prev <-> next
[2004-09-29 11:04:09] - On second read, you did recognize that the two things had to be combined. - pierce
[2004-09-29 11:03:19] - Paul: and as I said before, even if that were true, which I don't believe, it's miles away from the decision to allow any private enterprise access to all of our personal information in the name of protecting us. Which is what the pizza ordering blog entry was referring to. - pierce
[2004-09-29 11:02:04] - But neither of those amounts to identifying individuals for the purpose of protecting them from themselves. - pierce
[2004-09-29 11:01:52] - Paul: you're confusing the two aspects of the argument here. Protecting people from their own mistakes is something that's done, but done as a blanket policy for an undifferentiated subset of society. Protecting the common welfare sometimes takes the form of identifying individuals. - pierce
[2004-09-29 11:00:56] - Pierce: Maybe not in eleven years, but I think it's likely within 20 or so. Not because we voluntarily give up this information to private enterprises, but because the government mandates it as necessary for security and common good reasons. -Paul
[2004-09-29 10:59:15] - And so I don't think it's a huge leap to combine the two and say that the government could prevent people with high body weight from buying certain foods in the future. -Paul
[2004-09-29 10:58:45] - Pierce: No, but we have said that people who have been convicted of violent crimes can't have guns (collecting data on people and limiting their future actions based on past events) and we have a history of limiting what people can do to save them from making choices which harm themselves. -Paul
[2004-09-29 10:58:24] - Therefore, I don't see it as even close to realistic to think that, in eleven years, we'll have decided to allow all private enterprises access to all of our personal information, solely on the expectation that they'll use it to protect our interests. - pierce
[2004-09-29 10:56:34] - But listen, I agree that it's a grey area, but I think it's only grey because drugs are harmful to both the individual and society. Being a fatass, on the other hand, is only harmful to oneself (barring medical support costs, but there's not a significant argument that I've seen that uses that to justify prohibition of anything). - pierce
[2004-09-29 10:54:21] - I think a lot of people believe in the latter, but IMO it hasn't been the primary foundation of prohibitionary arguments. - pierce
[2004-09-29 10:53:48] - It seems like the legislative arguments against drugs have centered around the increased criminal activity that they claim is associated with drug use, rather than as a charitable protection of individuals from their own mistakes. - pierce
[2004-09-29 10:52:42] - In other words, those measures were applied to the whole of society for the "benefit" of the whole of society. (whether you agree or disagree that it's a benefit, or that the benefit is worth the cost to freedom, is a different story) - pierce
[2004-09-29 10:51:35] - Paul: but notably, the prohibition of drugs and alcohol were all-inclusive. It's not like they said "Joe Blow, Jane Doe, and John Public are prohibited from drinking because they were convicted of violent crimes in the past; all people must identify themselves when they buy alcohol to filter out those individuals." - pierce
[2004-09-29 10:44:24] - Vinnie: Really? Most of the time you seem like an independent third party. -Paul
[2004-09-29 10:39:00] - paul: I align with you sometimes... more on ideals than implementations. but I agree with pierce more of the time - vinnie
[2004-09-29 10:38:19] - Vinnie: Would be great if that was the title.
-Paul[2004-09-29 10:37:23] - paul: hah, "Spaceballs II: The Search for More Money" indeed - vinnie
[2004-09-29 10:36:24] - Vinnie: It's not that frightening, is it? We're usually on the same wavelength on topics not related to gender relations, aren't we? -Paul
[2004-09-29 10:36:07] - I meant the drugs thing is already more strict than the pizza thing, in a way - vinnie
[2004-09-29 10:35:39] - http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,595093852,00.html I can't, I'm a mormon. -Paul
[2004-09-29 10:35:08] - hah, paul and vinnie on same wavelength for once - vinnie
[2004-09-29 10:35:08] - http://comingsoon.net/news.php?id=6547 New Spaceballs in the works? -Paul
[2004-09-29 10:34:43] - pierce: but there are things the govt does to protect you from yourself. like not allowing anyone to have illegal drugs. not allowing anyone to have pizza is to me just an extension of this, although strangely enough more strict because no one can have illegal drugs - vinnie
[2004-09-29 10:34:23] - Pierce: And is that why the government banned alcohol for a period of time? Is that why drugs are illegal? -Paul
[2004-09-29 10:31:10] - http://www.1069therock.com/script/headline_newsmanager.php?id=352250&pagecontent=musicnewsrockmain&feed_id=22 Kiss Singer Against Marriage -Paul
[2004-09-29 10:27:21] - Paul: protecting people from anonymous crazies with guns is a protection of the "common welfare". Protecting you from your own fat ass, or your own blackened lungs, is a protection of your individual welfare. That's the difference. - pierce
[2004-09-28 18:09:32] - Pierce: How does stuff like preventing obesity and stopping people from overdrawing their bank accounts not fall under "the common welfare of society" like you say? -Paul
[2004-09-28 18:03:09] - Pierce: And ten years from now somebody just like you could be touting how the National ID has helped reduce obesity and that is a Good Thing.
