prev <-> next
[2004-03-11 10:43:00] - i don't agree, thinks adrian.
[2004-03-11 10:24:00] - Essentially meaning that any good "freethinker" would of course believe that there is no God. -Paul
[2004-03-11 10:23:00] - Vinnie: Ok, I can see that. Except I think that while the lollipops were supposed to be funny, I also think they were entirely serious about the message behind it. -Paul
[2004-03-11 10:20:00] - both a joke and advertising is what I meant - vinnie
[2004-03-11 10:20:00] - i thought the lollipops were both. kind of like if you wore a "help stop rape. consent" t-shirt. most people would just dismiss it as a joke, but it also speaks a little about your worldview - vinnie
[2004-03-11 08:54:00] - And wouldn't unitarians and other weirdo not be allowed to be freethinkers because they adhere to a dogma? -Paul
[2004-03-11 08:54:00] - a: Well, I'm basing pretty much everything I know on the Freethinkers at VT that I met and their website. -Paul
[2004-03-10 20:20:00] - paul: many freethinkers are not athiests. many unitarians and other weirdos. ~a
[2004-03-10 17:12:00] - Vinnie: I think I know what you mean, though. The name freethinkers didn't seem to be descriptive at all. They should've just called themselves the athiest club. -Paul
[2004-03-10 17:12:00] - Poor Vinnie. I know just how he feels. -- Xpovos
[2004-03-10 17:09:00] - Vinnie: Heh, I'm still here. I didn't get the impression that the lollipops were really a joke. I got the impression that it was almost a kind of advertising campaign for them. -Paul
[2004-03-10 17:00:00] - I think I'll just shut up now since I'm the only one here anyway - vinnie
[2004-03-10 17:00:00] - god, I'm digging the hole deeper and deeper. not to say, they were close-minded to god, just that if they did believe in God, they would no longer be freethinkers - vinnie
[2004-03-10 16:58:00] - but I should say I never got a vibe there that the people were close-minded about things not related to god - vinnie
[2004-03-10 16:55:00] - it just seems like one of those generic non-descriptive names that you feel bad to disagree with. "you don't hate free thought, do you?" - vinnie
[2004-03-10 16:53:00] - how about calling christians "freethinkers"? - vinnie
[2004-03-10 16:52:00] - ok, that was a really bad metaphor. lemme try again - vinnie
[2004-03-10 16:52:00] - the thing that always bugged me about the freethinkers (certainly not the lollipops - you know well as we that those were a joke, paul) was the name. freethinkers share a belief in agnosticism/atheism, right? how do you get the "free thinker" out of that? it seems akin to calling nazis the "we love everyone" group - vinnie
[2004-03-10 16:01:00] - a: Because many people believe that God frowns on homosexuality. -Paul
[2004-03-10 15:54:00] - i believe that country sadly is a more direct connection seeing as our country has many laws that touch on the subject. ~a
[2004-03-10 15:51:00] - paul: i just don't see the direct connection between god and anti-homosexuality. ~a
[2004-03-10 15:11:00] - duh. ~a
[2004-03-10 15:10:00] - a: Christians tend to believe in God. -Paul
[2004-03-10 15:07:00] - what does god have to do with christianity? i mean christianity has to do with god, of course. but the other way around doesn't really fit much. ~a
[2004-03-10 15:06:00] - Where do your fingers go?
[2004-03-10 15:06:00] - a: Generally the more ardent christians tend to be against homosexuality. -Paul
[2004-03-10 15:04:00] - "You're telling these girls to raise their fingers up to pledge to honor God and country, and yet you're handing out materials saying homosexuality is OK," how do the first two have anything to do with the last? ~a
[2004-03-10 15:02:00] - what perfect timing ~a
[2004-03-10 15:01:00] - *adrian stuffs a tagalong into his mouth and laughs.
[2004-03-10 14:59:00] - http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=37440 Sanctions to shut down pro-life law firm. -Paul
[2004-03-10 14:57:00] - http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,113210,00.html Girl Scout cookie boycott. -Paul
[2004-03-10 14:56:00] - http://www.reuters.com/locales/newsArticle.jsp;:40487c20:cfa77066824b758?type=entertainmentNews&locale=en_IN&storyID=4502228 Nope, no liberal bias here. -Paul
[2004-03-10 14:56:00] - a: Yes, because that's clearly what I said. -Paul
[2004-03-10 14:54:00] - paul: whatever. you win. freethinkers are horrible people. ~a
[2004-03-10 14:52:00] - Travis: I know you didn't, but I thought Pierce made some sort of comment about Metal Gear Solid being the first that had an actual use for them or something. -Paul
[2004-03-10 14:52:00] - a: And that's perfectly fine. I just don't think that a group that hands out lollipops that say "There is no god" on it should be calling themselves more open-minded than the normal person. -Paul
[2004-03-10 14:45:00] - Paul: i didn't say metal gear solid was the first to have cigs at all (use or no use) but that it was the first one to show a person actually smoking (it might not've been, but i remember it getting some attention because of that) - travis
[2004-03-10 14:44:00] - paul: fine. that's your view. i mostly disagree. but it's not so evil either. there aren't many places where atheists and agnostics can go to just hang out and relax with like minded peoples. ~a
[2004-03-10 14:43:00] - Travis: Didn't the original metal gear have a use for cigarettes? I thought you could see laser alarms if you used them or something. -Paul
[2004-03-10 14:40:00] - pierce: waaaay back to the cigs in games, the original metal gear had cigs in the inventory, but i'm fairly certain metal gear solid was the first to actually show the graphics of a person smoking (actually showing a face with a cigarette in its mouth) - travis
[2004-03-10 14:31:00] - a: I don't necessarily think the freethinkers are any more close-minded than anybody else, but I DO think they have a certain opinion of what is correct and what is wrong that they all share about certain topics and that they aren't as all-accepting as they would like us to believe. -Paul
[2004-03-10 14:25:00] - what isn't? you think freethinkers at vt are closed minded? i think there is a distinct possibility that your impression is biased by something (i can't imagine what). ~a
[2004-03-10 14:23:00] - a: If the Freethinkers at VT are any indication, that isn't the impression I got.
