Bill McEnaney
Feb 28, 12:52 PM
What is a "gay lifestyle" exactly? We get up, take a shower, brush our teeth, go to work and come home to our families just like anyone else.
A same-sex attracted person is living a "gay lifestyle" when he or she dates people of the same sex, "marries" people of the same sex, has same-sex sex, or does any combination of these things. I think that if same-sex attracted people are going to live together, they need to do that as though they were siblings, not as sex partners. In my opinion, they should have purely platonic, nonsexual relationships with one another.
Heterosexual couples need to reserve sex for opposite-sex monogamous marriage. If I had a girlfriend, I might kiss her. But I wouldn't do that to deliberately arouse either of us. If either of us felt tempted to have sex with each other, the kissing would stop right away. I know of a woman who gave an excellent answer when men asked her why saved sex for marriage. She said, "I"m worth waiting for." She lived by her Catholic convictions, and she wouldn't risk letting any man use her as a mere object, as a mere tool.
Some may say, "I have sex with my girlfriend to show her that I love her." If I had a girlfriend, I would hope I would love her enough to protect her from the physical and psychological risks that come with non-marital sex. The best way for me to do that is for my hypothetical girlfriend and me to be celibate before marriage.
Sacramentally same-sex "marriage" isn't marriage. Neither is merely civil marriage of any sort. If I understand what the Catholic Church's teachings about marriage merely civil, it teaches non-sacramental marriage, whether same-sex or opposite-sex, is legal fornication.
A same-sex attracted person is living a "gay lifestyle" when he or she dates people of the same sex, "marries" people of the same sex, has same-sex sex, or does any combination of these things. I think that if same-sex attracted people are going to live together, they need to do that as though they were siblings, not as sex partners. In my opinion, they should have purely platonic, nonsexual relationships with one another.
Heterosexual couples need to reserve sex for opposite-sex monogamous marriage. If I had a girlfriend, I might kiss her. But I wouldn't do that to deliberately arouse either of us. If either of us felt tempted to have sex with each other, the kissing would stop right away. I know of a woman who gave an excellent answer when men asked her why saved sex for marriage. She said, "I"m worth waiting for." She lived by her Catholic convictions, and she wouldn't risk letting any man use her as a mere object, as a mere tool.
Some may say, "I have sex with my girlfriend to show her that I love her." If I had a girlfriend, I would hope I would love her enough to protect her from the physical and psychological risks that come with non-marital sex. The best way for me to do that is for my hypothetical girlfriend and me to be celibate before marriage.
Sacramentally same-sex "marriage" isn't marriage. Neither is merely civil marriage of any sort. If I understand what the Catholic Church's teachings about marriage merely civil, it teaches non-sacramental marriage, whether same-sex or opposite-sex, is legal fornication.
Bill McEnaney
Apr 30, 08:24 PM
Doesn't mean its a good idea or helpful to the nation, but its not libel/slander if its true.
Fair enough, but I think many are willing to make hasty public comments about others. On Chopped, a program on the Food Network, a judge accused a competitor of lying when the competitor said that before the show, he had already used an ingredient that he used incorrectly on the program. Maybe the contestant's other dish came out poorly when he first used that ingredient. I've written some programs in IBM 370 assembly language. So I've that language. But I've forgotten what I learned about it.
On other message board some posters accused others of homophobia, sounding as though they couldn't have cared less about whether or how much they harmed the reputations of the accused. On other boards, some posters accused me of homophobia, too. Unfortunately, I doubt that the accuser even wonder whether it would have been better to send me a private message instead.
I know that some people here believe that I'm too socially conservative. Although they may be right, I prefer too much caution to too little caution.
To their credit, everyone here has treated me politely, even when I've said things that offended them. Compared to posters I've met at some other boards, people here, including Lee Kohler, control themselves admirably. But if I, and I do mean I, calumniate someone politely publicly, privately, or both, polite wording doesn't make up for the harm I do to the calumniated person's reputation.
But its clear what you are implying
I didn't intend to imply anything.