-Paul[2004-09-28 18:00:02] - Basically, the things you have complained about so far require SSNs for real, practical reasons that are intended to (and usually) benefit the common welfare of society. - pierce
[2004-09-28 17:59:13] - We can associate guns with people, which you may disagree with but I'd bet most people consider a Good Thing, since it makes practical ballistic forensics possible. - pierce
[2004-09-28 17:56:32] - We can also associate vehicles with people, and increase accountability for obedience of traffic laws. - pierce
[2004-09-28 17:56:27] - Paul: suddenly? SSNs have been around for a long time now, and the entire computing industry has evolved since then. We're now able to do a lot of things that we couldn't before, including safe financial transactions with any sort of real efficiency. - pierce
[2004-09-28 17:10:40] - Pierce: America got by just fine before SSNs, why do we suddenly need them now? -Paul
[2004-09-28 17:10:09] - Okay, I really have to go to the grocery store. Adios. - pierce
[2004-09-28 17:09:48] - And that's a prerequisite to the hypothetical conversation mig linked to. - pierce
[2004-09-28 17:09:29] - Paul: but you're not showing that we have to provide SSNs in cases where there's not a good reason for it. - pierce
[2004-09-28 17:08:52] - Paul: what about things like credit cards? You don't think they should be able to uniquely identify you? - pierce
[2004-09-28 17:08:29] - I'm just saying I think it's perfectly reasonable to say that within 10 years, we might be having such a conversation when we order a pizza. -Paul
[2004-09-28 17:08:01] - Pierce: But I think we're arguing different things here. I'm not saying we're already at the point of having to provide our SSN all the time and I'm not saying it makes sense. -Paul
[2004-09-28 17:07:21] - Pierce: How about any commercial interaction at all? None of them should require an SSN. -Paul
[2004-09-28 17:06:32] - Pierce: Right, I'm not debating that there is a difference between flying and buying a pizza, just that I don't think the difference is big enough that people don't mind one but would be outraged at the other. -Paul
[2004-09-28 17:06:10] - Paul: name some commercial interactions that you do "all the time" that require an SSN, that don't have a good reason to require such a unique identifier. - pierce
[2004-09-28 17:05:46] - I don't think it's a crazy stretch to say that the government could take it upon itself to track what you buy and not let you buy 20 Big Macs in a week or something. -Paul
[2004-09-28 17:05:09] - Pierce: I'm not necessarily speaking out against it here, I'm just saying that things are in place for this pizza scenario to easily become a reality in the not-so-distant future. People are already used to giving their SSN all the time, providing picture IDs, having their shopping habits tracked by companies, etc. -Paul
[2004-09-28 17:04:20] - Paul: the collection of flight information is because flying makes you a potential threat to the common safety (whether that threat is exaggerated is a different story). Buying a pizza makes you a threat to only yourself. - pierce
[2004-09-28 17:01:56] - Paul: "something that grocery stores already do"... not from government mandate, they don't. If you have a beef with all unique idenfication, then say so. But that's not solely a function of government legislation. - pierce
[2004-09-28 17:00:41] - Paul: no, that's no precedent. Checking for age is not comparable with uniquely identifying you. It's just simplicity that we don't have a separate "Age verification" ID from our "Unique identifier" IDs. - pierce
[2004-09-28 16:59:44] - Pierce: The point is that the public is already getting used to talk about the government collecting information about us for flight security, so what's the big jump from that to collecting information about our shopping habits (something that most grocery stores already do)? -Paul
[2004-09-28 16:58:32] - Pierce: Not yet, but you have to provide a picture ID (I know it's for age verification but the precedent is there). -Paul
