pay the associated "fees" (differences in buying and selling exchange rates basically would be amounting to a fee), I could just transfer you gold and things in game until you had enough to trade for the amount of money I was trying to give you.
Hell if we do it right, it should be damned hard to trace whats really going on, it could be made to either look legit or at least hard to figure out.
Maybe this isn't robust enough for signifigant laundering... but... as these sorts of economies flourish, I do have to wonder.....
-Steve
Hear Hear!
You know... I am all for things being different than what I am used to, or different from what I prefer... I don't however like having smoke blown up my ass.
Its like tofu. I LIKE tofu in some things. Tofu can be good. It is not meat... it doesn't ever taste like meat. Stop trying to tell me you can make it taste like meat god damnit. Its tofu, its its own thing.
And for the record, I can't believe anyone can't believe its not butter. It tastes nothing like real butter. In fact, neither does margarine. Nearest I can figure... they can't believe its not margarine, and have long since forgotten what real butter tastes like. (butter is, btw one area where I will not compromise... its either sweet cream salted butter or I don't buy it. Maybe if I cooked with it every day I would learn to like margarine...)
Warmup time? Fuck who cares! I have been using these CFLs for a few years now... you get used to them. Now, I don't even notice. They arn't as "good" as incandencents in some ways... big deal. They use way less energy...I can deal... I got used to them...
Now the real tragedy is dimables. I have several fixtures with dimmer switches, and the "dimmable" CFLs are still just crap. I want LEDs now!
I just wish some of the other people who like them would stop trying to blow smoke up my ass like I am too oblivious to notice that its not fucking butter!
-Steve
Maybe...
Actually from the reading I have done thats even relatively safe. Elemental mercury will pretty much just pass right through your digestive tract, much like it rolls all over the table.
Now, it evaporates, and inhaling the fumes isn't quite as nice.
Verified at wikipedia: Mercury Poisoning
-Steve
Hehehe its true.
Going offtopic here but... that tends to be true.
Never mind the fact that there is a little selection going on here... a migrant is someone who moved. That right there shows they are more ambitious than the average person in some way. Not to say all ambitous people move, just that slackers tend not to.
All groups have crime. How many ethnic groups don't have a large international organized crime syndicate or two? We Italians made it popular, but its as old as dirt. Ever since there were laws to break, someone has been breaking them. It really works like any other market.
In any population, no matter how big the crime, its only going to be a small small percentage of the population "involved" (obviously I mean directly taking part, I wouldn't call the small time shopkeeper who pays protection "involved"). I mean, shit... what percentage of the population is involved in any individual industry?
Its like saying they leave their butchers at home.
-Steve