Fair enough, but I think many are willing to make hasty public comments about others. On Chopped, a program on the Food Network, a judge accused a competitor of lying when the competitor said that before the show, he had already used an ingredient that he used incorrectly on the program. Maybe the contestant's other dish came out poorly when he first used that ingredient. I've written some programs in IBM 370 assembly language. So I've that language. But I've forgotten what I learned about it.
On other message board some posters accused others of homophobia, sounding as though they couldn't have cared less about whether or how much they harmed the reputations of the accused. On other boards, some posters accused me of homophobia, too. Unfortunately, I doubt that the accuser even wonder whether it would have been better to send me a private message instead.
I know that some people here believe that I'm too socially conservative. Although they may be right, I prefer too much caution to too little caution.
To their credit, everyone here has treated me politely, even when I've said things that offended them. Compared to posters I've met at some other boards, people here, including Lee Kohler, control themselves admirably. But if I, and I do mean I, calumniate someone politely publicly, privately, or both, polite wording doesn't make up for the harm I do to the calumniated person's reputation.
But its clear what you are implying
I didn't intend to imply anything.
troller
Apr 19, 03:10 PM
and the even bigger joke ist...all the apple stuff is produced for a small budget in china and sold like Karl Lagerfeld himself produced every little piece. Sorry but that's a shame!
gnasher729
Apr 25, 02:27 PM
The point is that I would have assumed that any app or part of the OS creating a database would be open and transparent about it.
What do you expect? Every application that you use will store information in databases. MacOS X keeps a database that contains every single word in every document that you ever create on your Macintosh, did you know that? Are you going all paranoid about it or are you just happy that Spotlight can find any document you are looking for in no time? Safari keeps track of every website you ever visited. Does that worry you? Do you want a list of all the thousands of databases on your Mac, and on your iPhone? Really? Did you know that Angry Birds keeps track of how well you played and stores the information on your phone without telling you? Are you really angry now?
What do you expect? Every application that you use will store information in databases. MacOS X keeps a database that contains every single word in every document that you ever create on your Macintosh, did you know that? Are you going all paranoid about it or are you just happy that Spotlight can find any document you are looking for in no time? Safari keeps track of every website you ever visited. Does that worry you? Do you want a list of all the thousands of databases on your Mac, and on your iPhone? Really? Did you know that Angry Birds keeps track of how well you played and stores the information on your phone without telling you? Are you really angry now?
gnasher729
Jul 27, 05:59 PM
but is still more productive because it handles more calculations per clock cycle
I'm no processor geek. I have a basic understanding of the terminology and how things work so correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't this one of the advantages that the PPC had over Intel chips? Does this mean Intel is moving toward shorter pipes? Are we talking more instructions per clock cycle or what? What does "calculations" mean in this context?
With most processors, especially the Intel/AMD processors, "instructions per cycle" is not a useful number. These processors have both simple instructions (add register number 3 to register number 6) and complex instructions (add register number 3 to the number whose address is in register number 6). A PowerPC has the simple instructions, but not the complex ones. Instead it would need three instructions "load the number whose address is in register number 6, and move it to register 7", "add register 3 to register 7", "store register 7 to the location whose address is in register 6". But the Intel processor doesn't magically do three times as much work. Instead, it splits the complex instruction into three so-called "macro-ops", and does exactly the same work. So in this case, the PowerPC would execute three times as many instructions per cycle (3 instead of 1), but because it doesn't do more actual work, that is pointless. Instead you would count the number of operations, and they are more or less the same.
Intel is indeed moving towards shorter pipelines. They have done that already with the Core Duo chips. Longer pipelines have the advantage that each pipeline step is a bit faster, so you can get higher clockspeed. Shorter pipelines have the advantage that they take much less energy (very important; at some point your chips just melt), they are much faster handling branches, and they are just much much easier to design. Pentium 4 needed absolutely heroic efforts to produce it, and would have needed twice the heroics to improve it. Instead, the Core Duo has a much simpler design, that is just as powerful, and because it was so simple, Core 2 Duo could improve it.
And Core 2 Duo can now execute up to four "micro-ops" per cycle, same as the G5, compared to three for Core Duo, Pentium 4 and G4. It also has some clever features that reduce the number of micro-ops needed up to 10 percent, and some other improvements.
