prev <-> next
[2004-05-21 12:27:43] - Mel: I haven't decided yet. It's a matter currently under debate in the inner circle. I'll let you know when we've reached a verdict.
-Paul[2004-05-21 12:27:29] - paul: I think kids need some decisions made for them, but when it comes to their diet, I think kids need to learn to make smart decisions by themselves - aaron
[2004-05-21 12:26:59] - Mel: I changed my mind, I'm not here. -Paul
[2004-05-21 12:26:46] - paul: I guessed your answer would be no, I was thinking more pierce or maybe dave - aaron
[2004-05-21 12:26:11] - Paul: so is access to the new section of your blog by invitation only? -mel
[2004-05-21 12:25:47] - Aaron: You probably already know my answer: No. Although I would point out that if all schools were privatized, parents would have the choice to send their kids to a school that does or does not have soda machines. -Paul
[2004-05-21 12:25:19] - has anybody heard of the gamecube game Donkey Kong's Jungle Beat where you use the bongo controller from Donkey Konga to jump, run, and hit stuff? - travis
[2004-05-21 12:24:38] - Is anybody here in favor of this whole 'keep soft drinks out of schools' thing which has been going on and off for the past year or so? - aaron
[2004-05-21 12:23:10] - Mel: Yup. -Paul
[2004-05-21 12:21:52] - hey Paul, are you around? -mel
[2004-05-21 11:57:49] - dave: Like livejournal! - aaron
[2004-05-21 11:57:40] - Dave: But in theory you could give yourself another invitation to get another account and more invitations? -Paul
[2004-05-21 11:56:09] - Paul: I think you only get a certain number, hence why I said allotment in my previous post -dave
[2004-05-21 11:52:38] - Dave: As many as you want? -Paul
[2004-05-21 11:50:42] - Paul: well you have to have Gmail already to get an invitation allotment. And then yeah, you get to send an invitation to whoever you want -dave
[2004-05-21 11:49:55] - Dave: So what's the big deal regarding invitations to gmail? You have to be invited by somebody? Can you invite whoever you want? -Paul
[2004-05-21 11:41:59] - why on earth would anyone name a type of ship "capesize"?? - vinnie
[2004-05-21 11:40:35] - hehe, people offering all sorts of things for an invitation to gmail http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A43620-2004May20.html items include bottle of whiskey, nekkid picture of a guy's gf, or $70 -dave
[2004-05-21 11:39:19] - Dave: I'm not surprised. China outnumbers us by quite a big deal. I imagine India is going to go through the same thing shortly. -Paul
[2004-05-21 11:35:40] - all from http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A43765-2004May20.html -dave
[2004-05-21 11:34:49] - shipping rates have doubled in the past year because of china, hehe -dave
[2004-05-21 11:33:53] - hehe china went from "a minor consumer of raw materials" to consuming 1/2 world cement production, 1/3 steel, 1/5 aluminum, 1/4 copper, and has eclipsed Japan to become 2nd largest importer of oil behind the US -dave
[2004-05-21 11:26:32] - Vinnie: I never let feelings of being out of my league stop me from sticking my foot in my mouth.
-Paul[2004-05-21 11:25:08] - someone may have found it odd - vinnie
[2004-05-21 11:24:08] - paul: no, just debates that I feel out of my league in like that one. i didn't mean to say that that happens a lot, just beating someone to the punch that I said something right before and right after that quick debate
- vinnie[2004-05-21 11:21:59] - Vinnie: So you deliberately avoid the big debates? -Paul
[2004-05-21 11:19:42] - isn't it usually "quiets down" or "shuts up"?