-Paul[2004-03-10 14:21:00] - b/c not many people who call themselves freethinkers are that closed minded. ~a
[2004-03-10 14:21:00] - oh. then i have no idea which fliers you are talking about. ~a
[2004-03-10 14:20:00] - Bye Pierce. -Paul
[2004-03-10 14:20:00] - Pierce: All the people who support evolution and think about this debate? -Paul
[2004-03-10 14:19:00] - In any event, you kids have fun... I'm off to the airport. - pierce
[2004-03-10 14:19:00] - a: Actually, I didn't know it was you.
I distinctly remember one saying in big letters that evolution was fact. -Paul[2004-03-10 14:18:00] - Paul: what I'm trying to say is that, from my perspective, the people who support evolution and think about this debate in the first place, do not tend to claim that it's a perfect, "factual" explanation. Rather, that it's the best explanation currently supported by scientific observation. - pierce
[2004-03-10 14:18:00] - paul: you know that was me. what was wrong with the fliers. ~a
[2004-03-10 14:15:00] - Pierce: But it still doesn't have anything to do with the legitimacy of evolution. There can be flaws in evolution without there being a more feasible alternative. -Paul
[2004-03-10 14:14:00] - a: Whoever printed up those flyers the freethinkers were handing out during the creationism vs evolution debate? -Paul
[2004-03-10 14:13:00] - Pierce: My bad, I thought since you started talking about intelligent design right after that you were trying to draw some connection. -Paul
[2004-03-10 14:13:00] - paul: who? ~a
[2004-03-10 14:12:00] - a: You probably do. -Paul
[2004-03-10 14:10:00] - Paul: I'm not making such an assumption. In fact, I said quite the opposite, that I think evolution's supporters would be willing to accept a logical, (reasonably) accurate explanation such as one using quantum physics. - pierce
[2004-03-10 14:08:00] - paul: do we know any of these people who would state seriously that evolution is a fact, pure and simple and would tolerate no questioning of it? ~a
[2004-03-10 14:02:00] - And besides, whether or not an alternative to the theory of evolution is any better is irrelevant to whether or not some people are dogmatic about evolution. -Paul
[2004-03-10 14:01:00] - Pierce: No, but what I'm saying is that you are assuming that any criticism of evolution is coming from the unscientific-based intelligent design community. -Paul
[2004-03-10 14:00:00] - and if there are people who are holding to it dogmatically, then they are being just as bad as the dogmatic intelligent design supporters. but I really think that they are in the minority of people who actively compare and contrast theories of species taxonomy. - pierce
[2004-03-10 13:58:00] - Paul: I don't think I am. If there were an accurate quantum explanation that was developed from a valid scientific method, I'd be willing to accept it as an alternative to evolution. But science is not about saying that something is the truth, but rather saying that "this is a valid explanation for what we can observe". - pierce
[2004-03-10 13:57:00] - Pierce: Well, all I can say is that I've run into my fair share of people who would state seriously that evolution is a fact, pure and simple and would tolerate no questioning of it. -Paul
[2004-03-10 13:56:00] - Pierce: Because I think you're proving my point as we speak.