I'm no processor geek. I have a basic understanding of the terminology and how things work so correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't this one of the advantages that the PPC had over Intel chips? Does this mean Intel is moving toward shorter pipes? Are we talking more instructions per clock cycle or what? What does "calculations" mean in this context?
With most processors, especially the Intel/AMD processors, "instructions per cycle" is not a useful number. These processors have both simple instructions (add register number 3 to register number 6) and complex instructions (add register number 3 to the number whose address is in register number 6). A PowerPC has the simple instructions, but not the complex ones. Instead it would need three instructions "load the number whose address is in register number 6, and move it to register 7", "add register 3 to register 7", "store register 7 to the location whose address is in register 6". But the Intel processor doesn't magically do three times as much work. Instead, it splits the complex instruction into three so-called "macro-ops", and does exactly the same work. So in this case, the PowerPC would execute three times as many instructions per cycle (3 instead of 1), but because it doesn't do more actual work, that is pointless. Instead you would count the number of operations, and they are more or less the same.
Intel is indeed moving towards shorter pipelines. They have done that already with the Core Duo chips. Longer pipelines have the advantage that each pipeline step is a bit faster, so you can get higher clockspeed. Shorter pipelines have the advantage that they take much less energy (very important; at some point your chips just melt), they are much faster handling branches, and they are just much much easier to design. Pentium 4 needed absolutely heroic efforts to produce it, and would have needed twice the heroics to improve it. Instead, the Core Duo has a much simpler design, that is just as powerful, and because it was so simple, Core 2 Duo could improve it.
And Core 2 Duo can now execute up to four "micro-ops" per cycle, same as the G5, compared to three for Core Duo, Pentium 4 and G4. It also has some clever features that reduce the number of micro-ops needed up to 10 percent, and some other improvements.
ccrandall77
Aug 11, 02:03 PM
EDGE is not meant to compare with EVDO, UTMS is.
Can you imagine them making the phone only for CDMA? That translates to "US only." There will be a GSM version, it will most likely support UTMS, which is as good or better than EVDO.
Even assuming for the sake of argument, which I don't in reality, that CDMA is better than GSM for voice, the annoyance of not being able to swap SIM cards is enough for me to avoid it.
That and the fact I can't use it anywhere outside the US.
I agree that EVDO is more analgous to UTMS than EDGE, but for now in most places UTMS is not present... esp the US. So when I compare CDMA technologies to GSM technologies for domestic carriers, the CDMA camp wins hands down.
There are many places CDMA is used outside the US. From the maps I've seen, much of Asia, Australia, and the Americas have CDMA coverage. And has I mentioned in a previous post, the big 2 (VZW and Sprint) do offer hybrid CDMA/GSM phones (or at least they did... we can still apparently get them through our business).
I WHOLEHEARTEDLY agree about your point on SIM cards. I wish to God Sprint had SIM cards. I have a Treo 700p and I LOVE IT!!! But I don't want to haul it around with me everywhere. Frequently I steal my wife's new Samsung A900 since it's so thin and is hardly noticable in my pocket. I'd love to have the freedom to have 1 line and 2 phones.
Can you imagine them making the phone only for CDMA? That translates to "US only." There will be a GSM version, it will most likely support UTMS, which is as good or better than EVDO.
Even assuming for the sake of argument, which I don't in reality, that CDMA is better than GSM for voice, the annoyance of not being able to swap SIM cards is enough for me to avoid it.
That and the fact I can't use it anywhere outside the US.
I agree that EVDO is more analgous to UTMS than EDGE, but for now in most places UTMS is not present... esp the US. So when I compare CDMA technologies to GSM technologies for domestic carriers, the CDMA camp wins hands down.
There are many places CDMA is used outside the US. From the maps I've seen, much of Asia, Australia, and the Americas have CDMA coverage. And has I mentioned in a previous post, the big 2 (VZW and Sprint) do offer hybrid CDMA/GSM phones (or at least they did... we can still apparently get them through our business).
I WHOLEHEARTEDLY agree about your point on SIM cards. I wish to God Sprint had SIM cards. I have a Treo 700p and I LOVE IT!!! But I don't want to haul it around with me everywhere. Frequently I steal my wife's new Samsung A900 since it's so thin and is hardly noticable in my pocket. I'd love to have the freedom to have 1 line and 2 phones.
osx11
Mar 22, 12:58 PM
.2 mm thinner?
let the war begin.
let the war begin.
