prev <-> next
[2004-01-13 10:40:00] - "buy mervis for those you truly karat for" - vinnie
[2004-01-13 09:58:00] - i don't think that's meant to be a pun. ~a
[2004-01-13 09:57:00] - I just heard a radio ad for a jeweler: "if you're looking for diamonds, we're the hardest place not to go"... that's the worst stretch for a diamond pun i've ever heard - aaron
[2004-01-13 09:50:00] - paul: yes. ~a
[2004-01-13 09:45:00] - Pierce: Yes it's just me or yes it's a little one sided?
-Paul[2004-01-13 09:43:00] - Paul: yes - pierce
[2004-01-13 09:11:00] - http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A11400-2004Jan12.html Is it just me or does this article seem a little one-sided? -Paul
[2004-01-12 17:50:00] - Aaron: Yeah, I spend over 40 hours a week on the internet myself.
-Paul[2004-01-12 17:49:00] - 35 hours a week is not addicted. and it was thus spoken. ~a
[2004-01-12 17:37:00] - 35 hours a week = addicted? That seems low... or maybe that's just my inner addict speaking - aaron
[2004-01-12 15:26:00] - Pierce: Yeah, I wonder what her favorite site was. -Paul
[2004-01-12 14:44:00] - The fact that the subject's last name was "Farke" is a bit ironic. - pierce
[2004-01-12 13:37:00] - http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/01/12/1073769485753.html Do you know any online addicts? -Paul
[2004-01-12 11:57:00] - yah, and catch up on TV and video games - vinnie
[2004-01-12 11:05:00] - Sunday is typically a day of rest. I would typically try to get all my chores done on Sunday. Get a haircut, do laundry, cook meals for the week, go grocery shopping, wash car, etc. -Paul
[2004-01-12 10:19:00] - how do we find the 14? I'm not looking through 35600 posts - vinnie
[2004-01-12 10:11:00] - anon: I know, I know... - pierce
[2004-01-12 09:34:00] - Other than going to church and driving 250 miles back to Blacksburg? --Xpovos
[2004-01-12 08:14:00] - pierce: fix yer webpage
[2004-01-11 18:18:00] - http://www.atxcases.com/Cases/kitty.htm
[2004-01-11 17:20:00] - what do people do on sundays? it seems like such a waste of a day. ~a
[2004-01-11 12:45:00] - Adrian: which 14 were censored? I bet I can think of one of mine that was in there. --Xpovos
[2004-01-11 05:54:00] - for all new EXCITEMENT, this message board has been released with all new previously censored posts! collect all 14. ~a
[2004-01-09 21:09:00] - yer mother
[2004-01-09 19:15:00] - a: that's a good question. i'm bored. - mig
[2004-01-09 19:05:00] - exists person x, exists interesting thing y, such that x is doing y tonight?
[2004-01-09 18:56:00] - anybody doing anything interesting tonight? ~a
[2004-01-09 16:34:00] - - pierce
[2004-01-09 16:34:00] - dr vinruption: do you like the sound of his or her town?
[2004-01-09 16:33:00] - ah nm, found it - vinnie
[2004-01-09 16:33:00] - where does the paul essen quote come from? - vinnie
[2004-01-09 16:32:00] - if I remember correctly. was there a different origin of that expression? my memory is a bit hazy - pierce
[2004-01-09 16:31:00] - whoa... moo moo for brown socks, that's a throwback. That was one of lisa's old friends at her old job, saying that to me for no clear reason back before lisa and I were dating. - pierce
[2004-01-09 16:24:00] - moo, moo for brown socks
[2004-01-09 16:20:00] - I AM NOT PAUL ESSEN!
