"And before you start spouting off about how kids should toughen up, try having some yourself, and then let me know how much you want them to smoke and drink and drive fast cars."
I have a kid, and I don't want him to smoke or drink or drive fast cars. But none of those things has anything to do with Sesame Street.
I'd spout off about how parents should toughen up, not the kids. If my son sees Cookie Monster smoking a pipe and wants to engage in that imaginative play, I have no problem with that--because I'd let him know that smoking a real pipe would be bad for him. The same principle is in action when he drinks juice from a mug and pretends it's his before-work coffee, just like daddy drinks. He also knows that I don't like coffee, am trying to stop drinking it and that I'm addicted to the chemical in it that helps me stay awake. He knows that I would much rather get more sleep if I had the time. He understands this the same way he understands that he can't have spicy chips when my wife is eating them (not because I don't want him eating them, but because he doesn't like spicy food).
It turns out being open and honest with your 4-year-old works quite well. So does not treating him like he's an idiot.
Your industry went to war with consumers the minute it placed a "piracy tax" on the blank cassettes I used for my own created music, Bronfman. "Winning" isn't good enough for us anymore.
FEMA is very likely sorry that they were caught. The question of whether they're sorry they did it in the first place is still up for debate. Available evidence points to "not a fucking chance."
That's interesting news and all, but I wish they would throw those 35 developers at making Notes not suck first. You know your company's email standard is a piece of shit when you miss the "good old days" of Outlook.
That was your favorite quote? Mine was the one where the company's CEO/President/big cheese was asking his underlings to follow up on some Chinese spam he got to determine whether they should pay to get the "internet name" of MediaDefender registered.
In honor of 4 editions, the new rules are based on d4 gameplay, using the following results table (fig. 2b):
evens: success odds: failure
Everything else translates well into the d4 system as well. For instance, percentage rolls are now 25d4 (yeah, like you used those bottom three percents). A Quasar Dragon's breath attack does (3.6x10^7)d4 damage to whichever planet it's aimed at. And so forth.
Nope, I freely admit I have no idea how to run a business. You appear to have missed the fact that I was making a joke at Slashdot's expense. But if your skin is really this thin, perhaps Slashdot isn't the best site for you to be reading.
"Your comments are appreciated and we take your input seriously."
Really? You take seriously an article submission containing an obvious logical flaw, followed by hundreds of comments from misinformed kids? That's no way to run a business, man.
"At this point, I'm happy to give you the last word."
A wise decision, given the spuriousness of your argument. Here's the text, for those playing along at home:
----- (c) "Declassification authority" means:
(1) the official who authorized the original classification, if that official is still serving in the same position; [i.e., not Karl Rove or Scooter Libby]
(2) the originator's current successor in function; [i.e., not Karl Rove or Scooter Libby]
(3) a supervisory official of either; [i.e., not Karl Rove or Scooter Libby, and here comes that logical construct you keep crowing about, but which changes nothing] or
(4) officials delegated declassification authority in writing by the agency head or the senior agency official. [i.e., not Karl Rove or Scooter Libby] -----
"There is no memo, but you did miss Executive Order 12958 (http://www.fas.org/sgp/clinton/eo12958.html) You may find Sec. 3.1 (c) informative."
No, but I did find it to bolster my argument (*you* may find subsection 4 of 3.1 (c) informative). So where is that written authorization I asked about in the first place?
"Libertarianism is abusive of liberty because it is equivalent to anarchy, and anarchy is abusive of liberty."
Since you keep spouting claims without anything at all to back them up, I'll go ahead and assume you're a nutjob. Thanks.
Slashdot Mirror
"And before you start spouting off about how kids should toughen up, try having some yourself, and then let me know how much you want them to smoke and drink and drive fast cars."
I have a kid, and I don't want him to smoke or drink or drive fast cars. But none of those things has anything to do with Sesame Street.
I'd spout off about how parents should toughen up, not the kids. If my son sees Cookie Monster smoking a pipe and wants to engage in that imaginative play, I have no problem with that--because I'd let him know that smoking a real pipe would be bad for him. The same principle is in action when he drinks juice from a mug and pretends it's his before-work coffee, just like daddy drinks. He also knows that I don't like coffee, am trying to stop drinking it and that I'm addicted to the chemical in it that helps me stay awake. He knows that I would much rather get more sleep if I had the time. He understands this the same way he understands that he can't have spicy chips when my wife is eating them (not because I don't want him eating them, but because he doesn't like spicy food).