-Paul[2004-03-10 13:56:00] - Paul: both, though I was originally referring to the idea that a lot of people believe that. - pierce
[2004-03-10 13:55:00] - OTOH, from what I've seen, intelligent design's supporters rarely present scientific evidence supporting it, nor do they indicate ways in which it could be used to further our scientific knowledge. We can use the theory of evolution to predict bacterial adaptation, but intelligent design can't be used as a basis to predict anything. - pierce
[2004-03-10 13:53:00] - Pierce: Which don't you think is true? That a lot of people believe that or the number I gave? -Paul
[2004-03-10 13:52:00] - But even "incorrect" theories can still be taught as long as they reflect valid scientific method, and are reasonably accurate. For example, we still teach Newtonian physics, and we teach atom theory using the image of an electron as a particle spinning around the nucleus, even though neither of these is completely accurate. - pierce
[2004-03-10 13:50:00] - But if someone came up with a consistent, logical explanation for the taxonomy of species that used, say, quantum physics, I think it would be acceptable to most scientists as an alternative to evolution - pierce
[2004-03-10 13:48:00] - Paul: I don't really think that's true, though there are people who get extremely defensive at pseudoscientific justifications for intelligent design that really boil down to "it could be that way, we just have no proof" - pierce
[2004-03-10 13:48:00] - a: Exactly 84,426,571.8 people. -Paul
[2004-03-10 13:42:00] - paul: lots of people? how many? ~a
[2004-03-10 13:34:00] - Pierce: I don't think you'll ever find anybody who will admit that they believe that evolution shouldn't be questioned but I think there are lots of people out there who equate any questioning of evolution as an attack from a fanatic religious fundamentalist or something. -Paul
[2004-03-10 13:33:00] - travis: I think it was the first time it had a use in a game, but I think there were some FPSs before that that had cigs as an inventory item, but all they did was decrease your health. - pierce
[2004-03-10 13:29:00] - people got upset when they showed solid snake smoking in metal gear solid, i think it was the first time a video game had done it, but it made sense to show it since it has a real use in the game - travis
[2004-03-10 13:05:00] - aaron: uh, because history isn't cool?
- pierce[2004-03-10 13:00:00] - pierce: Movie smoking is only dangerous if it's cool. So obviously historical figures are exempt. - aaron
[2004-03-10 12:35:00] - regarding smoking: they claim to exempt historical figures who smoked, but they ignore the historical accuracy of smoking; in my opinion, Chicago's use of smoking was more than appropriate. - pierce
[2004-03-10 12:27:00] - regarding evolution: is there really a hard-line group of people saying that evolution shouldn't be examined and criticized? I mean, most of what I've seen is defending of it as the best explanation that can currently be scientifically justified; not "absolute truth". - pierce
[2004-03-10 12:26:00] - Aaron: Hey, that banana argument spoke to me.
-Paul[2004-03-10 12:25:00] - Xpovos: I think you misunderstood me. I think we have an acceptable balance at the moment, but the extremes (the people who advocate teaching abstinence exclusively, and the people who think that teaching abstinence has no effect) are trying to lead us away from that balance. - pierce
[2004-03-10 12:22:00] - I think the "criticism of evolution" thing is a good idea... as long as it's, like, an objective argument about how evolution could be flawed, and not just like.... the "banana argument" we heard at God And Pizza
- aaron[2004-03-10 12:18:00] - http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=529&e=1&u=/ap/20040309/ap_en_mo/film_hollywood_smoking R-Rating for smoking in a movie? -Paul
[2004-03-10 12:12:00] - http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=37508 Ohio board OKs criticism of evolution. -Paul
[2004-03-10 12:11:00] - Pierce: I fail to follow your logic. If there are other issues at hand, and it's not just enough to encourage one alternative or the other, what's wrong with our current situation. I realize this is a wrong statement too, but I can't understand what you're getting at. Just my own stupidity. --Xpovos
[2004-03-10 12:11:00] - http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20040309-112653-9667r.htm Low turnout for democratic primaries. -Paul
[2004-03-10 11:59:00] - ugh, another example of people creating false dichotomies... the solution is not to just encourage condom use, nor is it to just encourage abstinence. I think we're doing okay right now, education-wise (encouraging both), but there are other social issues affecting, for example, the rate of spread of STDs and teen pregnancy. - pierce
[2004-03-10 11:48:00] - http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/03/09/health/main604877.shtml Some weird stats about STDs and pledging to wait until marriage for sex. -Paul
[2004-03-10 10:39:00] - a: Likely the major party candidates first followed by the non-major party candidatges with the most media exposure. -Paul
[2004-03-10 10:11:00] - here's a question; how are they ordering the results? it's not alphabetical, it's not by score, and it has nothing to do with who they want to win. ~a
[2004-03-10 10:08:00] - the afa isn't having very good luck with its polls. http://www.onlinepolls.net/pollv1/Results.aspx?pid=10 i don't think these were the results they were looking for. ~a
[2004-03-10 10:04:00] - aaron: every time i want to type "apartment" or "apart" i end up typing "aparna". every single time. ~a
[2004-03-09 19:14:00] - pierce: I found one of those wrong-word typos you were talking about earlier. Every time i want to type "purely" i end up typing "purpley". Every single time. - aaron
[2004-03-09 19:04:00] - I guess so, I didn't know that either Paul. Sorry about the messy link. Next time I'll know I don't need tags. - Melissa
[2004-03-09 17:09:00] - A baby penguin is called a chick? -Paul
[2004-03-09 16:51:00] - <a href="http://weblog.iconia.com/35637.html"> penguins can be gay too</a>
[2004-03-09 15:57:00] - Pierce: Ah yes, so it is. For some reason I thought 60-35=15. In that case there is probably some study that says speeding in 35 mph zones is the least dangerous.