[2004-01-09 16:10:00] - i wonder if dr. disruption would care if I usurped his name. I like the cut of its jib - dr. vinruption
[2004-01-09 16:08:00] - the true path to [utopia | heaven | job security | mint] - vinnie
[2004-01-09 16:06:00] - I kind of miss them but not enough to ask ~a to bring them back. i can see why he doesn't bother - I got rid of all my old journal entries for the same reason, to make the site simpler - vinnie
[2004-01-09 15:56:00] - although I really don't miss the poster statistics too much anyway... - pierce
[2004-01-09 15:55:00] - oh, that comment was in regards to your wish for a cmyslins, not poster statistics - pierce
[2004-01-09 15:16:00] - mig: dude, be careful what you wish for. - pierce
[2004-01-09 15:14:00] - by the way adrian, is there any chance of the poster statistics ever coming back? - mig
[2004-01-09 15:11:00] - we need an equivalent of cmyslins from the cs forums on here. - mig
[2004-01-09 15:09:00] - except for allison, all of those names sound like secret government weapons projects, don't they? - pierce
[2004-01-09 15:05:00] - i wonder if nemo will ever show his face again. - mig
[2004-01-09 15:03:00] - vinnie: the true path to where? smallville? - pierce
[2004-01-09 14:51:00] - it might be, but i still gotta get used to it again. -mig
[2004-01-09 14:40:00] - do it! 1024x768 is the true path... - vinnie
[2004-01-09 14:40:00] - and if you really are curious, i'm going down from 1280x1024. - mig
[2004-01-09 14:39:00] - i haven't gotten it yet, but i figure i might as well get used to the lower resolution now rather than later. -mig
[2004-01-09 14:39:00] - pierce: to answer your question I'm replacing my old crt with an lcd monitor. the catch is that it's only a 15" and it only supports up to 1024x768. but the space reduction and better image quality make it worth it. - mig
[2004-01-09 14:38:00] - and what a variety of people posting back then: where are Nano, allison, Dr. Disruption, Hot Shot, and STRIKESLIP today? - vinnie
[2004-01-09 14:36:00] - 4 years, 2 months, 28 days and counting - vinnie
[2004-01-09 14:34:00] - I really wish I could withdraw that entire post - pierce
[2004-01-09 14:34:00] - vinnie: yeah, I saw that too. Boy, we really have been waiting a while for that, haven't we? - pierce
[2004-01-09 14:33:00] - - pierce
[2004-01-09 14:33:00] - vinnie: I use 1600x1200 at home, 1024x768 at work. Those are the native resolutions of my flat-screen monitor and laptop monitor, respectively.
[2004-01-09 14:32:00] - a: didn't see the maybe. thanks for the speculation, I guess. - pierce
[2004-01-09 14:31:00] - good times - vinnie
[2004-01-09 14:31:00] - some of the earliest messages are funny: "All right, I'm going to cease to be a total dork now. - - Pierce" we're still waiting on that one - vinnie
[2004-01-09 14:27:00] - oh and thank you for the previous entries link, ~a - vinnie
[2004-01-09 14:26:00] - people (like me), not people similar to me - vinnie
[2004-01-09 14:24:00] - you all use 1600x1200? I assumed most people like me used 1024x768, but then again I guess it depends on the size of your monitor. everything seems too small for me on 1600x1200 - vinnie
[2004-01-09 14:13:00] - what clarification? i didn't clarify anything. that was a maybe clarification. ~a
[2004-01-09 14:12:00] - ah. thanks for the clarification. - pierce
[2004-01-09 14:09:00] - maybe mig got a T40 (ibm) with a small screen. like me. luckily i have a CRT in the office. ~a
[2004-01-09 14:08:00] - oh. you were responding to my message. i guess i don't read my own messages. ~a
[2004-01-09 14:08:00] - mig: why do you have to get used to 1024x768? - pierce
[2004-01-09 14:08:00] - "we have a calendar for our computer so that we don't have to remember" what are you talking about? ~a
[2004-01-09 13:53:00] - ugh, having to get to get used again to 1024x768 is annoying. everything looks so fucking huge. - mig
[2004-01-09 13:40:00] - fine. I've never been good at winning games with ill-defined rules. It always seems that the person who defines the rules wins. Maybe I'm just unlucky. - pierce
[2004-01-09 13:39:00] - I didn't go through the sign, I ran it. but I did hit the curb - vinnie
[2004-01-09 13:38:00] - yours was two hours but you didn't physically hit something. you have more to complain about, but by my ill-defined rules I win - vinnie
[2004-01-09 12:40:00] - vinnie: like, through the sign itself, or you "ran" a stop sign? because unless you hit the actual sign, I think my 2 hour commute wins (at least between the two of us). - pierce
[2004-01-09 12:21:00] - I went through a stop sign and hit a curb and I'm only ten minutes away. so I win - vinnie
[2004-01-09 11:52:00] - I spent two hours and ten minutes in traffic this morning. Oh, and I almost went over an embankment in my car. What exactly do I pay VDOT for? - pierce
[2004-01-09 10:17:00] - we have a calendar for our computer so that we don't have to remember (except that I already signed a form wrong, hopefully they won't boot me out of the company) - vinnie
[2004-01-09 08:46:00] - and it's 2004 already for those of you who forgot. ~a
[2004-01-09 08:44:00] - wow, that's kind of interesting. you guys broke 100 posts (in one day) for the first time since june 2002! ~a
[2004-01-09 01:40:00] - http://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/08/international/middleeast/08WEAP.html and the weapons team returns from iraq and finds a grand total of jack shit. - mig
[2004-01-09 01:38:00] - http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3909150/ powell finally admits they can't prove bin laden and hussein were drinking buddies. - mig
[2004-01-08 22:52:00] - pierce: aporter.org isn't my computer (referring to your timestamp message) and i really have very few rights on it. i'm still looking for a host that will give me more rights per dollar. ~a