[2004-09-28 16:58:03] - Vinnie: I disagree, it's not McDonald's responsibility to check your blood pressure any more than it's Marlboro's responsibility to see if you've had lung cancer, and I think the courts will show that. These industries are being attacked for false representations of their products, as far as I understand it. - pierce
[2004-09-28 16:55:31] - I guess I should append that to industries in which the "seller" needs a unique identifier for you in order to have any level of commercial safety. Pizza places don't qualify. And as I said before, even those industries are (usually) legally limited to relevant information derived from your ID. - pierce
[2004-09-28 16:53:47] - pierce: I actually agree with paguel here. maybe a little further than 10 years but as soon we get more high-profile suits against Big Fast Food I wouldn't be surprised to see the govt step in in this way - vinnie
[2004-09-28 16:53:38] - Paul: it's still expanding, but only into areas where there's a proveable threat to the common safety. Driving or flying a piece of heavy machinery, owning a gun, etc. As much as the government restricts smoking, you don't have to provide your SSN to buy cigarettes, do you? - pierce
[2004-09-28 16:51:41] - Pierce: It seems like we agree that the SSN is a de facto national ID, and that it's scope has been expanding, so I guess I wonder why YOU think it's going to stop before reaching the pizza place level of privacy intrusion. -Paul
[2004-09-28 16:50:46] - Pierce: I know you're gone but I want to get in the last word.
My point is that the scope of the SSN has expanded in the past and is still expanding and therefore could easily expand into the national ID thing that Miguel's pizza article mentioned. -Paul[2004-09-28 16:50:07] - pierce: you do realize that nowhere in that blog entry does it say pizza place's do this now. just that in 10 or so odd years, the possibility things could get orwellian enough that they might - mig
[2004-09-28 16:47:54] - Okay, I'm going to the grocery store. - pierce
[2004-09-28 16:47:10] - Paul: you've already said that the scope of the SSN has expanded. So the "narrow scope" argument doesn't apply to the SSN as much as you think it does. It is a de facto and de jure national ID right now, whether it's formally named that or not. - pierce
[2004-09-28 16:45:43] - Not to mention that there is a difference between the government requiring your SSN for something, and a pizza place requiring your SSN for something. The difference doesn't always make a difference, but usually it does. - pierce
[2004-09-28 16:45:00] - Pierce: Because SSNs have a much narrower scope than a potential national ID. -Paul
[2004-09-28 16:44:33] - Pierce: We're just talking about a name change here? Well, then I'm talking about something completely different, because a name change alone doesn't make a bit of difference. -Paul
[2004-09-28 16:44:24] - Paul: that same argument can be applied to SSNs right now, but we don't require people to provide their SSN to buy pizza now. - pierce
[2004-09-28 16:43:49] - pierce: no but thanks - vinnie
[2004-09-28 16:43:37] - Vinnie: Except I don't think Adrian was trying to be funny
-Paul[2004-09-28 16:43:21] - Or do you want to come to the grocery store? - pierce
[2004-09-28 16:43:01] - For a national ID number to be useful, it would have to be mandatory for people to provide it when doing things the government thinks is worth knowing. It might start with little things like flying or buying a gun or purchasing alcohol. But I can't see many good reasons why it wouldn't be expanded to things like buying pizza. -Paul
[2004-09-28 16:42:40] - Vinnie: do you need anything at the grocery store? - pierce
[2004-09-28 16:41:45] - pierce: gah!!! - vinnie
[2004-09-28 16:41:43] - Paul: no, you don't understand. We already have a national ID. It's just not called that. So unless you think that the name change alone will cause this much more abuse, then you're not proving anything. - pierce
[2004-09-28 16:41:12] - paul: what's funny is what you just did is what others do when they point out the fallacies you already know and acknowledge *sigh*
- vinnie[2004-09-28 16:40:51] - Pierce: I know, that's why I'm saying that a national ID number would have a much greater scope than our current SSN almost by necessity. -paul