-Paul[2004-03-09 15:32:00] - Paul: then shouldn't it be the opposite? harser penalties for less speeding in 35? What travis pointed out is that you can "get away" with more speeding in a 35 than anywhere else. - pierce
[2004-03-09 15:28:00] - Travis: I'm sure there was some study done that says that speeding in 35 mph zones was the most dangerous or something. -Paul
[2004-03-09 15:20:00] - that's weird, you can go 60 mph in a 35mph zone before it's reckless, everywhere else it's 80/+20 - travis
[2004-03-09 13:47:00] - Aaron: I think it's funny that the Chinese government is trying to convince it's people that there is nothing wrong with women.
-Paul[2004-03-09 13:26:00] - Aaron: Yeah, and I guess my point is that pedestrians often act too recklessly for my liking. -Paul
[2004-03-09 13:23:00] - http://www.mit.edu/~jfc/laws.html
[2004-03-09 13:21:00] - "Daughters are as good as sons!" That's a little disturbing. Like one of those accidentally-racist advertisements you'd see back in the 1940's. - aaron
[2004-03-09 13:16:00] - Oh okay - i agree with that. But i think legally, drivers should be responsible unless the pedestrian was acting recklessly - aaron
[2004-03-09 12:36:00] - http://www.guardian.co.uk/china/story/0,7369,1165129,00.html Shortage of women in China -Paul
[2004-03-09 11:42:00] - Even a good driver might be looking to HIS left and start turning without looking to his right for pedestrians because he's watching for oncoming cars from his left. I've done it before. -Paul
[2004-03-09 11:42:00] - Even if you have a walk sign, look over to the left to make sure that the car there isn't in the process of turning before you start walking. -Paul
[2004-03-09 11:41:00] - Aaron: That comes up at an intersection near where I work a lot. I didn't mean to say that legally pedestrians shouldn't be given the right of way, just that they should always pay attention to cars around them before stepping into the road. -Paul
[2004-03-09 11:38:00] - That's why some places end up having those redundant "no right on red when pedestrians present" signs - it's already a law, but some people don't recognize that you are supposed to yield to pedestrians in that situation - aaron
[2004-03-09 11:38:00] - travis: senior year of HS, I got pulled over for 42 in a 25 school zone (d'oh!), but I didn't get a reckless. Anecdotal, but perhaps applicable. - pierce
[2004-03-09 11:38:00] - Paul: The only problem with expecting pedestrians to yield to motorists, is with right-turns-on-red being legal, pedestrians could potentially never get to go anywhere. - Aaron
[2004-03-09 11:35:00] - i knew it was also over 80, but i've heard both 15mph and 20mph. never seen anything official to prove either one, though - travis
[2004-03-09 11:34:00] - A good example of how I drive is when I'm driving home from Travis' at like 3:00am. Hardly anybody is on the parkway so I tend to go 65 or so, not because of the speed limit (because I've only seen a cop out once) but because that's just the speed that feels best at that time. -Paul
[2004-03-09 11:20:00] - reckless is 20mph over or over 80
[2004-03-09 11:17:00] - Travis: That's the way I would see it but I don't know if that's how it works or not. I just think that there are some pedestrians out there (not all of them) who are entirely too unconcerned about whether or not a car is speeding down a road they are about to cross. -Paul
[2004-03-09 11:17:00] - my general rule: don't go more than 14mph over the speed limit (wreckless is 15mph over, right?) if no one else is around or keep up with traffic, whichever is faster. i don't always follow it, but that's my personal guideline - travis
[2004-03-09 11:15:00] - Paul: i thought if you have a green light then you have the right of way (legally) so it would be the pedistrian's fault if they started walking after the green light (not sure how well that would hold up in court, but it seems legally sound to me) - travis
[2004-03-09 11:14:00] - I don't know about everyone else, but I find that I hardly pay attention to speed limits anymore. When driving on a road, I either try to adapt to how fast everyone else is driving or (if not many people are around) I'll drive how fast I think it's safe to drive. -Paul
[2004-03-09 11:13:00] - http://www.shaadi.com/ I know I posted something very similar to this before, but I find this one amusing because it claims to be "The No.1 Matrimonial Services Provider". -Paul
[2004-03-09 11:11:00] - I think 5mph limits are bull, though... my car doesn't even show less than 10, and I shouldn't be watching my speedometer in a place that would need a 5mph limit anyway. - pierce
[2004-03-09 11:10:00] - Aaron: Completely off-topic, but I have the unpopular opinion that pedestrians should yield to cars in most cases. Few things annoy me more than when pedestrians walk out in front of me without looking and when I have a green light. -Paul
[2004-03-09 11:06:00] - I think the 55-mile-an-hour federal speed limit is overly restrictive. But I'm all in favor of the 10/25/35 mile an hour speed limits around places with pedestrians. - aaron
[2004-03-09 09:33:00] - http://www.termlimits.org/Press/Common_Sense/cs1059.html Do speed limits make highways more dangerous? -Paul