BenRoethig
Apr 6, 12:35 PM
I can't wait. I think a 13" air will be my next Mac.
rtdunham
Apr 27, 09:49 AM
I'm old-fashined I guess because I have no interest in having a smartphone in the first place. I just have a standard flip-phone. By owning a smartphone, you are always going to be faced with privacy issues...
Did you know dumb phones record every call you make? That they record who you call, and how long you talk to them? That when landlines are involved, nubmers are recorded that pinpoint the location? That your phone transmits that information to your phone company? Look at your next phone bill. Your standard flip phone even records who calls YOU and tells THAT to your phone company, too. AND if you lose your phone bill--as is the case if you lose your phone--all that data's available, in unencrypted form, to anyone and everyone!
My take: Yeah, the data should've been encrypted, and prudence would have had it deleted after a short time. They're fixing that now. But it serves a purpose we all value, facilitating calling and optimizing location services when we want them. It's a glitch, nothing more, exaggerated by media attention (and i'm part of the media, so I'm not unfairly finger-pointing) just as happened with antenna-gate and the fuss over Toyotas accelerating out of control (where almost always the conclusion is someone put their foot on the accelerator instead of the brake, by mistake). Ten years from now someone will write an entertaining book about the gap between public hysteria and reality on these issues and many others (birtherism, anyone? or if your political views swing in a different way, government spending way beyond its means?)
I'm not saying the location database is operator error. Clearly not. I'm just trying to keep it in perspective. (It's not time-stamped? It's accurate sometimes only to 50 or 81 miles, as in cases reported in this thread? My phone, using the data that's recorded, consistently puts me five miles from my home, in a different county, across a river, four or five cities away, due to some oddity of cell tower location).
Look, your credit cards not only keep track of where you've been, but how much you spent there, and when, with precise geographic accuracy. Sometimes they even tell what you've bought. Just look at your next bill. Did you know your bank keeps track of every check you write, and to whom, and sends that information to you unencrypted via the mail? Did you know...
I think we should keep this situation in perspective. Too many people here see the privacy sky falling on them, when they're really swimming in it. (Did you know the device you're using to read this doesn't protect you from being victimized by horrible unencrypted metaphors...?)
Did you know dumb phones record every call you make? That they record who you call, and how long you talk to them? That when landlines are involved, nubmers are recorded that pinpoint the location? That your phone transmits that information to your phone company? Look at your next phone bill. Your standard flip phone even records who calls YOU and tells THAT to your phone company, too. AND if you lose your phone bill--as is the case if you lose your phone--all that data's available, in unencrypted form, to anyone and everyone!
My take: Yeah, the data should've been encrypted, and prudence would have had it deleted after a short time. They're fixing that now. But it serves a purpose we all value, facilitating calling and optimizing location services when we want them. It's a glitch, nothing more, exaggerated by media attention (and i'm part of the media, so I'm not unfairly finger-pointing) just as happened with antenna-gate and the fuss over Toyotas accelerating out of control (where almost always the conclusion is someone put their foot on the accelerator instead of the brake, by mistake). Ten years from now someone will write an entertaining book about the gap between public hysteria and reality on these issues and many others (birtherism, anyone? or if your political views swing in a different way, government spending way beyond its means?)
I'm not saying the location database is operator error. Clearly not. I'm just trying to keep it in perspective. (It's not time-stamped? It's accurate sometimes only to 50 or 81 miles, as in cases reported in this thread? My phone, using the data that's recorded, consistently puts me five miles from my home, in a different county, across a river, four or five cities away, due to some oddity of cell tower location).
Look, your credit cards not only keep track of where you've been, but how much you spent there, and when, with precise geographic accuracy. Sometimes they even tell what you've bought. Just look at your next bill. Did you know your bank keeps track of every check you write, and to whom, and sends that information to you unencrypted via the mail? Did you know...
I think we should keep this situation in perspective. Too many people here see the privacy sky falling on them, when they're really swimming in it. (Did you know the device you're using to read this doesn't protect you from being victimized by horrible unencrypted metaphors...?)