[2004-09-28 16:40:30] - Vinnie: Paul's right. The logical fallacy of the Brights article is obvious; "the majority of 'smart' people believe in god. ergo, people who believe in god are smarter than people who don't." It ignores the fact that more people believe in god overall, so you have to proportion the statistics. - pierce
[2004-09-28 16:40:09] - The government already clumsily tries to do that now, a national ID would just make it a helluva lot easier. -Paul
[2004-09-28 16:39:42] - Pierce: And if it gets to the point where american citizens have given the government the right to collect all this information about them, then I don't see why anybody would be squeamish about them using it to deny obese people certain foods or not let poor people buy beyond their means, etc. -Paul
[2004-09-28 16:37:58] - Paul: no one today questions the fact that the SSN is a "national ID number", and it has privacy protections accordingly. We're not magically going to decide that pizza delivery requires an identification number just because it's called the national ID rather than the social security number. - pierce
[2004-09-28 16:37:33] - Vinnie: That's what I thought, but I was just being safe... -Paul
[2004-09-28 16:37:09] - Pierce: Basically, the only reason to have something like a national ID when we already have a SSN would be so that the National ID could be used for more things than an SSN can. Medical information, security information, psychological information... -Paul
[2004-09-28 16:35:37] - paul: that was exactly my point
- vinnie[2004-09-28 16:35:35] - Pierce: But that's because the SSN was never intended to be used for anything other than verifying who you are. A national ID would almost certainly have farther reaching uses and would therefore become more widely used. -Paul
[2004-09-28 16:35:01] - pierce: http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-exc1.htm a ver good explanation of "the exception that proves the rule" - vinnie
[2004-09-28 16:34:32] - Vinnie: I think nobody is bothering because the entire point of me posting it was because it's so easy to pick apart. Of course, that hasn't stopped people from jumping on me in the past... -Paul
[2004-09-28 16:33:46] - a: If you don't see the reason why then I see no reason to spell it out.
-Paul[2004-09-28 16:31:30] - no one cares enough to pick apart paul's tongue-in-cheek article? this board is losing its touch
- vinnie[2004-09-28 16:30:19] - Yes, these laws are sometimes broken, sometimes have loopholes, and may not be as comprehensive as they should be. But they're there, and they show that this is not a problem that our government is completely ignoring/causing. - pierce
[2004-09-28 16:29:06] - Moreover, industries that currently need access to your SSN have legal controls over its usage. Your bank isn't allowed to use your SSN to check up on your library usage, for example. - pierce
[2004-09-28 16:28:01] - If a national ID was adopted, it would simply replace SSNs in the already existing applications, but it wouldn't expand to industries that don't require it. Pizza places don't need your SSN now, and they won't with a national ID. - pierce
[2004-09-28 16:27:36] - paul: i think the Brights are morons. ~a
[2004-09-28 16:27:24] - Paul: but SSNs expanded beyond their original scope because it is extremely advantageous for all sorts of enterprises (both gov't and private) to have a universal unique identifier for human beings. - pierce
[2004-09-28 16:26:37] - paul: why directed at me? ~a
[2004-09-28 16:23:05] - Now you can hardly do anything without providing your SSN. The driver's license is almost becoming a de facto national ID also (just has to get over that pesky state-issued deal). -Paul
[2004-09-28 16:21:12] - It's just like with the Social Security Number. Critics of it when it was first introduced were worried about it's potential as a national ID number and the proponents said that was pure nonesense and look what happened. -Paul
[2004-09-28 16:20:23] - Pierce: I think the point of that article was to show that whatever national ID policy is created, it's eventually going to expand beyond it's original scope. -Paul
[2004-09-28 16:19:38] - Pierce: Well, there is something to be said about life being one giant IQ test also.