[2004-01-08 22:45:00] - http://aporter.org/msg/?action=previndex not very user friendly, but it was pretty easy to code up. just a few fseeks and i'm there! ~a
[2004-01-08 21:56:00] - paul: they don't trust us to do the right thing because we don't do the right thing. and by "we" i mean americans. ~a
[2004-01-08 17:46:00] - Aaron: But that's the rationale the government takes with a lot of things. Education, retirement, insurance... They don't trust us to do the right thing so they take it upon themselves to do it. -Paul
[2004-01-08 17:45:00] - (a few extra thousand dollars per kid! not years....) - aaron
[2004-01-08 17:44:00] - err... you know what I mean. I can picture the government giving an extra few thousand years per kid, but raising your kid for you seems like such a losing venture - aaron
[2004-01-08 17:43:00] - Paul: I'm not being entirely sarcastic, but I'm trying to say that people like already like procreating plenty - I don't think the government needs to give them that much incentive... - aaron
[2004-01-08 17:23:00] - Aaron: I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not, but I think it's a natural extension of things. Women who want children can enter the child-raising sector of government and those who don't want to bother can just go about without any worries. -Paul
[2004-01-08 17:16:00] - Paul: Procreate as much as you want and let the state take care of the mess... that sounds like a sweet deal for the typical child-hating sex-loving american. Count me in - aaron
[2004-01-08 16:53:00] - Aaron: Well, I guess we're of basically the same opinion. I think that there is going to be some underpopulation problem that is going to be addressed by the government in the future. I'm thinking that the whole "job" of child raising may eventually be mostly taken over by the state as a necessary function it feels it must perform. -Paul
[2004-01-08 16:46:00] - Besides, worse comes to worse, countries will just legislate against underpopulation - give tax incentives to couples bearing more than one child - aaron
[2004-01-08 16:45:00] - As areas becomes less populated, it seems labor would become more valuable, increasing the incentive to bear children (because jobs will be readily available, right?) - aaron
[2004-01-08 16:44:00] - Aaron: Why do you think it will balance out? -Paul
[2004-01-08 16:43:00] - Paul: Just like everything else, I, for one, think it will balance out... - aaron
[2004-01-08 16:39:00] - Vinnie: So you think we're going to have an underpopulation problem sometime in the future? -Paul
[2004-01-08 16:38:00] - but i'm not sure it will peak at 10 billion - vinnie
[2004-01-08 16:36:00] - it sounds perfectly reasonable. in the few places in the world where overpopulation is a problem, it is being controlled, and in many other places we're seeing underpopulation - vinnie
[2004-01-08 16:25:00] - Yeah, like Japan has a huge population density, but it is entirely capable of supporting everyone that lives there. India has a high population density, but a lot of people living there live in poverty. Africa has a relatively low population density but they still have trouble supporting the people living there. -Paul
[2004-01-08 16:20:00] - A more important metric is population density, and even more important than that is population density as compared with the region's ability to sustain that density. There's a great deal of the world that is almost completely unpopulated, but it couldn't support high densities anyway (or else people would likely have moved there already) - pierce
[2004-01-08 16:09:00] - Aaron: Well, it depends. Japan is technically very crowded but their population is starting to decline. The U.S. also has people who think overpopulation is an issue, but I don't think it really is. China and India are really the two biggest concerns when it comes to overpopulation (unless you want to count Africa, which I don't). -Paul
[2004-01-08 15:58:00] - Well... on a smaller scale countries like Italy already complain about underpopulation, but are there any countries that complain about overpopulation? I can't remember...... - aaron
[2004-01-08 15:23:00] - And I'm wondering how paranoid, stupid and unreasonable that sounds to you.
-Paul[2004-01-08 15:23:00] - Because I believe that human population has almost peaked (well, not almost, but I don't think it's going to go much higher than 10 billion or so) and will probably start to drop off rather noticeably in the next 50 years or so. -Paul
[2004-01-08 15:22:00] - hehe, ok - vinnie
[2004-01-08 15:21:00] - Vinnie: Oh, it doesn't really. This is just a somewhat related topic (since I think we've reached a stalemate in the previous one). -Paul
[2004-01-08 15:16:00] - it's already a bit of a problem, but it will continue to be a problem. now tell me how that works against my argument
- vinnie[2004-01-08 15:00:00] - Vinnie: Do you think that overpopulation will be a problem in the future? -Paul
[2004-01-08 14:50:00] - at least we agree there - vinnie
[2004-01-08 14:46:00] - I think there is going to be some serious upheaval in terms of societal structure in the next 100 years. -Paul
[2004-01-08 14:45:00] - But we should start to see things happen within a hundred years is my guess. -Paul
[2004-01-08 14:38:00] - uh, that first sentence is part of a joke I tried to erase. please ignore it
- vinnie[2004-01-08 14:38:00] - a hundred years? i seriously think men are just about last on the endangered species list. i'd even put women before us thanks to areas like india and china - vinnie
[2004-01-08 14:35:00] - Vinnie: We shall see who's right a hundred years from now.