Joshuarocks
Apr 8, 12:17 AM
retail sucks dookey.. and Best Buy or Worst Buy can go out of business for all I care
Raid
Apr 28, 11:04 AM
I really have nothing to add to this thread, the whole thing was silly from the get go and is just a fantastic example of how American politics is more show than substance. (and a over-the-top- soap opera at that!)
But I saw this today and thought I would share:
http://cheezfailbooking.files.wordpress.com/2011/04/funny-facebook-fails-doubting-thomas1.jpg
You may now continue distract yourselves from real issues.
But I saw this today and thought I would share:
http://cheezfailbooking.files.wordpress.com/2011/04/funny-facebook-fails-doubting-thomas1.jpg
You may now continue distract yourselves from real issues.
shelterpaw
Jul 20, 11:11 AM
I think Logic can only use two cores/processors with a cludge to use the other two on a quad (by pretending it's a remote machine). Someone told me this though so I'm not 100% on that.I'm not sure either and I shouldn't have made the assumption. I know Ableton and Cubase do as I've used both and I'm now an avid Ableton user. I'd imagine Logic will take full advantage sometime soon since it's now one of Apple's pro applications. It certainly makes sense considering how bogged down your system gets once you load enough virtual instruments and effects.
jeanlain
Apr 12, 12:10 PM
You open it from Compressor, in the top right corner. Then, if you have a cluster (set up in Qmaster) it will show on top of "Your computer"
Here you can monitor your render progress and see how many cores are used.
See attached screen shot
I have not set up a cluster, so I only see "my computer" in the list.
Here you can monitor your render progress and see how many cores are used.
See attached screen shot
I have not set up a cluster, so I only see "my computer" in the list.
chatin
Aug 16, 11:58 PM
This poor cache design will kill off the G5's fast in rendering intensive workspaces.
The G5 has only 1MB of cache and it's per core not per cpu. If one core needs to cache 3.5MB of data it's possible on the Mac Pro becauce the CPU cache is fully unified.
I just ran Cinebench 9.5 on my Mac Pro and got 4 Cpu's Showing and a healthy 3.5 Ratio. (That means the CPU's are working together very well, thanks to the Intel Smart Cache.)
:) :p
The G5 has only 1MB of cache and it's per core not per cpu. If one core needs to cache 3.5MB of data it's possible on the Mac Pro becauce the CPU cache is fully unified.
I just ran Cinebench 9.5 on my Mac Pro and got 4 Cpu's Showing and a healthy 3.5 Ratio. (That means the CPU's are working together very well, thanks to the Intel Smart Cache.)
:) :p
Porco
Nov 28, 10:41 PM
The full article is very funny.
"It would be a nice idea. We have a negotiation coming up not too far. I don't see why we wouldn't do that... but maybe not in the same way," he told the Reuters Media Summit, when asked if Universal would negotiate a royalty fee for the iPod that would be similar to Microsoft's Zune.
"The Zune (deal) was an amazingly interesting exercise, to end up with a piece of technology," he added.
"It would be a nice idea" if I got money for nothing too! And why am I tempted to read "an amazingly interesting exercise" as an amazingly interesting exercise ... he added, dollar signs flashing in his eyes like some real-life Scrooge McDuck' ?
And to end up with "a piece of technology"! Yes! wow! hahahahah, I bet Microsoft were astounded about that too.
As the various parodies of such behaviour online indicates, the whole thing would be hilarious if it wasn't so ... true.
Pirates will pirate unless you give them a compelling reason not to. Legitimate customers will stay that way unless they feel piracy is an action they are ethically comfortable with. This kind of garbage makes that happen.
So for every iPod that would possibly hold a good couple of hundred Universal tracks amongst the thousands on there, I'd guess this kind of thing completely turns us nerds towards piracy rather than CD purchases/legitimate downloads. Is that $1 per iPod really going to make them as much money as the $xx they have lost on CDs and downloads? I'd guess not. Even if only 1% of people buying iPods pirate Universal tracks instead of buying them because of this deal (if it happens), it would be a loser for Universal. And of course the only people not financially at a loss because of it will be people who buy tracks, not the pirates who are back in the black as soon as they soak up the $1 surcharge by illegally downloading a Universal album as soon as they get their iPod.