-paul[2004-09-28 16:15:49] - Paul: education correlates more closely with economic status than IQ, from what I understand. I'm not saying it'd be easy to find out, but it'd be interesting to see. - pierce
[2004-09-28 16:14:55] - And while they're not perfect, there are laws protecting the privacy of our information. Not every government action has the effect of decreasing our privacy. - pierce
[2004-09-28 16:14:14] - Right now, pizza delivery places have exactly the amount of information I give them. When I pay by credit, they send the request to the credit company which has exactly the information I give them. And so on and so forth. - pierce
[2004-09-28 16:14:04] - mig: what was the purpose of the "pizza in 2015" article? I mean, there doesn't seem to be any shred of realism in anything in that blog entry. - pierce
[2004-09-28 16:10:39] - Pierce: It's hard to find information about the IQ of presidential supporters, but you can usually find stats about the education of the supporters of certain candidates pretty easily. -Paul
[2004-09-28 16:09:04] - http://www.beliefnet.com/story/132/story_13212_1.html Great article about how believers are more intelligent than atheists. And yes, this is most certainly tongue-in-cheek directed at Adrian. -Paul
[2004-09-28 16:08:17] - I'm not insinuating anything in particular, and I'm certainly not saying that "high IQ" directly translates into "better choice of presidential candidate", but it would be interesting to see it. - pierce
[2004-09-28 16:08:12] - Pierce: Wow, because I find Leno amusing most of the time whereas I find Conan to be amusing almost never. -Paul
[2004-09-28 16:07:27] - I would be interested in seeing statistics comparing presidential candidates to the average IQ of their supporters. - pierce
[2004-09-28 16:06:47] - Paul: I think a can of dehydrated beets would be funnier than Leno. And I think Conan is very funny. And I don't think a can of dehydrated beets would be very funny. So the answer to your question is yes. - pierce
[2004-09-28 15:56:19] - Pierce: You like Conan over Leno? -Paul
[2004-09-28 15:47:18] - aaron: that article was great! i wish it had given actual numbers though. it's nice to know that bush supporters are dumb, but i want to know how dumb. ~a
[2004-09-28 14:12:25] - Aaron: Oh, I know they probably weren't happy about it. But I was just saying that I can't imagine any of them saying they would be willing to play without one of their teammates when the other team is willing to forfeit. -Paul
[2004-09-28 14:09:09] - http://www.cnn.com/2004/SHOWBIZ/TV/09/28/tv.stewart.oreilly.ap/index.html Viewers of Jon Stewart's show are more likely to have completed four years of college than people who watch "The O'Reilly Factor," - aaron
[2004-09-28 14:04:59] - Paul: If they were that happy to win the game by default, there probably wouldn't have been an article written. - aaron
[2004-09-28 13:42:00] - a: You think some of them would've said "We're going to play the game without our teammate and risk the chance of getting a loss"?
-Paul[2004-09-28 13:40:06] - imo ~a
[2004-09-28 13:39:49] - mig: it's kind of cool that they unanimously decided to keep her in for the game. ~a
[2004-09-28 11:35:08] - http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/9744840.htm catholic school's football team refuses to play against a team that has a girl on it. goto bugmenot.com for a l/p. - mig
[2004-09-28 11:09:38] - http://www.census.gov/acs/www/SBasics/congress_toolkit/QandA.pdf oh boy i can't wait to get one of these "surveys"! - mig
[2004-09-28 09:38:54] - Are eggs native to mexico? I assumed they came from Turkey. Or maybe chizickenstan - aaron
[2004-09-28 09:26:07] - someone tell me why I'm obsessed with this picture http://www.alicantetiempolibre.com/conocenosweb/images/rancheros.gif - vinnie
[2004-09-28 09:02:11] - http://blog.lewrockwell.com/lewrw/archives/006101.html ordering a pizza in 2015... - mig
[2004-09-27 16:42:23] - I heard about that. it seems strange to plan that so far in advance (not because the reasoning isn't sound, but just because. 5 years!) - vinnie
[2004-09-27 16:11:46] - 2009? That's so long from now! I want Leno to retire nowwww... - pierce
[2004-09-27 16:01:43] - http://www.cnn.com/2004/SHOWBIZ/TV/09/27/leisure.leno.reut/index.html Leno retiring in 2009, to be replaced by o'brien -dave