-paul[2004-01-08 14:33:00] - and there's a typo for me - vinnie
[2004-01-08 14:33:00] - I can't tell you the actual improtance of saving endangered species (diversity?), just guarantee that people will care - vinnie
[2004-01-08 14:32:00] - well, we spend millions saving endangered species, and men even have the advantage of being able to speak up for themselves and anticipate being endangered - vinnie
[2004-01-08 14:30:00] - Vinnie: Maybe, but my next question would still be, "Why?" What makes having men around so important that the government would spend millions of dollars to make sure it happens? -Paul
[2004-01-08 14:29:00] - not force, just pay millions of dollars. and someone will accept - vinnie
[2004-01-08 14:27:00] - Well, that was my question to you. I don't think the government would go so far as to force women to bear a child they don't want just to keep some variant of humanity alive (mutants, people with six fingers, whatever) -Paul
[2004-01-08 14:24:00] - wha? the government would be stepping in, right? the government wants to keep the species alive in your example - vinnie
[2004-01-08 14:22:00] - But it would be up to the mutants to try to keep the mutant gene going. The government wouldn't be stepping in. -Paul
[2004-01-08 14:19:00] - actually I think artificial incubation will change a lot of things, since I imagine most couples would want that option even if they could reproduce naturally. my guess is the rights each parent had would balance out, but hey that's just optimistic me - vinnie
[2004-01-08 14:18:00] - or if not, artificial incubation when it becomes available - vinnie
[2004-01-08 14:18:00] - they wouldn't but they would find a surrogate mother that would have one - vinnie
[2004-01-08 14:12:00] - Maybe that's a good analogy to use, mutants... The government wouldn't force women to have mutant babies just to keep the "species" alive, would it? -Paul
[2004-01-08 14:11:00] - You know? This would make a good plot for an X-Men comic... They found the mutant gene and people are deciding to abort all fetuses that have it... -Paul
[2004-01-08 14:08:00] - I'll try not to.
-Paul[2004-01-08 14:08:00] - I know Adrian will disagree with me here, but I wonder what's going to happen when the number of children born per woman drops below 2 for everyone on Earth... -Paul
[2004-01-08 14:07:00] - don't let minor typos get in the way of our argument - vinnie
[2004-01-08 14:06:00] - I wish we could live long enough to see, because I think there are some real legitimate concerns that are going to face humanity regarding the reproductive future of the race. And not only the possible extinction of men, but of all humans. -Paul
[2004-01-08 14:06:00] - and it's one word, I think
- vinnie[2004-01-08 14:05:00] - mind bogglingLY. Sorry.
-Paul[2004-01-08 14:04:00] - yes I can see the government stepping in in that rare case. BUT even otherwise I don't see the world getting to the point where we'll need to worry about that - vinnie
[2004-01-08 14:04:00] - I can see why people might think it's unlikely or whatever and that's fine, I just don't think it's so mind boggling unreasonable as to label it stupid and paranoid. -Paul
[2004-01-08 14:03:00] - Secondly, why bother? Unless there is some overwhelming reason to keep men around, why would there be so much concern? -Paul
[2004-01-08 14:02:00] - I entirely disagree. Can you see a government trying to dictate to a woman what kind of baby she can have? Especially if abortion is not involved. I imagine we'll be at a place where we can choose the gender we want at conception rather than relying on chance. -Paul
[2004-01-08 14:01:00] - Think of it almost like a model of car. For whatever reason, people don't want to buy Fords anymore, so they stop making them. Well, what if nobody wanted to have male babies anymore? -Paul
[2004-01-08 14:00:00] - I think it's the same principle. perhaps there's no precedent, but I think laws will be passed first preventing people from only aborting fetuses of a specific gender, like not allowing the parents to know the gender of the fetus - vinnie
[2004-01-08 13:59:00] - The big difference, I think, is that one entails us allowing something bad to happen. We don't want to go around killing off all the handicapped people in the world. However, things are very different if we can prevent people from coming into the world. -Paul
[2004-01-08 13:58:00] - As a society, we try to avoid giving birth to babies with disabilities. Well, think of male babies of the future being babies with minor disabilities. -Paul