- travis[2004-05-21 11:09:47] - I'll make an offhand remark. like this one! - vinnie
[2004-05-21 11:09:24] - vinnie: ahh ok -dave
[2004-05-21 11:09:06] - ack, quiet up -dave
[2004-05-21 11:09:00] - vinnie: yeah, who knows what you'll do when the debate starts to quite up? -dave
[2004-05-21 11:08:46] - like an army's north front - vinnie
[2004-05-21 11:08:32] - vinnie: ahhh <somewhat quizzical expression> -dave
[2004-05-21 11:07:58] - note how I come out of hiding after the debate rages down - vinnie
[2004-05-21 11:07:40] - no, a "front" in the sense of that word just means a side, I think - vinnie
[2004-05-21 11:06:42] - hmmm, doesn't forefront seem to be kinda redundant? because isn't "fore" the front already? -dave
[2004-05-21 11:05:52] - Pierce: Let your Irish heritage come to the forefront! LOL -dave
[2004-05-21 11:03:49] - Pierce: and you're on the opposite side of the debate as me. I think you should go take a nap or something ^_^ -dave
[2004-05-21 11:03:39] - Pierce: So basically you take exception to the article implying that we shouldn't be concerned about raising gas prices? -Paul
[2004-05-21 11:03:01] - dammit, now I've messed up "it's" and "its". What's wrong with me today? - pierce
[2004-05-21 11:02:34] - Paul: I'm just saying the article has faulty reasoning behind it's claims, not that it's claims are false. - pierce
[2004-05-21 11:02:01] - Pierce: I agree that the article isn't ironclad, but who wants to write a tome to take everything into accout? I felt he was just trying to make a simple statement about inflation -dave
[2004-05-21 11:01:16] - Paul: <gasp> HEHE -dave
[2004-05-21 11:00:53] - I'm not saying we should be concerned, or that Bush is to blame for oil prices. I'm saying that the article is (implicitly or explicitly) making those claims in invalid ways. Not an affirmative, a double negative. - pierce
[2004-05-21 11:00:50] - Pierce: So we should be concerned that the price of gas is, gasp, staying consistent? Despite increased demand? And instability in the Middle East? -Paul
[2004-05-21 11:00:08] - Pierce: ahhh see, I guess that's where we disagree about the point. Because I don't think he necessarily meant to aim specifically at the Kerry campaign, just the general issue of increasing gas prices (altho this happens to be an issue Kerry is trumpeting atm) -dave
[2004-05-21 10:59:40] - Pierce: So you think there is nothing wrong with saying that gas prices have hit record highs? -Paul
[2004-05-21 10:59:33] - Paul: but you've gone outside the scope of the article. The article says that current gas prices are okay because they're more historically consistent, when in fact that's an invalid reason not to be concerned. - pierce
[2004-05-21 10:59:13] - Pierce: The recent high prices are a result of OPEC a few months back decreasing(?) or not increasing supply when a lot of demand started coming in, so prices went up. Now OPEC is realizing this and deciding how much to increase supply -dave
[2004-05-21 10:58:47] - Pierce: All I know is that I didn't get the impression the article had anything to do with Bush at all, just to clarify that gas prices have not really hit an all time high in terms of inflation adjusted dollars. -Paul
[2004-05-21 10:58:32] - Paul: but the point of mentioning the Kerry campaign claims is to negate them by the rest of the content of the article. But I don't think that the rest of the content inherently negates the claim. - pierce
[2004-05-21 10:57:47] - Pierce: In the short term, gas prices are always going up and down. It's especially dependent on OPEC. I also suspect the dollar has undergone a lot of inflation recently considering how it's lost a lot of value against the Euro. -Paul
[2004-05-21 10:57:25] - Pierce: Yeah, I think he wasn't so much trying to make a political statement as to give an example of people being misleading about "how bad" the gas prices are. I don't think he's trying to say there ISN'T a problem, just that it's not as bad as a lot of people are saying -dave
[2004-05-21 10:57:20] - To clarify the Bush thing: it's not a strong implication of the article, but it's something he mentions and is arguably the most political point of his claims. - pierce
[2004-05-21 10:56:28] - Pierce: That's just an off-hand remark of something Kerry's campaign said. -Paul
[2004-05-21 10:56:11] - Paul: but they are increasing. Gas wasn't > $2.00 a few weeks ago, and it wasn't too long ago that it was under $1.00. - pierce
[2004-05-21 10:55:52] - haha, I mean to direct that towards Paul -dave
[2004-05-21 10:55:25] - that was to dave. - pierce
[2004-05-21 10:55:22] - Yeah, I agree with Dave, are you sure we're talking about the same article?
