And in your original post, you didn't even make reference to a difference in preferences like you are now. You said that chick-friendly games were "mindless." What an insult that must be to all the women in the world who are avid fans of the game "Chess." Seriously, get your head out of your ass.
It's also rather ludicrous to say that Doom 3 isn't a mindless game. As simple as Spore is, it is far more complicated than a generic shooter.
Disprove the hypothesis that the only reason men and women act differently is because they are treated differently as children by our society. Similarly, racial differences are caused by cultural differences, not something that is inherent. Believing that these differences are inherent is a feat of great ignorance.
You really are stupid. Why don't you stick with insults that you can actually back up with some evidence, instead of just shooting wildly in the dark and hitting nothing?
Better yet, why don't you just stop trolling? Oh right, you're like 12.
and knows that having more than one bank account would be a pain in the ass
I like having accounts at different banks. You can do neat tricks, like cashing a check at bank A and depositing the cash at bank B so that you have access to the funds in check or card form today, as opposed to tomorrow!
There's another neat trick you can do with two banks... that is, if your balance at bank A goes negative, you can do all of your transactions at bank B until you get the situation straightened out!
You're a fool. As another slashdotter said, it's about deferring on the stuff you don't care about, being honest about the stuff you do care about, and discussing the stuff you disagree about. Asking her what she wants is nothing like saying "I'm helpless." You're deluded.
If your geeky bride-to-be is socially conscientious, frugal, or just into cool science, a cultured diamond from "Gemesis" is probably what you want for the stone itself (unless you can think of a better idea). http://www.gemesis.com/
Maybe he just meant that the car was "new" to him, 'cause he didn't have it before.
Your ego isn't tied up in new things, it's tied up in a totally blue-collar, short-sighted system of ideas regarding investment and the time value of money.
Remember kids, murdering the woman you promised to love and cherish and who gave you two children is EVIL.
Why don't we pick more philosophically neutral terminology, like, "murdering... is destructive" or "murdering... is wasteful?" Those are words that everyone can understand. "EVIL," on the other hand, is a subjective idea that lacks a commonly-held operational definition.
He didn't say it was determined solely by physical proximity, idiot. He said that Google lets Mozilla Foundation use one of it's buildings, and hence inferred that the companies had good relations. Nothing idiotic or unreasonable in that line of thinking.
You are a dip-shit for not realizing that your evidence makes no sense. You're also a dip-shit for not realizing that I was pointing that out in my previous post.
Your equation is too simplistic. Oftentimes (although not always, especially in the current housing market), the equity gained from simply owning a home (not considering "sweat equity") is greater than the cost of the interest payments. In this context, getting a loan or a mortgage can be profitable.
You may not need credit, but if it can help you build equity profit earlier in life than you could with out it, then it is certainly better to have it than not to.
This even applies to your "sweat equity" argument -- you can get a mortgage to pay for that run-down house much earlier in life than you would without a mortgage, thereby increasing your gains.
My guess is that someone modded you -1 flamebait for displaying such a dismal grasp of investment analysis.
Why don't you respond to those accusations than criticize my writing.
Because they are childish insults from an anonymous internet person. Why would I waste time disproving baseless accusations, when they already make you look stupid on their own? That would be playing right into your immature little game.
More editing: "Why don't you respond to those accusations than criticize my writing" isn't just stylistically bad, it's grammatically incorrect. What you wanted to say was either, "Why don't you respond to those accusations instead of criticizing my writing?" or "Why don't you respond to those accusations, then criticize my writing?"
Your writing is literally so bad that I can't tell what sentence you were even aiming for.
Slashdot Mirror
And in your original post, you didn't even make reference to a difference in preferences like you are now. You said that chick-friendly games were "mindless." What an insult that must be to all the women in the world who are avid fans of the game "Chess." Seriously, get your head out of your ass.
It's also rather ludicrous to say that Doom 3 isn't a mindless game. As simple as Spore is, it is far more complicated than a generic shooter.
Disprove the hypothesis that the only reason men and women act differently is because they are treated differently as children by our society. Similarly, racial differences are caused by cultural differences, not something that is inherent. Believing that these differences are inherent is a feat of great ignorance.
Spore continues this downward spiral into mindless chick-friendly games.
Wow, how sexist.