If Apple did have the misfortune to be made to accept this kind of thing (unlikely right now I'd think, but you never know after a couple of ad-laden Zune-ar years), they should add the $1 to the price of the iPod so people ask "why does it cost $201?" and they should tell people on their web-site exactly why as well, providing details of how to get in touch with Universal to express their thanks.
Sorry if I've repeated any points already made... it's a Universally idiotic idea.
"It would be a nice idea. We have a negotiation coming up not too far. I don't see why we wouldn't do that... but maybe not in the same way," he told the Reuters Media Summit, when asked if Universal would negotiate a royalty fee for the iPod that would be similar to Microsoft's Zune.
"The Zune (deal) was an amazingly interesting exercise, to end up with a piece of technology," he added.
"It would be a nice idea" if I got money for nothing too! And why am I tempted to read "an amazingly interesting exercise" as an amazingly interesting exercise ... he added, dollar signs flashing in his eyes like some real-life Scrooge McDuck' ?
And to end up with "a piece of technology"! Yes! wow! hahahahah, I bet Microsoft were astounded about that too.
As the various parodies of such behaviour online indicates, the whole thing would be hilarious if it wasn't so ... true.
Pirates will pirate unless you give them a compelling reason not to. Legitimate customers will stay that way unless they feel piracy is an action they are ethically comfortable with. This kind of garbage makes that happen.
So for every iPod that would possibly hold a good couple of hundred Universal tracks amongst the thousands on there, I'd guess this kind of thing completely turns us nerds towards piracy rather than CD purchases/legitimate downloads. Is that $1 per iPod really going to make them as much money as the $xx they have lost on CDs and downloads? I'd guess not. Even if only 1% of people buying iPods pirate Universal tracks instead of buying them because of this deal (if it happens), it would be a loser for Universal. And of course the only people not financially at a loss because of it will be people who buy tracks, not the pirates who are back in the black as soon as they soak up the $1 surcharge by illegally downloading a Universal album as soon as they get their iPod.
If Apple did have the misfortune to be made to accept this kind of thing (unlikely right now I'd think, but you never know after a couple of ad-laden Zune-ar years), they should add the $1 to the price of the iPod so people ask "why does it cost $201?" and they should tell people on their web-site exactly why as well, providing details of how to get in touch with Universal to express their thanks.
Sorry if I've repeated any points already made... it's a Universally idiotic idea.
manu chao
Apr 25, 02:16 PM
To say that it is an invasion of privacy is just false, however, because the information remains private.
It is not an invasion of privacy, it is an unnecessary (and unpublicised) risk to your privacy.
Any company that stores sensitive data of yours, eg, a CC number, is expected and to some degree legally bound to take any reasonable precautions to keep your data private (eg, by securing their servers). Apple simply failed to take reasonable precautions (by clearing the cache). Not on something extremely serious but an oversight for which they could except some slight scolding.
It is not an invasion of privacy, it is an unnecessary (and unpublicised) risk to your privacy.
Any company that stores sensitive data of yours, eg, a CC number, is expected and to some degree legally bound to take any reasonable precautions to keep your data private (eg, by securing their servers). Apple simply failed to take reasonable precautions (by clearing the cache). Not on something extremely serious but an oversight for which they could except some slight scolding.
Cougarcat
Mar 26, 12:56 PM
Do you use stacks for accessing applications? If yes, then why wouldn't you want to use launchpad?
I use Spotlight, but Launchpad is terribly inefficient compared to stacks. You have to click on its icon to invoke it, hunt through potentially a bunch of different screens, click on a folder if you've organized your apps, and then click on your app. With stacks, I move my cursor down to the dock, click on the appropriate stack, and then click on my app. 2 clicks vs a button press, a bunch of swipes, hunting, and 2 more clicks.