-Paul[2004-05-21 10:55:21] - Dave: The problem with Iraq is that we shouldn't let other pesky countries stop us from just taking all the oil as opposed to selling it for the Iraqis and not touching any of the sale money ^_^ -dave
[2004-05-21 10:55:06] - "declares that "gasoline prices are setting new records" and assails the Bush administration for having "done almost nothing to get gas prices under control."" - pierce
[2004-05-21 10:54:45] - Pierce: But the prices aren't increasing, is the point. -Paul
[2004-05-21 10:54:40] - Paul: again, I'm just saying that the article's implied reasons for dismissing that criticism are faulty in reasoning. - pierce
[2004-05-21 10:54:30] - Pierce: I think you're misreading the article. He doesn't mention Bush. Even says "None of this is to deny that gasoline prices have been climbing lately. Economic growth around the world is pushing up demand for fuel, which in turn is tugging the price of crude oil upward. " -dave
[2004-05-21 10:53:54] - Pierce: I'm not entirely sure how the president of the US controls gas prices, except possibly to change the tax on gasoline. -Paul
[2004-05-21 10:53:50] - Paul: But if we're looking at increased demand in the recent past and near future, then increasing gas prices are something to be worried about, which negates the value of the article. - pierce
[2004-05-21 10:53:07] - Dave: Iraq isn't enough?
-Paul[2004-05-21 10:52:51] - Paul: I should be more specific. The implication in the article that oil prices aren't a valid point of criticism of GWB is based on faulty reasoning. I don't necessarily thing they're a valid criticism of him, but for different reasons. - pierce
[2004-05-21 10:52:28] - Paul: because he should be invading OPEC countries to force them to give us cheap oil ^_^ -dave
[2004-05-21 10:51:31] - pierce: what I got more from the article is that the doomsayers who are saying prices are at all times high are slightly misleading. -dave
[2004-05-21 10:51:09] - OPEN = OPEC -Paul
[2004-05-21 10:50:58] - Pierce: OPEN is a valid point of criticism of Bush? How do you figure that? -Paul
[2004-05-21 10:50:42] - pierce: last I heard they were arguing over by how much it should be increased. -dave
[2004-05-21 10:50:25] - Pierce: I'm still not sure why you think gas prices should be low. The demand keeps going up and in theory the supply keeps getting harder to obtain. -Paul
[2004-05-21 10:50:16] - pierce: yes, it is a problem I will agree. Go bang on OPECs door some more. In fact, OPEC has agreed that supply needs to be increased. -dave
[2004-05-21 10:49:51] - Dave: but our international oil commerce with the OPEC nations is a valid point of criticism of George Bush, though the article implies that it shouldn't be. - pierce
[2004-05-21 10:49:34] - pierce: China is consuming massive amounts of oil now (something like 3x as much than a few years ago?) so obviously this is going to drive prices up if supply isn't increased -dave
[2004-05-21 10:48:45] - Paul+Dave: he may be right that we're not setting record highs on gas prices, but IMO gas prices should be very low at this point of technological development, and the fact that it's roughly at its historical price is a problem. - pierce
[2004-05-21 10:48:39] - pierce: besides, the market has nothing really to do with how much oil there is, just how much oil OPEC is deciding to sell at the moment. Kinda like Diamonds and their hyper-inflated price -dave
[2004-05-21 10:48:11] - Besides, if the prices are about average, then I would think that there really ISN'T something wrong with the market. Especially considering that demand is always going up. -Paul
[2004-05-21 10:47:23] - "How can gas and oil be getting more affordable when we consume so much? The secret, Moore says, is innovation and technology... [deep sea drilling]" - pierce
[2004-05-21 10:47:20] - Pierce: I didn't think that was his point. I thought his point was just that there is no reason to go on and on about how expensive gas is because it's actually about as expensive as it's always been. -Paul
[2004-05-21 10:46:51] - pierce: I don't think he's trying to say there's nothing wrong with the market, just that people should take inflation into account as well and when doing that, it's not really as bad as some are making it out to be -dave
[2004-05-21 10:46:40] - Paul: no, his point was that deep sea drilling decreases the cost of oil, it doesn't increase it. - pierce