[2004-09-27 14:44:33] - I'd think the equipment wouldn't even be properly designed to gauge a car going 600 mph. they could throw it out on that basis if true - vinnie
[2004-09-27 12:22:16] - In both cases, it seems like the equipment was definitely faulty (at least based on what the bike experts they quoted). If he fights it in court, i'll bet the ticket gets thrown out - aaron
[2004-09-27 12:21:18] - I read that article earlier today. I saw a similar article earlier this year about a guy getting issued a ticket for something like 600 mph in a car (well past the sound barrier) - aaron
[2004-09-27 12:20:30] - http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/internet/09/27/google.china.ap/index.html Google bows to chinese censorship - aaron
[2004-09-27 11:56:57] - http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/09/27/speeding.ticket.ap/index.html biker gets ticket...for going 205 mph. Skeptics abound -dave
[2004-09-27 11:41:47] - http://www.cnn.com/2004/HEALTH/09/27/health.sprawl.ap/index.html suburbs may be hazardous to your health? - aaron
[2004-09-26 11:43:12] - a: no particular reason. just curious. - pierce
[2004-09-26 10:53:06] - pierce: why? ~a
[2004-09-26 01:13:34] - pierce: no. ~a
[2004-09-25 00:25:39] - boing.com
[2004-09-24 19:12:29] - want ...... get out of home..... - mig
[2004-09-24 18:45:43] - want...go...home. - pierce
[2004-09-24 18:45:27] - fifteen minutes! - pierce
[2004-09-24 18:29:18] - a: do you have a robots.txt specified so that google won't index the "previous entries?" link? - pierce
[2004-09-24 17:07:48] - Travis: I'm flying in... I had to postpone my flight so I'm not getting in until 10:45pm or so. Then I'm going home. - pierce
[2004-09-24 14:03:48] - dave: usually scp (scp stands for secure copy; it uses the ssh protocol, so if you have an ssh server running, you can use scp). ~a
[2004-09-24 11:59:43] - travis: celebrating my brother's b'day with family. you are NOT allowed to come
- vinnie[2004-09-24 11:58:11] - dave/paul: broke my wrist three weeks ago playing basketball. saw doctor last fri, said it wasn't set properly and needed immediate surgery. that was done on tues. my thumb is swollen because the cast is tight but that's already gone down quite a bit - vinnie
[2004-09-24 11:56:46] - "I always liked the shampoo bottle where you twist my head off and pour liquid out of my neck. That's very Freudian," she said. "If I dreamed that, what would you think it meant?" - aaron
[2004-09-24 11:56:27] - http://www.cnn.com/2004/SHOWBIZ/Movies/09/21/demystifying.starwars.ap/index.html Fun star wars article. All old news but it's got some good anecdotes and quotes about the original films - aaron
[2004-09-24 11:20:33] - what cmd or cmds do I use to xfer a file from a unix sys I'm remotely connected to? -dave
[2004-09-24 11:03:03] - a: you have a sister, right?
- travis[2004-09-24 10:55:39] -
. . . i'm going to my parents house. do you want to come? ~a[2004-09-24 10:55:13] - travis: yes. ~a
[2004-09-24 10:17:21] - is anybody doing anything tonight? - travis
[2004-09-24 09:14:00] - pierce: Was he forgetting a JFrame.setCloseBehavior() call? - aaron
[2004-09-24 08:17:26] - - pierce
[2004-09-24 08:17:22] - a: he solved it
[2004-09-24 08:13:51] - mig: i've seen that before! do you have any jni? (not that i even know what caused my problem; but it's a thought) ~a
[2004-09-23 22:16:06] - That's the only thing that comes to mind without knowing the details of your program. - pierce
[2004-09-23 22:15:43] - do you have any listeners registered that may not have been removed, miguel? The garbage collector won't remove them (and won't terminate your process) unless you deregister them. - pierce
[2004-09-23 21:53:34] - does anyone know why a swing java app's process would continue to linger around even though i have closed the window it was using? - mig
[2004-09-23 20:09:20] - pierce: a) it was broken b) i made sure that i didn't send a referer header. ~a
[2004-09-23 18:00:48] - a: did you go to the link that that bot posted to my journal? - pierce
[2004-09-23 11:34:00] - dave: vinnie broke his arm playing basketball. he needed to get surgery. ~a
[2004-09-23 09:51:28] - Travis: Nice picture of Sue Storm.