How are they gonna find time to kill him, when they are too busy killing themselves with their ridiculous and unhealthy jobs?
America could. We spent over $90,000,000,000 on the war in Iraq, and that isn't even productive!
You really are stupid. Why don't you stick with insults that you can actually back up with some evidence, instead of just shooting wildly in the dark and hitting nothing?
Better yet, why don't you just stop trolling? Oh right, you're like 12.
There's usually a one-day holding period before the funds are available, so that the bank can process the check and make sure that it's good.
and knows that having more than one bank account would be a pain in the ass
I like having accounts at different banks. You can do neat tricks, like cashing a check at bank A and depositing the cash at bank B so that you have access to the funds in check or card form today, as opposed to tomorrow!
There's another neat trick you can do with two banks ... that is, if your balance at bank A goes negative, you can do all of your transactions at bank B until you get the situation straightened out!
Remember that even to non-technical users, Google is a brand name.
I'm not a moral relativist or an atheist, I'm an amoral nihilistic agnostic.
At the end of the day, you're still just an angry anonymous asshole with nothing important to do.
You're a fool. As another slashdotter said, it's about deferring on the stuff you don't care about, being honest about the stuff you do care about, and discussing the stuff you disagree about. Asking her what she wants is nothing like saying "I'm helpless." You're deluded.
I think you realize that you don't even make sense, you just strive to get a rise out of people by repeating silly things.
If your geeky bride-to-be is socially conscientious, frugal, or just into cool science, a cultured diamond from "Gemesis" is probably what you want for the stone itself (unless you can think of a better idea). http://www.gemesis.com/
Maybe he just meant that the car was "new" to him, 'cause he didn't have it before.
Your ego isn't tied up in new things, it's tied up in a totally blue-collar, short-sighted system of ideas regarding investment and the time value of money.
Remember kids, murdering the woman you promised to love and cherish and who gave you two children is EVIL.
Why don't we pick more philosophically neutral terminology, like, "murdering ... is destructive" or "murdering ... is wasteful?" Those are words that everyone can understand. "EVIL," on the other hand, is a subjective idea that lacks a commonly-held operational definition.
He didn't say it was determined solely by physical proximity, idiot. He said that Google lets Mozilla Foundation use one of it's buildings, and hence inferred that the companies had good relations. Nothing idiotic or unreasonable in that line of thinking.
The thing that surprises me is that you don't realize just how childish you really are.
You are a dip-shit for not realizing that your evidence makes no sense. You're also a dip-shit for not realizing that I was pointing that out in my previous post.
This is why we can't have nice things.
Credit = interest. Interest = drain on resources.
Your equation is too simplistic. Oftentimes (although not always, especially in the current housing market), the equity gained from simply owning a home (not considering "sweat equity") is greater than the cost of the interest payments. In this context, getting a loan or a mortgage can be profitable.
You may not need credit, but if it can help you build equity profit earlier in life than you could with out it, then it is certainly better to have it than not to.
This even applies to your "sweat equity" argument -- you can get a mortgage to pay for that run-down house much earlier in life than you would without a mortgage, thereby increasing your gains.
My guess is that someone modded you -1 flamebait for displaying such a dismal grasp of investment analysis.
Typically speaking, one usually presents evidence to support their case before resting it.
He speaks the truth.
Talk about an overreaction. How can you not see the humor in that?
Yeah, not being able to walk would be shitty. Just because things are shitty doesn't mean we can't make jokes out of them now and then.
It's arguable as to whether or not I'm a sick fuck, but ignorant? Really?
"Ignorant" must just be your pet insult because it's totally out of context here.
They didn't quadruple productivity, they quadrupled participation in the program. Participation and productivity are different metrics.
Economics only seems like a load of bullshit if you don't understand it and don't make an attempt to.
Why don't you respond to those accusations than criticize my writing.
Because they are childish insults from an anonymous internet person. Why would I waste time disproving baseless accusations, when they already make you look stupid on their own? That would be playing right into your immature little game.
More editing: "Why don't you respond to those accusations than criticize my writing" isn't just stylistically bad, it's grammatically incorrect. What you wanted to say was either, "Why don't you respond to those accusations instead of criticizing my writing?" or "Why don't you respond to those accusations, then criticize my writing?"
Your writing is literally so bad that I can't tell what sentence you were even aiming for.