[2004-03-08 22:35:00] - http://www.gizmodo.com/archives/bike_powered_pleasuring.php Dildo bicycle. Not safe for work. -Paul
[2004-03-08 19:53:00] - oh gee, real nice vinnie. thanks a friggin' bunch. - pierce
[2004-03-08 18:17:00] - "computer scientists" sounds retarded - vinnie
[2004-03-08 18:01:00] - http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4449759/ I didn't realize that the jobless rates for computer scientists and electrical engineers was higher than the average jobless rate. -Paul
[2004-03-08 17:23:00] - Pierce: No, but in a way they force me to hire somebody (much like they would force somebody to marry somebody else). -Paul
[2004-03-08 16:51:00] - Paul: but they wouldn't force you to work for a company that has too small a ratio of minorities to whities, if you were of the non-whitey persuasion.. - pierce
[2004-03-08 16:46:00] - Hmmm, that didn't come out sounding right after I cut out parts of it so it would fit
-paul[2004-03-08 16:45:00] - Pierce: In an ideal world, but in the real world the government does exercise that right for you. If you want to work for a company and they don't want to hire you because of your race. The government steps in and forces them to stop discriminating based on race. Essentially enforcing your civil right to fair employment. -Paul
[2004-03-08 16:42:00] - But it doesn't obligate the government to exercise that right for you. - pierce
[2004-03-08 16:41:00] - Paul: because enforcement of a civil right means the opportunity to exercise that right or not, as desired. - pierce
[2004-03-08 16:23:00] - And if an argument for gay marriage as a civil right can be made, then why not an argument for marriage for everybody as a civil right? -Paul
[2004-03-08 16:22:00] - So I think the theory is that a civil right is something that the government is supposed to actively try to enforce in order to aim for equality (like anti-discrimination laws and the like). -Paul
[2004-03-08 16:20:00] - http://www.google.com/search?q=define:civil+right Dammit, this link works. -Paul
[2004-03-08 16:20:00] - Pierce: Doing some more research on what I posted, I think the key wording is that they say "Civil Right" (http://www.google.com/search?q=define:civil+right), which has different meaning than merely a "Right". -Paul
[2004-03-08 16:18:00] - Generally, I think (and I'm not sure of this), that the term 'right' is thrown around without much meaning behind it. -Paul
[2004-03-08 16:18:00] - Pierce: I don't think there is even a real legal definition of 'right' so I would guess no, it doesn't. And that would make you correct. -Paul
[2004-03-08 16:17:00] - In fact, I was fairly certain that it's not recognized as a "right", but rather as something that they can't outlaw because enforcement of that law would be an invasion of privacy... someone care to enlighten me? - pierce
[2004-03-08 16:16:00] - And correct me if I'm wrong, but does abortion get any extra financial support from the gov't based on its recognition as a "right"? I thought it was only insofar as it qualifies as a medical procedure, as applied to peoples' normal medical coverage. - pierce
[2004-03-08 16:15:00] - But since the way they chose to support that argument was fallacious, they're left with nothing. - pierce
[2004-03-08 16:14:00] - Paul: I do think it was meant to be taken seriously... just because it seems like a ridiculous statement doesn't mean that they weren't trying to convey a real point. The ridiculousness of the statement was meant to serve as an indicator that marriage is not a civil right. - pierce
[2004-03-08 16:08:00] - Pierce: I agree, but the government often doesn't see the fallacy. We've gone from a 'right to abortion' to having the government pay for abortions for some people. I don't think the argument was meant to be taken seriously at all, but more as making fun of people who look to the government to solve their problems. -Paul
[2004-03-08 15:59:00] - joking aside, the original argument (marriage = civil right -> government must find me a spouse) is fallacious. By the same token, the right to bear arms means the government has to give you a gun, or the right to free speech means the government has to write stuff for you to say... obviously false, but that doesn't negate those rights. - pierce
[2004-03-08 15:51:00] - http://voxday.blogspot.com/2004_03_01_voxday_archive.html#107877178470655154 I'm against most government programs but this one sounds good to me (sarcasm) -Paul
[2004-03-08 15:24:00] - Travis: I don't know. I don't recall posting this same article on my journal but it's entirely possible. -Paul
[2004-03-08 15:19:00] - is that a different study? i swear you had posted something along the same lines a while back. either that or i just read it on some other blogs - travis
[2004-03-08 15:18:00] - http://www.gadsdentimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/artikkel?SearchID=73164835965997&Avis=GT&Dato=20040306&Kategori=ZNYT04&Lopenr=403060358&Ref=AR People tolerate more pain from women than men. -Paul
[2004-03-08 13:34:00] - For instance, I remember Elijah wood talking about how LotR is a metaphor for how war is evil. I suppose that's a valid interpretation but it's not terribly interesting or controversial.