-Paul[2004-09-23 09:49:33] - Vinnie: Yeah, when did this surgery happen? Last time I spoke to you it sounded like they thought the cast alone would be enough. -Paul
[2004-09-23 09:36:49] - vinnie: ack! surgery? what was wrong with your thumb? -dave
[2004-09-23 09:36:32] - http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/09/22/elderly.assault.ap/index.html jeez, 11 year old boy attempt to rape 76 year old woman -dave
[2004-09-22 21:41:32] - mig: thanks for asking. surgery went fine. my thumb is really fucking numb and swollen, but I called the doc and he said it's normal - vinnie
[2004-09-22 16:49:18] - Heh heh. I know what you mean. I think video game girls are less threatening because you don't need to worry what you're going to do if they like you back. - aaron
[2004-09-22 15:55:02] - http://www.penny-arcade.com/images/1999/19991015l.jpg why can i almost relate to this?
- travis[2004-09-22 14:41:57] - vinnie: so how'd the surgery go? - mig
[2004-09-22 14:09:36] - travis: was totally expecting a blank picture. also, julian mcmahon as dr. doom! - vinnie
[2004-09-22 09:26:46] - http://www.usatoday.com/life/movies/news/2004-09-20-fantastic4_x.htm pic of jessica alba as sue storm - travis
[2004-09-22 08:00:17] - and as the article points out, this disorganized, in-fighting iraq would probably take a long time before threatening its neighbors again -dave
[2004-09-22 07:59:14] - mig: I almost hope that we do leave, let the iraqis slaughter each other instead of killing us ^_^ -dave
[2004-09-21 13:00:36] - that us troops need to get out of iraq asap. - mig
[2004-09-21 12:51:00] - mig: what is the right thing? ~a
[2004-09-21 09:44:20] - http://www.suntimes.com/output/novak/cst-edt-novak20.html maybe there is hope whoever's president in november will do the right thing.... - mig
[2004-09-21 09:30:51] - http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/0920/p03s01-usju.html tobacco companies getting sued ... again. - mig
[2004-09-21 09:21:24] - http://news.com.com/Linux+group+rebuffs+Hollywood+piracy+charge/2100-1030-5374528.html?part=dht&tag=ntop seems that mpaa just does blind keyword searches to base their sending of "cease and desist" notices to web sites, without even bothering to verify the site actually is pirating anything. - mig
[2004-09-21 09:15:32] - http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A36880-2004Sep20.html Microsoft sharing source code of Office 2003 with 60 governments. -dave
[2004-09-21 09:13:41] - http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A36908-2004Sep20.html CBS's "unimpeachable" source surrounded by controversy -dave
[2004-09-21 09:00:08] - mig: yeah, that's very true -dave
[2004-09-21 08:47:21] - dave: there's a difference between saying, "Oh i think that Bush should have really done x instead of y" and saying "Bush is totally incompetent because he did x instead of y" - mig
[2004-09-21 08:30:36] - And besides, aren't there always people in both parties that disagree with their candidate? That doesn't necessarily mean that they would think of not supporting him. For example, many democrats support Kerry because they hate Bush, not necessarily because they agree with all of his policies. -dave
[2004-09-21 08:28:49] - so I'm not that surprised to see republicans disagree with Bush's stance, just like I wouldn't be surprised to see Democrats disagree with a Dem. president on similar issues -dave
[2004-09-21 08:28:05] - mig: I'm not so sure that the issue / decision that was being disagreed about is really something that is dictated by party lines though. Like what would the democratic stance be on whether to initiate a ground attack on insurgents now? So in other words, initating a ground attack on insurgets seems like a party-independent view/issue to me. -dave
[2004-09-21 08:23:16] - in an attempt to cause the public to believe the information was perhaps more unbiased than it was. -dave
[2004-09-21 08:22:36] - errr, I mean that potential wrong may have been the aide potentially leading to the release of the information without any public link to himself -dave
[2004-09-21 08:20:48] - I suppose that perhaps the "wrong" if there is any, is that the Kerry-camp may have wanted to release the news themselves...although is that something that one side or the other can do, release breaking news on the other candidate? -dave
[2004-09-21 08:15:23] - Assuming the Kerry aide didn't know that the "memos" were forged (assuming they were, which is not necessarily true), is it really that bad of a thing for a Kerry-aide to point out information that they think should be revealed? -dave