[2004-05-21 10:45:41] - pierce: well, I think the articles point is to just bring up inflation. The article points out itself that prices have generally been going down -dave
[2004-05-21 10:45:36] - Paul: but the conclusion he's trying to draw is that that means nothing is wrong with the global oil market, but I think his reasoning is invalid. - pierce
[2004-05-21 10:45:12] - Pierce: But the oil infrastructure isn't all there. It was even mentioned in the article, we're doing stuff like deep sea drilling now which is probably pretty expensive to do. -Paul
[2004-05-21 10:44:50] - pierce: I suppose the price of a barrel of crude might be a better judge then -dave
[2004-05-21 10:44:49] - Am I missing something here? - pierce
[2004-05-21 10:44:37] - Pierce+Aaron: That wasn't the point he was making, though. The point is that gas prices are not at record levels in terms of inflation at all. -Paul
[2004-05-21 10:44:36] - In other words, it seems like we should be technologically capable of cheaper gas prices than ever before, and yet the price is still what it used to be. - pierce
[2004-05-21 10:43:30] - Today, with this many drivers, we should only be paying the incremental cost of each barrel, since the one-time infrastructure cost is distributed over so many more people. - pierce
[2004-05-21 10:43:00] - paul: Don't forget that cars today are more fuel-efficient on average than cars back in the 80's - aaron
[2004-05-21 10:42:51] - Does anyone else see a lot of fallacious reasoning there? Gas prices today are (adjusted for inflation) roughly where they were in 1950. But what it's ignoring is that in 1950, since there were fewer cars each person was paying more of the initial infrastructure cost for getting oil. - pierce
[2004-05-21 10:34:49] - http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2004/05/20/sky_high_gas_prices_not_really/ Sky-high gas prices? Not really -Paul
[2004-05-21 10:31:02] - vinnie: Yeah, the other day I was writing an email using the phrase "air on the side of caution" and I was like - wait a minute... does that make sense? I had never written the phrase down so I couldn't decide if it should be air, err, herr, heir, etc... - aaron
[2004-05-21 10:29:50] - Area man named Honeycutt! - vinnie
[2004-05-21 10:28:54] - In related news, man has been delivering pizza for 20 years! -Paul
[2004-05-21 10:28:10] - http://www.wave3.com/Global/story.asp?S=1877208&nav=0RZFNDof Pizza Hut has a company policy prohibiting delivery people from carrying weapons. -paul
[2004-05-21 10:26:47] - paul: does that make it any less funny? no ^_^ -dave
[2004-05-21 10:26:03] - aaron: ? I remember "aaron" and "air in" but not that one - vinnie
[2004-05-21 10:25:25] - Dave: It was halfway intentional.
-Paul[2004-05-21 10:25:02] - Vinnie: I didn't necessarily prove your point, just proved half of it.
-Paul[2004-05-21 10:25:02] - Paul: hehe, that's hilarious -dave
[2004-05-21 10:24:31] - vinnie: Better than mixing up "air" and "err" - aaron
[2004-05-21 10:24:12] - paul: hahaha, you proved my point. you just dropped one word and a letter from something dave said 10 posts back - vinnie
[2004-05-21 10:23:48] - Vinnie: Did Lisa see Van Helsing with you two? -Paul
[2004-05-21 10:22:50] - Vinnie: No, just you.
-Paul[2004-05-21 10:22:04] - Ack! I almost never mix up "to" and "too"! I'm so disappointed in myself. - pierce
[2004-05-21 10:21:54] - I swear, the only time we ever say anything original (something that's not a quote from something or a variation of a quote) is when we're drunk - vinnie
[2004-05-21 10:21:31] - Vinnie: heh, I guess that's an exception to. Actually, I can't say I'd really mind any movie opening weekend at Cinema De Lux. It's so huge that I'm rarely irritated by other people. - pierce
[2004-05-21 10:20:52] - and dave's theory's right - vinnie
[2004-05-21 10:20:21] - haha, I saw van helsing with pierce on opening weekend, so your theory's blown - vinnie
[2004-05-21 10:20:17] - what happens in a month? ~a
[2004-05-21 10:20:05] -
-Paul[2004-05-21 10:20:03] - Paul: I do for overhyped movies or movies that are guaranteed to have super-devoted fans, since it's always crowded and annoying. But since Shrek is a kids' movie, and we went fairly late on a school night, it was fine. - pierce
[2004-05-21 10:19:19] - Paul: not us, just you
-dave[2004-05-21 10:19:04] - Paul: it came out on wed I believe -dave
[2004-05-21 10:18:54] - Pierce: Or is that only with us? -Paul
[2004-05-21 10:18:40] - Pierce: Cool, I didn't know it was out yet. I thought you hated seeing movies the week they come out.