[2004-01-08 13:57:00] - Vinnie: Ah, but see, that's the beauty of it. We try to keep people alive. The elderly, people with disabilities, people with fatal illnesses. For men to become extinct, it's a different matter. We don't need to stop not wanting them to die. We just need to stop wanting to have more of them. -Paul
[2004-01-08 13:55:00] - sorry, i'm arguing like two different things at the same time here. ask me to explain anything - vinnie
[2004-01-08 13:54:00] - men are far off from being the margin, and I don't think there are strong enough reasons to assume that will change - vinnie
[2004-01-08 13:53:00] - what I'm saying is that humanity is constantly trying to save the margins. replace aids with people over 80 if that makes it easier. the elderly do nothing but drain money, yet we try to save them even if humanity might function better without them - vinnie
[2004-01-08 13:53:00] - Vinnie: You're absolutely right. However, I think that is less likely for some reasons I alluded to in my entry. I think men are more attached to women in a love/lust way then women are to men. -Paul
[2004-01-08 13:52:00] - And yes, it is centuries away, I never said this was going to happen in my lifetime. Extinctions don't often happen immediately like that. -Paul
[2004-01-08 13:51:00] - and all it would take for women to be extinct is the reason for males to be preferred. the technology isn't quite there but it will be achieved within our lifetime I would bet - vinnie
[2004-01-08 13:51:00] - Humanity could very conceivably carry on fine (perhaps even better) without women. It wouldn't be a matter of humanity being any more weak because of this, what I'm saying is that in the future, men might become somewhat obsolete. -Paul
[2004-01-08 13:50:00] - I don't know if I entirely understand the AIDS analogy, care to explain? As for humanity being fragile, I don't think that's an issue. I'm not talking about women being responsible for the end of humanity here. -Paul
[2004-01-08 13:46:00] - do you think humanity is that fragile? how come the people with aids haven't all died off? humanity is constantly checking its own back and the time that we actually need to worry about men being extinct is centuries away, if there ever is a danger - vinnie
[2004-01-08 13:41:00] - There is an established history of cultures where male babies had been preferred over female ones so the precedent is there for a preference to be established. -Paul
[2004-01-08 13:40:00] - It could be because science has shown that men are more violent, or maybe that women live longer, or men are more likely to have birth defects or maybe it's a cultural thing like in India, where women get to carry on the family name in the future... -Paul
[2004-01-08 13:38:00] - Vinnie: And all I want to know is what is so completely irrational about it. It seems reasonable that women will someday be able to reproduce without men. Choosing the gender of a baby is easy enough even now. All it would take is one little reason for female babies to be preferred over male ones. -Paul
[2004-01-08 13:33:00] - this might be a little paranoid, but this also stinks of police state here. (we need to id these people, know who they are, blah blah blah). - mig
[2004-01-08 13:31:00] - i have to agree with paul, if you've actually been paying attention to what bush has been doing domestically, this really isn't all that surprising. - mig
[2004-01-08 13:29:00] - that's in regards to why you are baffled - vinnie
[2004-01-08 13:29:00] - I thought your line of thought on that entry was completely irrational. irrational speculation = paranoia - vinnie
[2004-01-08 13:01:00] - Mel: I don't think it's surprising at all. He has no threat from his conservative right flank so he can easily slide over to the left and do some "liberal" things to try to steal some thunder from the eventual Democratic nominee without worrying about alienating his base. -Paul
[2004-01-08 12:58:00] - About the new Bush immigration proposal, I think most (almost all) legal Hispanic immigrants remember how hard it was to get there -and- still have family/friends that would like to become legal themselves. So I think this proposal will win points for them. Definitely a suprising move by Bush if you ask me. - Mel
[2004-01-08 11:52:00] - Vinnie: Well, I guess I need to work on my writing style because my intention was pretty much to make the complainers look stupid. I guess I failed there, huh?