It turns out being open and honest with your 4-year-old works quite well. So does not treating him like he's an idiot.
Amen. Elmo needs a good ass kicking.
Your industry went to war with consumers the minute it placed a "piracy tax" on the blank cassettes I used for my own created music, Bronfman. "Winning" isn't good enough for us anymore.
"Those that give up Liberty to have temporary Security deserve Neither - Benjamin Franklin."
Sorry, wrong answer.
When I am booted into OSX(86), I don't use most of the GUI utils for simple operations. So everyone who uses
/Volumes/newdir; tar xvf -) ...probably won't run into this bug.
sudo tar cf - . |(cd
FEMA is very likely sorry that they were caught. The question of whether they're sorry they did it in the first place is still up for debate. Available evidence points to "not a fucking chance."
"Rich and powerful" on $15K? Are they high?
Artists will see one thin dime of that tax money when monkeys come flying out of my ass. And I don't feel any monkeys down there at the moment.
My stereo is made of solid helium, newbie.
Cost almost as much as the pressurized storage chamber...
AT&T blows.
Does this mean I have to stop furtively putting money in parking meters?
That's interesting news and all, but I wish they would throw those 35 developers at making Notes not suck first. You know your company's email standard is a piece of shit when you miss the "good old days" of Outlook.
That was your favorite quote? Mine was the one where the company's CEO/President/big cheese was asking his underlings to follow up on some Chinese spam he got to determine whether they should pay to get the "internet name" of MediaDefender registered.
This is from last night after news of the leak hit everywhere. Enjoy!
-------[snip]------
From: ceo@mediadefender.com
To: all@mediadefender.com
Subject: Oh fuck
Oh fuck me. Jesus fucking God. We are so fucked. What the fuck are we going to do?
Fuck.
-------[snip]-----
I'm betting the drugs cost way less than the ink. Any takers?
Websites have ads now? You're pulling my leg.
Go away, PLA!
(People who don't know what I'm referring to are going to bury this in moderation)
Curses! I have been out-nerded!
"bottom three percents"
See what happens when you get your math degree from a cheap college?
In honor of 4 editions, the new rules are based on d4 gameplay, using the following results table (fig. 2b):
evens: success
odds: failure
Everything else translates well into the d4 system as well. For instance, percentage rolls are now 25d4 (yeah, like you used those bottom three percents). A Quasar Dragon's breath attack does (3.6x10^7)d4 damage to whichever planet it's aimed at. And so forth.
Nope, I freely admit I have no idea how to run a business. You appear to have missed the fact that I was making a joke at Slashdot's expense. But if your skin is really this thin, perhaps Slashdot isn't the best site for you to be reading.
"Your comments are appreciated and we take your input seriously."
Really? You take seriously an article submission containing an obvious logical flaw, followed by hundreds of comments from misinformed kids? That's no way to run a business, man.
"At this point, I'm happy to give you the last word."
A wise decision, given the spuriousness of your argument. Here's the text, for those playing along at home:
-----
(c) "Declassification authority" means:
(1) the official who authorized the original classification, if that official is still serving in the same position; [i.e., not Karl Rove or Scooter Libby]
(2) the originator's current successor in function; [i.e., not Karl Rove or Scooter Libby]
(3) a supervisory official of either; [i.e., not Karl Rove or Scooter Libby, and here comes that logical construct you keep crowing about, but which changes nothing] or
(4) officials delegated declassification authority in writing by the agency head or the senior agency official. [i.e., not Karl Rove or Scooter Libby]
-----
I see you failed to actually comprehend subsections 1-3. That's too bad, because you might have made a point if you had.
"There is no memo, but you did miss Executive Order 12958 (http://www.fas.org/sgp/clinton/eo12958.html) You may find Sec. 3.1 (c) informative."
No, but I did find it to bolster my argument (*you* may find subsection 4 of 3.1 (c) informative). So where is that written authorization I asked about in the first place?
"Libertarianism is abusive of liberty because it is equivalent to anarchy, and anarchy is abusive of liberty."
Since you keep spouting claims without anything at all to back them up, I'll go ahead and assume you're a nutjob. Thanks.