-Paul[2004-05-21 10:18:05] - Paul: no, Buckfutter
-dave[2004-05-21 10:17:52] - Paul: I don't know what that's from, but I feel like I should. - pierce
[2004-05-21 10:17:39] - shit, that should've had *spoiler* in front of it - vinnie
[2004-05-21 10:17:24] - Paul: yeah, last night. - pierce
[2004-05-21 10:17:22] - Pierce: Too rock, PH, too rock.
-Paul[2004-05-21 10:17:14] - vinnie: NOOOO, you've ruined it now, HEHE -dave
[2004-05-21 10:17:08] - Dave: Fokker?
-Paul[2004-05-21 10:17:00] - Paul: dammit! you beat me to it. - pierce
[2004-05-21 10:16:53] - Pierce: You saw it already? I'm planning on seeing it this weekend. -Paul
[2004-05-21 10:16:46] - paul: least he doesn't have that amusing last name ^_^ -dave
[2004-05-21 10:16:42] - Vinnie: your brother had better hope he never gets engaged to Robert De Nero's daughter. - pierce
[2004-05-21 10:16:40] - Jesus says to all the little children of the world, "I'll never be gone as long as you remember me." Then he gets in his rocket and takes off for the North Pole. The end. - vinnie
[2004-05-21 10:16:19] - Vinnie: Oh man, he's so lucky.
Although I wonder if he gets a lot of jokes like Meet The Parents. -Paul[2004-05-21 10:15:56] - paul: professional pimp, HEHE -dave
[2004-05-21 10:15:50] - Speaking of fairy tale endings, Shrek 2 was really friggin good. - pierce
[2004-05-21 10:15:40] - Dave: Well, that was the thing, I had mentioned off-hand "when X dies" just assuming he knew that of course that person was going to die because that's a big part of the Illiad, but then the guy said he didn't know that and never read the Illiad and I felt like a fool. -Paul
[2004-05-21 10:15:38] - paul: nursing - vinnie
[2004-05-21 10:15:31] - vinnie: I don't wanna know! I haven't seen it yet! ^_^ -dave
[2004-05-21 10:15:13] - Vinnie: Jesus lives happily ever after? - pierce
[2004-05-21 10:15:08] - if you read action or military fiction novels, jinks is used a lot, like a fighter pilot evading someone -dave
[2004-05-21 10:14:46] - Vinnie: I really envy your brother. What does he do? -Paul
[2004-05-21 10:14:44] - dave: haha, yeah. should I spoil the ending of passion of the christ? - vinnie
[2004-05-21 10:14:20] - Pierce: Chloe and Lana are always reading way too much into everything Clark does and over-reacting though. Not too different from real life
-Paul[2004-05-21 10:13:41] - paul: that's not half so bad though, since most people know who dies in that story anyways ^_^ -dave
[2004-05-21 10:13:08] - vinnie: jinks - A quick, evasive turn. -dave
[2004-05-21 10:13:06] - dave: that's one of those things that I would guess really depends on your background. we're all in high male:female ratio fields. my brother, for example, is in a low male:female ratio field, so he can relate to smallville
- vinnie[2004-05-21 10:12:52] - Vinnie: or is that "jinkies"? - pierce
[2004-05-21 10:12:46] - Pierce: Whoops.
I've been pretty bad with that this week, including telling somebody who dies in Troy before they saw it. 