-Paul[2004-03-08 13:31:00] - Travis: Yeah, but I imagine they're mostly talking about useless metaphors like, "The struggle against the Orcs of Mordor is like the struggle of a poor African boy with AIDS." -Paul
[2004-03-08 13:24:00] - he's not the first person to do that, pretty much everyone involved in the movie has said LotR applies to today - travis
[2004-03-08 13:23:00] - Heh yeah, just proves anything can be a metaphor for anything - aaron
[2004-03-08 13:00:00] - I think it's amusing that he says that there is some connection between Lord of the Rings and modern times.
-Paul[2004-03-08 12:10:00] - Yeah, I mean I agree with him that eastern culture seems more violent than most, at least in modern times. I can understand him wanting to keep that kind of stuff out of Europe. - Aaron
[2004-03-08 11:08:00] - it sounds like he just trying to defend his own culture. when "white male culture" invades other cultures it's evil, but when those cultures invade his he's just supposed to lay down arms and accept it, which he doesn't want to do - travis
[2004-03-08 10:29:00] - But he does say something about how all Muslims need to stand up and be counted so I think he realizes that the actions of a small group are reflecting negatively on the whole. -Paul
[2004-03-08 10:27:00] - And, of course, I've also read about how plenty of Muslims were horrified by 9-11. -Paul
[2004-03-08 10:26:00] - Pierce: It's hard to tell what percentage of Americans want the towel-heads dead and what percentage of Muslims celebrate the killing of the great Satan. I've read about how a lot of the supposed post 9-11 Muslim-backlash was a combination of false reports and media hype. -Paul
[2004-03-08 10:24:00] - Pierce: I got the impression he was being somewhat sarcastic with his "white male culture" remark, referring to the Western European culture with a phrase that others might use as a derogative term. Something that I do a lot.
-Paul[2004-03-08 10:21:00] - In any event, he has a skewed vision of the world, in my opinion. He heard people in the US being upset about the Iran quake, and he saw the news footage of arabs celebrating 9/11, but he missed the Americans who were glad that the "towel heads" were being punished, and his missed the arabs who recognized that 9/11 was an atrocity. - pierce
[2004-03-08 10:19:00] - I guess he was using "white male culture" to refer to the societies that were historically white male. But I'm reading between the lines to get that...
- pierce[2004-03-08 10:17:00] - hmmm... I think he screwed himself by using the expression "white male culture" when I gather that that's not all he's referring to. It seems like equality of gender and ethinicity are part of what he wants, as long as that equality doesn't mean that we tolerate violent behavior. - pierce
[2004-03-08 10:09:00] - http://icwales.icnetwork.co.uk/0100news/0200wales/content_objectid=13830081_method=full_siteid=50082_page=1_headline=-Welsh%2Dstar%2Din%2Drace%2Drow-name_page.h John Rhys-Davies and his "anti-Muslim" remarks. -Paul
[2004-03-08 08:50:00] - http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=1753313 I don't want TO to join the Ravens, but I still have to say that TO is a giant ass. -Paul
[2004-03-05 22:35:00] - anonymous: it probably tries ____.com if it is unable to contact a web server on the IP that "localhost" resolves to. so since you have a web server, it works for you. But if aaron doesn't, then it tries localhost.com (don't know why it's going to .net.au...) - pierce
[2004-03-05 22:20:00] - aaron: it doesn't do that for me. http://localhost/ takes me to my webserver
[2004-03-05 21:46:00] - approximately adrian ~a
[2004-03-05 19:11:00] - what, nobody else has a rock pun for vinnie's journal? - pierce
[2004-03-05 17:18:00] - pierce, i was responding to your first post. ~a
[2004-03-05 17:17:00] - I occasionally go to rottentomatoes.com at work, and I usually get there by typing part of the address, then hitting the down arrow and enter when Mozilla autocompletes it. But one time I almost ended up at rotten.com because I missed the down arrow. (quick realization and agile hitting of the "stop" button saved me) - pierce
[2004-03-05 17:17:00] - pierce: no, it's a thing that's also in lots of glib software and it really pisses me off. if i type in a name that doesn't exist . . . like http://www.ntoehut.com/ then it tries to add ".com" to the end. which takes me to "http://www.ntoehut.com.com/" well "com.com" is owned by someone, so i get taken to some stupid page. so annoying. ~a
[2004-03-05 17:16:00] - aaron: regardless though, you're right. I've never liked the "autoredirect you to ____.com" quote-unquote feature. - pierce
[2004-03-05 17:15:00] - aaron: do you have an http server on localhost:80? - pierce
[2004-03-05 17:12:00] - miguel: beef #1 with FireFox: Typing http://localhost/ in the browser takes you to http://www.localhost.net.au/ - aaron
[2004-03-05 16:39:00] - note that that was not intended to sound harsh or sarcastic, as indicated by the smilie. Just a joke in good fun. - pierce
[2004-03-05 16:39:00] - travis: you could also paint the next mona lisa or develop the next Windows or become the next Michael Jordan, while you're at it.