-Paul[2004-01-08 11:49:00] - i'm off to lunch, but I will definitely pick this all up when I get back - vinnie
[2004-01-08 11:48:00] - as I thought, but you picked an attention-grabbing, slightly incendiary way to do it. You could have easily written an entry about why the complainers are stupid but you chose to make your point by having us defend a movie we love from racist accusations. Pierce made a noble attempt
- vinnie[2004-01-08 11:47:00] - I'm just baffled sometimes how what I see as innocent speculation leads to people calling me stupid and paranoid and thinking that I hate women and think they're all out to get me. -Paul
[2004-01-08 11:45:00] - Hell, it could even be seen as a natural extension of evolution. The argument could be made that women are the superior gender and once they learn to reproduce on their own then the inferior gender will slowly die out. -Paul
[2004-01-08 11:44:00] - It wouldn't even involve women doing anything wrong in the slightest. The only possible bad thing I said about women is that they might prefer having female babies in the future and not see a problem with men not being around. Not that they would be going around murdering their own fathers or anything. -Paul
[2004-01-08 11:43:00] - I mean, I never intended to imply that women are all out to get men or anything. All I was really doing was hypothesizing that men might become grossly expendable in the near future and therefore become, with no maliciousness involved, extinct. -Paul
[2004-01-08 11:42:00] - Just like my "women taking over the world" entry wasn't supposed to be incendiary either. I kinda knew it was going to be when I wrote it, but I'm not entirely sure why it is. -Paul
[2004-01-08 11:41:00] - Well, it wasn't really to incite controversy, it was more of a question as to why one movie gets slammed for racism while another gets a free ticket. I was hoping somebody would respond to tell me where I was wrong but nobody ever did. -Paul
[2004-01-08 11:16:00] - but none of us disagreed with your point, which is that Black Hawk Down shouldn't be considered racist either, so there was no controversy - vinnie
[2004-01-08 11:14:00] - well, since you agreed that you didn't really find it racist, I have to imagine you wrote that entry just incite controversy - vinnie
[2004-01-08 10:57:00] - You thought my "LotR could be considered racist" entry was incendiary? -Paul
[2004-01-08 10:56:00] - Vinnie: I think it's partly because I'm feeling more free to open up and rant about whatever comes to mind in my journal and partly because a lot of the less offensive topics I've already talked about a lot. -Paul
[2004-01-08 10:51:00] - oh now I remember the question. I'd just say you've gotten weirder and maybe more incendiary, what with your "women taking over the world" and "LOTR being racist" entries - vinnie
[2004-01-08 10:49:00] - Vinnie: I don't know if I can quote it perfectly, but it was something like "Is it just me, or has Paul been a lot more cynical lately?" -Paul
[2004-01-08 10:47:00] - paul's got it about the immigrant thing. also, I'm sure many legal hispanic immigrants here have illegal relatives and friends who they would like to have work - vinnie
[2004-01-08 10:46:00] - what was pierce's question you refer to way down there? it fell off before I noticed it (or I saw it and ignored it) - vinnie
[2004-01-08 10:26:00] - As for the Indian professor, I actually thought of Dr. Ramakrishnan (or however you spell it) since I never had Dr. Varadarajan. Pierce is right, there were way too many Indian CS professors at Tech to be able to refer to any of them as "That Indian CS Professor"
-Paul[2004-01-08 10:24:00] - I suspect it's because they are not as selfish as you give them credit. Instead of thinking what's best for themselves, they remember the hardships they had to endure and therefore feel sympathetic to those going through the same thing. -Paul
[2004-01-08 10:23:00] - Pierce: That makes sense, but I don't think that's how things work. Just look at the people who are the biggest protesters whenever any bills against immigration come up. It always seems to be the people who were themselves immigrants. -Paul
[2004-01-08 10:03:00] - a: I think the clock on your computer is wrong. I just posted a comment to Paul's journal, and though time.gov says it's 9:52, the journal lists my comment as 10:01. - pierce
[2004-01-08 09:31:00] - we're talking about Dr. Varadarajan, for those of you who might have had him for a class. - pierce
[2004-01-08 09:29:00] - "That indian cs professor", huh? Now, I happen to know who you mean, but since there's more than one Indian CS prof at tech, I'd recommend being more specific... like, "the professor who organized the new apple supercomputer". - pierce
[2004-01-08 09:12:00] - hey, everybody. that indian cs professor was on the front of Virginia Tech Magazine. i just thought i would mention it before i threw it in the trash. ~a
[2004-01-08 09:00:00] - But if I were a legal hispanic immigrant, which is presumably the subset of hispanics that would be most sympathetic to this policy, wouldn't I be more likely to be competing for my job with illegal immigrants, and thus this policy's validation of illegal status would actually be bad for me? - pierce
[2004-01-08 08:48:00] - So that if they see him helping some Hispanics, that goodwill will rub off on the Hispanics that can vote. Not sure if it works that way, but I think that's the theory behind it. -Paul
[2004-01-08 08:48:00] - Pierce: I think the theory is that most illegal immigrants are hispanic and so this bill shows that Bush is sympathetic to the plight of immigrants (and by association Hispanics). Bush is pretty much hoping that Hispanics as a group stick closely together. -Paul
[2004-01-08 08:07:00] - Incidentally, why is this considered a political ploy? The article claims that it will improve Bush's rating with Hispanic voters, but I don't fully understand why... this policy isn't going to directly affect any voters. - pierce
[2004-01-08 08:03:00] - And while I want illegal immigrants who are in abusive employment situations to be able to go to the police without fear of deportation, I agree with Goode that they should not receive special privileges simply because they, unlike those awaiting valid work visas, chose to ignore the law. - pierce
[2004-01-08 08:00:00] - http://www.suntimes.com/output/news/cst-nws-illegal08.html this seems like a pretty touchy issue to use to try to appeal to one subset of voters, but I can't think of any real other reason that Bush would be in favor of this. - pierce
[2004-01-08 00:56:00] - http://www.lockheedmartin.com/data/images/feature/365.jpg does anyone else find this picture vaguely perturbing? - pierce
[2004-01-07 20:26:00] - Besides, it's not really necessarily true that an unbiased prof is a better one. All else being equal, a pref who takes stands that might be against the students' beliefs may encourage critical thought, which is arguably more important than having an accurate knowledge of the current (though temporary) political environment. - pierce
[2004-01-07 20:25:00] - Not cynical, honest. Parents who are paying ungodly amounts of money for their kids' education want to be able to pinpoint brochure-worthy symbols of that education. - pierce
[2004-01-07 20:21:00] - this whole harvard prof thing just screams, "who gives a shit?". - mig
[2004-01-07 20:05:00] - Pierce: Now who's being cynical?