-Paul[2004-05-21 10:12:40] - Vinnie: are they the things you can't see without your glasses? - pierce
[2004-05-21 10:11:27] - what the hell are "jinks"? - vinnie
[2004-05-21 10:11:15] - dave: ooooh. wait... TV-land isn't real? - pierce
[2004-05-21 10:11:12] - "high jinks" is correct? - vinnie
[2004-05-21 10:11:00] - Angel is almost all guys in S5 - vinnie
[2004-05-21 10:10:54] - Dave: yes, "hijinks" or "high jinks". - pierce
[2004-05-21 10:10:47] - a: actually, no ^_^ -dave
[2004-05-21 10:10:38] - pierce: actually, I meant more in RL than in TV-land -dave
[2004-05-21 10:10:26] - Angel has more guys typically, from what I've seen. - pierce
[2004-05-21 10:10:16] - dave: so you set the title to "one month"? ~a
[2004-05-21 10:10:06] - hmm, is that spelled hijinks? -dave
[2004-05-21 10:09:58] - Dave: Firefly is almost 50-50. - pierce
[2004-05-21 10:09:45] - mig: Sweeeet - aaron
[2004-05-21 10:09:17] - Dave: empirically, Buffy is more girls than guys most of the time. - pierce
[2004-05-21 10:08:34] - you know what's amusing? In my experience it usually seems like the situation is 1 girl and a buncha guys with hyjinx ensuing, smallville is two girls and 1 guy. I wonder which is more common? -dave
[2004-05-21 10:08:16] - pierce: I've think most of us have seen that episode, plus, I don't plan on going back to watch S1. I've completely given up on the show - vinnie
[2004-05-21 10:08:05] - Paul: yeah, I didn't like the way they did that, because it kinda implied that Clark was "choosing" between Chloe and Lana. But It's not really a choice, because "being ditched at prom" < "DEATH" - pierce
[2004-05-21 10:07:21] - paul: yeah, that's the chloe that I know - haven't seen much else -dave
[2004-05-21 10:07:02] - Paul: you know, for people who haven't seen S1 that was a pretty bad spoiler. - pierce
[2004-05-21 10:06:56] - just heard on the radio. family guy is now officially coming back in june 2005. - mig
[2004-05-21 10:06:21] - pierce: ironically no, because they're doing it back to her since she did it to them in the first place. That isn't necessarily true of just backstabbing ^_^ -dave
[2004-05-21 10:06:03] - Pierce: Ok, yeah, I don't know what happens later in the series, I'm just remembering her getting dumped by Clark at the prom so he could save Lana. Poor Chloe.
-Paul[2004-05-21 10:05:55] - like she's always have that winning smile and then say something very caustic and spiteful like she's pulling the chair out. it really makes me dislike her character - vinnie
[2004-05-21 10:05:43] - pierce: yeah, I have no clue since I haven't watched it in awhile -dave
[2004-05-21 10:05:34] - Dave: "Backstab her back"? Isn't that redundant?
- pierce[2004-05-21 10:05:27] - a: you'll know in a month ^_^ -dave
[2004-05-21 10:04:52] - vinnie: it's because they want to lure her into thinking they are her friends so they can backstab her back later ^_^ -dave
[2004-05-21 10:04:45] - vinnie: okay, she's not a backstabber at all in S1. That's where the confusion is. - pierce
[2004-05-21 10:04:40] - no, I agree that sarcastic and nice aren't mutually exclusive (I think most of us pull it off well), but that it's hard to do and chloe ain't doin' it
- vinnie[2004-05-21 10:03:41] - everybody: who keeps setting that "one month" title and what the heck does it mean? ~a
[2004-05-21 10:03:14] - I don't think chloe seems nice but it might just be because of all the shit she's done in the latest season. the perfect example of a backstabber. and yet they stay friends with her! - vinnie
[2004-05-21 10:02:50] - Dave: Not like me.
-Paul[2004-05-21 10:02:44] - Vinnie: No, she was sarcastic, but it didn't seem to be in a mean-spirited way. -Paul
[2004-05-21 10:02:20] - pierce: we're nearly done with first season - vinnie
[2004-05-21 10:02:04] - dave: no, just me. I alone know how Angel ends
- vinnie[2004-05-21 10:01:44] - vinnie: I think someone can be sarcastic and nice if they do it right -dave
[2004-05-21 10:01:30] - Vinnie: ooh, speaking of which, how are you guys coming along on Angel? - pierce
[2004-05-21 10:01:27] - maybe her character's changed though. maybe she was nice in first season, I which I haven't seen - vinnie
[2004-05-21 10:01:20] - vinnie: she's been introduced to everyone but Pierce eh?
-dave[2004-05-21 10:01:04] - Vinnie: even though she's really sarcastic, she seems nice because she has such a perky, cheerful smile. - pierce
[2004-05-21 10:00:40] - introduced to you, I meant - vinnie
[2004-05-21 10:00:28] - pierce: well, there's one on angel that probably hasn't been introduced yet - vinnie
[2004-05-21 10:00:17] - And don't say Lisa Simpson. - pierce
[2004-05-21 10:00:00] - vinnie: yeah, knowing someone awhile really does affect even the perception of physical attractiveness -dave
[2004-05-21 09:59:51] - this is the same chloe we're both talking about?