- pierce[2004-03-05 16:14:00] - you should write the next Harry Potter series travis, I hear Rowling is worth around 1 billion now -dave
[2004-03-05 15:58:00] - a novel i just bought was written by a software designer (unfortunately her publisher has already decided to stop producing the book so no more will be made, which is how i found out about it) - travis
[2004-03-05 15:57:00] - yeah, most writers start in their spare time, and i'm not even sure how many authors don't have another job to make enough money - travis
[2004-03-05 15:51:00] - travis/vinnie: to clarify, I don't really care about the length, if you wrote a really (really!) tight short story in three pages that was complete, then I'd be happy. - pierce
[2004-03-05 15:45:00] - unless you were talking about merely taking a writing-related job, like editing - vinnie
[2004-03-05 15:44:00] - re: writing full-time - isn't how a lot of writers start by writing in their spare time while working a normal job? (Then, if something takes off, they write full-time?) the world of writing seems way too fickle for someone to just leap into and expect it to be a full-time job - vinnie
[2004-03-05 15:36:00] - travis: good point. something with some development and story to it, I suppose. i'm guessing to do something like that you'd need at least 15 pages? let's just say keep writing longer and longer pieces until we're satisfied
- vinnie[2004-03-05 15:28:00] - travis: having a start and a finish, and preferrably a middle. - pierce
[2004-03-05 15:21:00] - pierce and vinnie: just curious, what, exactly, do each of you mean when you say "full"? - travis
[2004-03-05 15:18:00] - I seriously would love to read some full-length thing you write, travis. your writing is already quite good, and more importantly (to me), you have good ideas if the first two pieces are any indication - vinnie
[2004-03-05 15:15:00] - aaron: except that's not really a mental block, it's just shitty user interface design. I haven't been doing much java coding at my work up to this point, but I fired up NetBeans and confirmed it. What an awful idea! How did that get by QA? - pierce
[2004-03-05 14:56:00] - pierce: No, but annoyingly in Netbeans (my java development tool) anytime I type "we're" it auto-changes it to "we'return". It's kind of a similar problem - every time I type "we're" i have to backspace and fix it - aaron
[2004-03-05 14:52:00] - to be grammatically correct: there's = there are, that medium = those mediums - travis
[2004-03-05 14:51:00] - i'd like to build up a full piece, but i don't think i'm cut out for writing long prose. most of my ideas come to me in the form of comics or film. there's lots of things i think i could do in that medium that i'm too clumsy at with straight-up prose - travis
[2004-03-05 14:49:00] - that's just what you get for having a real word as a name that's also close to another real word. it's not based on my name, but any word that ends in "in" i'll invariably type "ing" instead - travis
[2004-03-05 14:47:00] - on an unrelated note, I can't remember the last time I successfully wrote the word "piece" without writing "pierce" first by mistake. I'm just too hardwired to writing my own name. Anyone else have common typos based on their names like that? - pierce
[2004-03-05 14:45:00] - travis: regarding writing for a living, it's not cringe-worthy at all. I'd like to see what you'd come up with if you wrote a full piece, rather than a fragment (though I'm impressed by the fragments). - pierce
[2004-03-05 14:36:00] - a: not sure about moving, lack of confidence in programming skills, still wavering between which career path to pursue: programming or writing (hopefully people don't cringe at my dream of earning a living through my writing after reading some of my early stuff) - travis
[2004-03-05 14:34:00] - nope, "konami gaming" does the games i posted the link for while "konami" does the good games. both use the konami logo, though, and you can get to the "konami gaming" site from the "konami" site - travis
[2004-03-05 14:33:00] - I guess that makes sense; it seems like they make most of their games abroad, and just translate them - pierce
[2004-03-05 14:32:00] - oh, so that's not the part of konami that did the games you referred to? - pierce
[2004-03-05 14:32:00] - this was a reply to a resume i sent last summer, well before i got my current job on labor day - travis
[2004-03-05 14:31:00] - well, applied through their web site, but their site was much worse then and didn't have much info on it, all i saw was the konami logo. now they have a games list and it's obviously not the big boy konami - travis
[2004-03-05 14:27:00] - travis: you thought you checked what when you applied? - pierce
[2004-03-05 14:22:00] - the confusing part is they use the same logo, so konami gaming is a subset of konami, i guess - travis
[2004-03-05 14:21:00] - konami gaming is different than konami, which is what i thought until a coworker went to a web page and i thought he went to the right one - travis
[2004-03-05 14:20:00] - ahhh, nevermind, i thought i checked it when i applied: http://www.konamigaming.com/?page=Games&id=34&CFID=9275992&CFTOKEN=77011971 - travis
[2004-03-05 14:18:00] - the W stands for Why, by the way. ~a
[2004-03-05 14:17:00] - wtf did you turn them down? are you crazy? ~a