I use Spotlight, but Launchpad is terribly inefficient compared to stacks. You have to click on its icon to invoke it, hunt through potentially a bunch of different screens, click on a folder if you've organized your apps, and then click on your app. With stacks, I move my cursor down to the dock, click on the appropriate stack, and then click on my app. 2 clicks vs a button press, a bunch of swipes, hunting, and 2 more clicks.
puggles
Jun 13, 12:37 AM
Will radio shack be selling the bumpers?
netdog
Aug 11, 02:42 PM
MS Windows has about 95% of the world market...doesn't mean the technology is better.:)
A phone that works in most of the world is better for many of us. Who wants a phone that won't work in Europe for instance? Last I checked, my Mac works here just fine.
A phone that works in most of the world is better for many of us. Who wants a phone that won't work in Europe for instance? Last I checked, my Mac works here just fine.
CdnBook
Apr 11, 09:15 AM
Apple will release faster unicorns tomorrow, duh
Dr.Gargoyle
Aug 11, 03:48 PM
I standby my assumption that the amount of internet usage is probably a good gauge of cell phone usage.
I am sure you are...
Care to dispute, then provide your own "facts".
My assumption (http://www.gsmworld.com/index.shtml). I was wrong. It is not 81%, it is 82%. Sorry, I will check my sources better next time.
I am sure you are...
Care to dispute, then provide your own "facts".
My assumption (http://www.gsmworld.com/index.shtml). I was wrong. It is not 81%, it is 82%. Sorry, I will check my sources better next time.
Heilage
Mar 1, 06:23 AM
I have no right to condemn anyone to hell.
If heaven were very crowded, it wouldn't be very heavenly, would it?
Fair point. Then again, if one makes the assumption that Heaven is full of people with ideas like yours, I'd rather stay here or in Hell. Which is basically the same thing anyway. :p
If heaven were very crowded, it wouldn't be very heavenly, would it?
Fair point. Then again, if one makes the assumption that Heaven is full of people with ideas like yours, I'd rather stay here or in Hell. Which is basically the same thing anyway. :p
CaoCao
Feb 28, 09:36 PM
You can blame my work PC for not correcting my awful spelling. :rolleyes:
But, yes, obviously I meant influences.
Also, thank you for admitting what most people on here can see. You have no idea what you are talking about.
Correct I have no idea what causes homosexuality, neither do scientists.
Well, then why do expect us to explain it to you? Why do you expect us to justify who we are? We are who we are and we have just as much to offer the world as you do. We have families, talents and love just like anyone else. Love is rare. Why would you deny that to two adults who truly care about each other? To me, that's sick and disgusting. Keep your religion to yourself. Wallow in it's BS as much as you want. But keep it out of our lives.
I wanted to know what he expected from me, he doesn't necessarily have to know the cause(s). I don't remember saying you could not live with the person you love. Also one can not infer what "that" means from your paragraph.
But, yes, obviously I meant influences.
Also, thank you for admitting what most people on here can see. You have no idea what you are talking about.
Correct I have no idea what causes homosexuality, neither do scientists.
Well, then why do expect us to explain it to you? Why do you expect us to justify who we are? We are who we are and we have just as much to offer the world as you do. We have families, talents and love just like anyone else. Love is rare. Why would you deny that to two adults who truly care about each other? To me, that's sick and disgusting. Keep your religion to yourself. Wallow in it's BS as much as you want. But keep it out of our lives.
I wanted to know what he expected from me, he doesn't necessarily have to know the cause(s). I don't remember saying you could not live with the person you love. Also one can not infer what "that" means from your paragraph.
Tommy Wasabi
Apr 25, 04:36 PM
Block box in your car tracks not only where you are but the speed in which you are traveling. These black boxes are used by the insurance company if you get in an accident.
The phone company tracks where you are - and it is stored and can be requested by any law enforcement agency and have the data within 10 minutes of the submission.
I wonder if people are going to sue the auto industry, the insurance industry, and the phone companies.
Oh wait, this is American, land of lawyers - give them until Friday to write their brief and file in a some courthouse located in the Eastern District of Texas.
The phone company tracks where you are - and it is stored and can be requested by any law enforcement agency and have the data within 10 minutes of the submission.
I wonder if people are going to sue the auto industry, the insurance industry, and the phone companies.
Oh wait, this is American, land of lawyers - give them until Friday to write their brief and file in a some courthouse located in the Eastern District of Texas.
No comments:
Post a Comment