-Paul[2004-01-07 18:15:00] - Nope. Nor am I surprised. It's much more about having a professor with an influential résumé than having a professor who is unbiased. - pierce
[2004-01-07 17:44:00] - They're not even trying to be unbiased about it. -Paul
[2004-01-07 17:43:00] - <cough> - pierce
[2004-01-07 17:43:00] - Pierce: I dunno, I just get this feeling that a school like Harvard might want to try to get as unbiased a politics teacher as possible... -Paul
[2004-01-07 17:40:00] - Paul: Why would that be strange? Harvard is known as being a liberal school, and Al Gore's campaign was effective enough to win the popular vote. - pierce
[2004-01-07 17:35:00] - http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A61825-2004Jan7.html Does anybody else think it's strange that somebody who worked for Al Gore's campaign is teaching politics at Harvard? -Paul
[2004-01-07 17:29:00] - Mel: And how long have you been reading it? -Paul
[2004-01-07 17:06:00] - I do think that you've been more cynical than usual in your journal, Paul. - Mel
[2004-01-07 17:05:00] - l
[2004-01-07 17:02:00] - So is there a reason everybody is ignoring Pierce's question? I'm curious to hear your answers.
-Paul[2004-01-07 16:47:00] - it's all those damn teens and tweens (everyone see City of God!!) - vinnie
[2004-01-07 16:29:00] - paul: that's only if you believe michael moore. ~a
[2004-01-07 15:00:00] - "With a population of nearly 182 million, more than 40,000 Brazilians died of gunshot wounds last year, according to the WHO. The United States, with a population of 292 million, had 29,000 firearm deaths last year." Isn't America supposed to have the worst gun homicide rate or something? -Paul
[2004-01-07 13:45:00] - Aaron: Maybe it's kinda like the Apu stereotype? I dunno, I didn't know that Indians were supposed to be gas station attendants either. -Paul
[2004-01-07 13:42:00] - Pierce: I would say it's just you but I'm probably the most biased person possible on this matter.
-paul[2004-01-07 12:41:00] - I thought that traditionally, gas station attendants usually fit the "white trash" stereotype..... - aaron
[2004-01-07 12:40:00] - Stereotype? That may be a dumb joke but that's kind of an unusual stereotype - aaron
[2004-01-07 12:04:00] - Is it just me, or is Paul even more cynical than normal with his latest comments and journals? - pierce
[2004-01-07 11:18:00] - http://www.wjla.com/news/stories/0104/116974.html Thank god a Democrat said this, so all is forgiven. -paul
[2004-01-07 09:03:00] - http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A60732-2004Jan6.html You might all find this boring, but I thought this article on the Bush twins was kinda interesting. Especially the different approaches that Laura and George take to parenting them. -Paul
[2004-01-07 08:47:00] - http://www.sinfest.net/d/20040107.html Stupid double standards. -Paul
[2004-01-06 17:19:00] - Pierce: But I so love hyperbole
-Paul[2004-01-06 16:19:00] - Paul: I agree that she missed the point, but I think that is a fitting punishment for anyone who so recklessly uses hyperbole: miss their point, and it takes away the value of their having used it in the first place. Or we could just administer the death penalty to anyone who uses hyperbole.
- pierce[2004-01-06 14:47:00] - http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A57436-2004Jan5.html I think this columnist missed the point of the estate tax = holocaust remark... -Paul
[2004-01-06 14:46:00] - Pierce: Thanks, it takes a lot of practice to reach the level that I have attained.