[2004-03-05 14:15:00] - supposedly vegas' cost of living is 14% less than DC, interesting... - travis
[2004-03-05 14:11:00] - hehe, i could try emailing them and saying i might change my mind (more money *wink**wink*) - travis
[2004-03-05 14:10:00] - but man, castlevania, metal gear solid, silent hill, ddr, those're all konami games - travis
[2004-03-05 14:09:00] - pierce: not really sure. probably the thought about what would happen if i did get the job (having to move away from everyone and everything i know) - travis
[2004-03-05 14:01:00] - travis: That could result in some very awkward company lunches - aaron
[2004-03-05 13:52:00] - Dave: it's one of the choices for custom plate designs, and I was playing around with the "vanity plate" feature. - pierce
[2004-03-05 13:52:00] - hmmm, my guess would be "yes". Why did you turn it down? - pierce
[2004-03-05 13:42:00] - should i have gone ahead and done the interview and seen what happened? - travis
[2004-03-05 13:41:00] - oh...my...fucking...god... konami gaming just called about the resume i sent them months ago and wanted to do a phone interview... and i turned it down... they're based in las freakin' vegas! on the same road as all the strip clubs! - travis
[2004-03-05 13:37:00] - haha, how on earth did you find that pierce? -dave
[2004-03-05 13:19:00] - Ughhh, who authorized this custom VA plate? https://www.dmv.state.va.us/images/plp/ICIbg.gif - pierce
[2004-03-05 13:00:00] - Was there ever any confirmation on the link between the contents of those documents and articles by Robert Novak? - pierce
[2004-03-05 12:58:00] - like the washpost headline "Democrats' Files Accessed and Leaked In Security Breach " is misleading because there was no security breach at all. There just wasn't any security period. -dave
[2004-03-05 12:56:00] - instead the aide's who copied the files over lost their jobs -dave
[2004-03-05 12:55:00] - doesn't mean they should have done it, but I'm rather annoyed that the media like washpost hasn't said anything about that. -dave
[2004-03-05 12:55:00] - Just wanted to comment that the files the Repubs. "stole" from the democrats' computers were from folders that the dem's had shared to the entire network without any restrictions -dave
[2004-03-05 10:18:00] - i wanna see it again too - i saw it a loooooong time ago - aaron
[2004-03-05 09:51:00] - it's on my list to see, I believe - vinnie
[2004-03-05 09:50:00] - aha - vinnie
[2004-03-05 09:35:00] - yup, the magnificent movie featuring david bowie, classic 80s singing, and jennifer connelly (hence why andrew would know it)
- travis[2004-03-05 09:26:00] - Labyrinth - aaron
[2004-03-05 09:24:00] - can someone please just tell me 'y' (ain't nothing but a heartache) - vinnie
[2004-03-04 23:17:00] - all righty then, imagine the boldness of that word
[2004-03-04 23:16:00] - who <b>is</b> that masked man?
[2004-03-04 23:16:00] - http://www.livejournal.com/users/misterdreamer/
[2004-03-04 23:14:00] - I used imdb to find "J" - and no i hadn't heard of it - aaron
[2004-03-04 18:03:00] - more explicit hint for A: "i love the smell of napalm in the morning" - travis
[2004-03-04 18:02:00] - aaron: you've definitely heard of A, probably heard of B but it's way before our time, H is contemporary, probably heard of J, S is old and not a popular genre in our group, and X is impossible - travis
[2004-03-04 17:55:00] - Aaron: I think you've heard of H but as for the rest, I wouldn't be surprised if you haven't heard of them. They're mostly before our time. -Paul
[2004-03-04 17:53:00] - tsk - even with the hints I can't get A B H J S X. I really just have not heard of/seen many of these movies. Does anybody know for sure if 'y' was photoshopped? - aaron
[2004-03-04 17:21:00] - doubt any of us could get 'x' - travis
[2004-03-04 17:21:00] - hey, i actually found that site, but google's link took me to the base page, not that thread. andrew would've got 'y' i know, i knew i recognized 'u' but never paid much attention to the title font, i guessed everything with the same main part for 's' except that movie, didn't even remember 'o' was made since i never saw it - travis
[2004-03-04 17:14:00] - and now I know 'x' - vinnie
[2004-03-04 17:13:00] - the hints http://www.maskhideout.com/archives/000527.php - vinnie
[2004-03-04 17:11:00] - Dammit
-Paul[2004-03-04 17:11:00] - 's' was a movie I had barely heard of. probably never would've guessed it - vinnie
[2004-03-04 17:08:00] - scratch that, 21 (finally got v) - travis
[2004-03-04 17:08:00] - well, like i said, i failed to find any hints, so my 20 is perfectly valid - travis
[2004-03-04 17:05:00] - tsk. It's funny that I know 3 of those - i would think my movies would be a complete subset of yours but i guess we've seen somewhat different stuff - aaron
[2004-03-04 17:04:00] - I haven't used any hints (except for Vinnie's) and I have 19. -Paul
[2004-03-04 17:02:00] - oooooh my god, how did i not get 'c' before now? i think i reached my limit of 20 (missing: o, s, u, v, x, y) - travis
[2004-03-04 16:53:00] - i tried finding answers/hints before but can't get any results on google - travis
[2004-03-04 16:45:00] - I cheated. I went to a blog that gave hints. I think the only ones I didn't have that I could've possibly guessed were 'a' and 'n' (grrr, that one was right under my nose). but now I know all of them except for 'y' and 'x' - vinnie
prev <-> next