she's so sarcastic - vinnie[2004-05-21 09:59:45] - What other "geek girl" characters are there? - pierce
[2004-05-21 09:59:06] - Chloe was really attractive on the Smallville episodes I saw. I think a lot of it also had to do with her character. Even though she was occasionally bitchy, she was usually really nice. -Paul
[2004-05-21 09:55:57] - in the long term - vinnie
[2004-05-21 09:55:37] - dave: precisely. to me, they really are separate, although they can affect one another - vinnie
[2004-05-21 09:55:02] - dave: your use of "either" made me think you had seen my post
- vinnie[2004-05-21 09:54:50] - Paul: having to know personality to gauge physical beaty doesn't make sense in any case, not just actresses methinks -dave
[2004-05-21 09:54:42] - Vinnie: she's smart, she has a geeky sense of humor... she may be less geeky than the other two examples, but she's definitely the geek girl on smallville. Especially when contrasted with Lana. - pierce
[2004-05-21 09:54:12] - vinnie: oops, didn't see your post in time -dave
[2004-05-21 09:53:04] - vinnie: chloe on smallville really isn't that much of a geek either if I remember correctly, tho she'd be the one to fall into that category over the others in smallville -dave
[2004-05-21 09:52:27] - Dave: You come up here.
Maybe that it, then, I have trouble gauging beauty without first getting an idea of what kind of personality they have. But that doesn't make sense for actresses. -Paul[2004-05-21 09:52:03] - I wouldn't call chloe a geek (though I don't know what other broad stereotype she falls into) - vinnie
[2004-05-21 09:51:24] - but for some reason zoe really jumped out at me. some mix of elements I hadn't seen before - vinnie
[2004-05-21 09:50:56] - there wasn't really anyone I disliked on firefly, actually. joss did a great job - vinnie
[2004-05-21 09:49:13] - paul: I suppose people's looks do vary a bit from day to day tho, so I guess some sort of avg would work better -dave
[2004-05-21 09:48:59] - paul: well, what kind of beauty are we talking about? you're saying purely physical? for me, I can say I have certain things I look for that I usually spot immediately, but then my definition can be appended to by even a single person (in this case, gina) - vinnie
[2004-05-21 09:48:14] - Vinnie: but then again, that might be another example of me being affected by the character; Kaylee was the "geek girl" character on Firefly, and I can never resist the "geek girl" character (Willow from Buffy, Chloe from Smallville, etc). - pierce
[2004-05-21 09:47:57] - paul: most interesting, I would think you could peg a person's physical attractiveness at first glance. Usually people "grow" on you because you get to know their personality better -dave
[2004-05-21 09:46:52] - paul: bring it down here, I'll watch it with you
-dave[2004-05-21 09:46:33] - Vinnie: Yeah, losing the weight would bring out some more of Jewel Staite's "traditional" beauty, but she's still got too much of a "girl-next-door" face to be described that way, IMO. And frankly, I think Joss was spot-on when he told her to gain weight for the role... I imagine I wouldn't find her as attractive without it. - pierce
[2004-05-21 09:45:41] - Vinnie: *Sigh* I guess I'll be watching it alone then.
-Paul[2004-05-21 09:45:32] - mig: hmm, it is odd that it will not work like that, I think that my coworker got it to work without associating a windows partition with it, but that was in SuSE, not mandrake. Unfortunately he has since left the company. -Ricky
[2004-05-21 09:45:16] - Vinnie: I must be somewhat different from you, because I often have a hard time judging how good somebody looks until I've seen them for awhile. So a lot of people's beauty 'grows' on me. -Paul
[2004-05-21 09:45:10] - paul: we've all seen it! I'm not sure who's left to watch - vinnie
[2004-05-21 09:44:55] - in fact, I think I started conflating the looks with the character. kind of like how it's hard to judge the looks of your friends - vinnie
[2004-05-21 09:43:59] - Vinnie: Nope.