-Paul[2004-01-06 14:41:00] - Paul: heh, once again you've one-upped me in cynicism. Well played. - pierce
[2004-01-06 13:39:00] - Then the media might latch onto that and dig deeper to see if there is more abuse going on... -Paul
[2004-01-06 13:38:00] - Pierce: But I think that this deal keeps the people being discharged more quiet. Discharging them dishonorably would likely raise more eyebrows with the media too because that's kinda like admitting that the military messed up. -Paul
[2004-01-06 13:08:00] - Honestly, I think it's worse for the military to discharge them honorably, thus leaving itself open to criticism, rather than using them as scapegoats by discharging them dishonorably. It would have been noticed about equally by the press, but the former leaves a big hole for the media to latch onto (if they care, which they don't) - pierce
[2004-01-06 12:49:00] - Pierce: I don't know whether they would be looked upon favorably or not but I'm sure this was just an instance of the military wanting to sweep this entire thing under the rug and forget about it. -Paul
[2004-01-06 12:39:00] - Actually, I should qualify that: I don't know that they're discharged in a way that indicates no flaws. I'm sure that an employer who looked would find these incidents in their military record; also, is there a level of discharge above "under honorable conditions"? Anyone know? - pierce
[2004-01-06 12:37:00] - But instead, they get out of the military in a way that indicates no flaws on their record. I'm sure potential employers would look at them more favorably, because they were in the military and discharged honorably... when in fact, they should be highly skeptical. - pierce
[2004-01-06 12:35:00] - http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2001830549_discharge06.html does it seem ridiculous to anyone else that three of these people received "general, under honorable conditions" discharges? I mean, if there was any truth to the allegations, they would have been imprisoned in the U.S. for similar behavior as civilians. - pierce
[2004-01-06 12:13:00] - Aaron: Probably in my journal.
-Paul[2004-01-06 12:12:00] - I've heard lord of the rings likened to the war on iraq somewhere else, too... i can't remember where. - aaron
[2004-01-06 11:16:00] - http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=36471 What does it say about me that I didn't realize that this article was fictional until halfway through? -Paul
[2004-01-06 11:10:00] - http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A53140-2004Jan4?language=printer Another article on bisexual girls -Paul
[2004-01-06 10:35:00] - if you're referring to the former, you could call it "portmanteau lox", which you could shorten into "portmanteaux". Not sure what you'd do if you had to pluralize that, though. portmanteauxx? - pierce
[2004-01-06 10:32:00] - lox = liquid oxygen | smoked salmon. The former is a portmanteau, the latter is not. - pierce
[2004-01-06 10:22:00] - Yeah, some of those were sketchy. "lox"??? Lox is a food.... - aaron
[2004-01-06 09:54:00] - smog is a portmanteau.
[2004-01-06 09:52:00] - i guess you're right - for some reason i think of words like "kcal" and "kbar" as acronyms.... i guess they're too short for my brain to recognize - aaron
[2004-01-06 09:51:00] - don't you mean that neither of those words are acronyms? they are both portmanteaux. and what idiot decided that the pluralization of portmanteau would be done by adding an x to the end?
[2004-01-06 08:51:00] - So it turns out "elhi" and "kbar" were acronyms... there are some other funny words in there too. Mmmmm beefalo! - aaron
[2004-01-06 08:49:00] - http://www.cs.princeton.edu/~amitc/Scrab/acroport.html a list of of valid acronyms/portmanteaux in scrabble - aaron
[2004-01-06 08:40:00] - aparna: What happened to aba? -Paul
[2004-01-05 19:00:00] - maybe it doesn't bug you on a cell phone because you're used to the delay from a cell phone; or maybe because you have other things to pay attention to when you're on a cell phone. in my situation, i'm staring at a blank wall in a dark quiet room and have no distractions. it's easy to get annoyed by the long silence between communication. ~a
[2004-01-04 16:22:00] - In answer to your question, adrian, cell phone delay really doesn't bug me too much. - pierce
[2004-01-04 16:18:00] - I'm pissed off by the huge time delays when using a remote control with digital cable or satellite tv. Navigating the on-screen guide is so frustrating, because you'll press page down and it'll take up to two seconds to update and paint the screen - pierce
[2004-01-04 12:27:00] - is it just me, or are other people pissed off with the huge time delays when you're talking to someone on a cel phone? it's almost a second in some cases. that's like absurd. ~a
[2004-01-02 18:50:00] - it was me - aparna
[2004-01-02 18:31:00] - well it wasn't me either. -mig
[2004-01-02 18:16:00] - paul: that's possible although i'll admit i never thought about it. i know that certain parts of high schools are considered open to the public; like the track at Annandale High School is definitely open to the public. ~a
[2004-01-02 16:30:00] - a: I don't know if alumni are allowed on the grounds of TJ without permission, are they? -Paul
[2004-01-02 16:08:00] - well i am indeed interested; but i don't think that i would go alone. and it wasn't me that posted it. ~a
prev <-> next