Still waiting for somebody to watch it with me. -Paul[2004-05-21 09:43:47] - oh really? I don't care for her character on 24, but I loved zoe in firefly - vinnie
[2004-05-21 09:42:53] - jewel is also pretty non-traditional, but I think she could look stunning if she lost the weight she was intentionally told to gain her the show - vinnie
[2004-05-21 09:42:31] - Vinnie: I don't know, my impression of her looks might be affected by the fact that I greatly dislike both of the characters I've seen her play. - pierce
[2004-05-21 09:42:02] - vinnie: yeah, i don't really like gina torres, any of the other females on Firefly are better and only morena baccarin really falls into the traditional hollywood beauty category - travis
[2004-05-21 09:41:43] - I didn't like gina at all when I first saw her, but her looks really grew on me. it's rare that that happens to me so I feel like calling attention to it when it happens - vinnie
[2004-05-21 09:40:53] - Vinnie: remind me that I have your tape and Futurama S3 with me today. - pierce
[2004-05-21 09:40:34] - Vinnie: I actually don't like gina torres all that much. If I were going to pick a nontraditional beauty from Firefly, I'd pick Jewel Staite. - pierce
[2004-05-21 09:39:33] - ricky: yeah that's not going to work to well. the dlls in there are set up as linux libraries so wine's not going to be able to work with any windows libraries you copy there. - mig
[2004-05-21 09:38:48] - paul: haha, and you own firefly. still haven't seen it, I guess - vinnie
[2004-05-21 09:38:20] - what makes no sense to me is why registration of a dll requires display drivers like X11drv-Ricky
[2004-05-21 09:37:52] - Vinnie: I don't know Gina Torres, but I think I know what you're talking about. She definitely has a very different type of attractiveness. Not the typical hollywood beauty. -Paul
[2004-05-21 09:36:51] - too many stunning actresses in hollywood, is what I meant to say - vinnie
[2004-05-21 09:35:41] - I like actresses like selma blair because there seem to be too many stunning ones. a very understated charm (like gina torres of 24 and firefly) - vinnie
[2004-05-21 09:35:11] - I tried putting the file I wish to register into usr/lib/wine and registering it there and I get the same error -Ricky
[2004-05-21 09:31:57] - Dave: Yeah, I was just about to say that her looks weren't anything spectacular, but she managed to portray an attractive kind of personality nonetheless. -Paul
[2004-05-21 09:31:47] - ricky: from my understanding of how wine works, yes, wine can't use the actual windows dlls without a working win32 partition. - mig
[2004-05-21 09:30:05] - Paul: Yeah, she's more like an actress that has "character" than an actress that is just good looking -dave
[2004-05-21 09:28:59] - mig: Wine can't use windows dlls correctly without relying upon a windows partition? -Ricky
[2004-05-21 09:27:35] - Dave: Yeah, I guess she was pretty good looking in Hellboy. Nothing spectacular, though. -Paul
[2004-05-21 09:27:34] - oh, that's not the actual libraries they use. the libraries that are used are in /usr/lib/wine. the ones in the fake windows partition are just there to mimic the windows file structure. - mig
[2004-05-21 09:27:15] - well, I have a working windows partition on this system, but we are trying to get away from needing windows installed so that when we sell these systems they only need to be shipped with linux on board -Ricky
[2004-05-21 09:25:09] - mandrake 9.2 -Ricky
[2004-05-21 09:24:55] - basically it created the fake_windows/Windows/System directory with a bunch of dll files which are all 0 bytes except the ones I replaced - Ricky
[2004-05-21 09:23:41] - ricky: what distro is this on? the wine binaries and the wine libraries may be in different packages and you might have the wine runtime libraries installed. i know they are separate packages in debian. - mig
[2004-05-21 09:21:53] - Paul: Did you like Selma Blair in Hellboy? -dave
[2004-05-21 09:21:23] - Paul: I declare you an inferior fan
-dave[2004-05-21 09:21:23] - ricky: i don't think just copying them over will work, i think you've got to actually have a working windows partition for wine to use the windows dll's properly. - mig
[2004-05-21 09:20:04] - Dave: I never said that, I just said I don't equate giving money with dedication.
-Paul[2004-05-21 09:19:10] - Pierce: Not a big fan of Selma Blair, but this is all going off of Cruel Intentions. -Paul
[2004-05-21 09:18:16] - I am trying to use the emulated ones that wine came with, but for some reason those files all seem to be 0bytes when I get file info for them. IT complained about some so I copied in ones from a windows installation to replace those. -Ricky
[2004-05-21 09:17:22] - i didn't think selma looked that great in that movie, but she was good looking in Hellboy and on Zoe, Duncan, Jack & Jane - travis
[2004-05-21 09:16:55] - paul: you don't equate seeing an actress' movies with level of dedication? -dave
prev <-> next