[2004-09-21 08:14:14] - http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/09/21/cbs.kerry.adviser/index.html Apparently a high-lvl Kerry aid put CBS in touch with a contact that had the "memos." -dave
[2004-09-20 10:12:54] - travis: wow that sounds horrible - vinnie
[2004-09-20 09:38:42] - http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0331933/ "Tommy lee jones stars as a Texas Ranger who must protect a group of cheerleaders of witnessed a murder" - travis
[2004-09-20 09:37:03] - As though dissention within a party was some sign of weakness. It was pretty funny to listen to though.... - aaron
[2004-09-20 09:36:21] - mig: It's good for the party though. I remember Limbaugh was always talking about how the Democrats didn't know what they were doing because they always criticized other democrats, and I was always thinking, "what?" - aaron
[2004-09-20 09:01:51] - http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20040919/ts_nm/iraq_usa_policy_dc_3 it's not a good sign when people from your own party call you incompetent. - mig
[2004-09-19 23:47:06] - http://michnews.com/artman/publish/article_5120.shtml lots of studies show that false accusations of rape are very commonplace. - mig
[2004-09-17 15:49:14] - travis: I'd like that clarification too. as is, I never use "parenthesis", which seems odd since it's far more common
- vinnie[2004-09-17 15:38:50] - http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=1883100 Geez, and they go and talk about how Kobe cheats on his wife with ANOTHER woman on a consistent basis... -Paul
[2004-09-17 15:33:57] - Travis: For a split second, I thought you were going to correct Mr. Black on the proper definition of meteorologist by quoting m-w.com.
-paul[2004-09-17 15:31:36] - vinnie: and since the word is spelled correctly in the article it must've been some webmaster who failed english who made the url
- travis[2004-09-17 15:29:51] - oh, i see, my bad, i misread it, they misspelled it like i originally did, but i'd still like clarification on whether my assumption about needing a plural form is correct - travis
[2004-09-17 15:29:06] - vinnie: actually, according to www.m-w.com, parentheses is the plural form of parenthesis even though parenthesis is "one or both of the curved marks", i guess parentheses is for multiple sets of parenthesis - travis
[2004-09-17 15:27:19] - paul: "Now, what's meteorologist mean in English. It means liar." - lewis black
[2004-09-17 15:19:12] - Why does the weather report say it's supposed to be storming all day and yet it seems like it's not raining at all right now? -Paul
[2004-09-17 14:22:19] - http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=1883158 Nets CEO says Kidd will probably not be traded -dave
[2004-09-17 14:10:03] - ironic that a website so devoted to correct English would misspell "parentheses" in the URL though - vinnie
[2004-09-17 14:08:41] - http://www.bewrite.net/community/tips/parantheses_brackets.htm - vinnie
[2004-09-17 14:07:11] - travis: I don't think parentheses are ever allowed in quotes. I've certainly never heard the convention of using them to add words - vinnie
[2004-09-17 13:20:44] - http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/09/16/chucky.hunt/index.html if life gives you dead chickens, make dead chicken-ade. I thought this was a pretty gross way of solving two problems - aaron
[2004-09-17 13:07:49] - hmmm, apparently montgomery county is under tornado watch -dave
[2004-09-17 13:04:31] - Travis: Good point, I never really noticed the difference between parenthesis and square brackets. No idea. -Paul
[2004-09-17 12:55:43] - travis: no idea -dave
[2004-09-17 12:54:29] - are paranthesis for adding stuff and square brackets for replacing stuff? like for paul's examples, i thought you were supposed to say "I told [Kobe] to take more shots" since you're replacing the actual words but i never really learned about adding words - travis
[2004-09-17 12:53:04] - dave: then they need to include the second "to" after "you" to satisfy my english grammar needs
- travis[2004-09-17 12:40:23] - http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/nation/columns/kurtzhoward/ Media notes. A lot of back and forth about the CBS memos and several other issues. A long compilation -dave
[2004-09-17 12:28:16] - Travis: my guess is it might have been "did she say anything to provoke this to happen" -dave
[2004-09-17 11:29:31] - Travis: There is probably some meteorological explanation for it, like the eye of the storm or something. Hey, yeah, maybe it's like the calm before the storm. -Paul
[2004-09-17 11:28:39] - Travis: I usually see those sentences with a name in there, like "I told (Kobe) to take more shots" and I assumed that they were replacing something like "him" with "Kobe" for more clarification. -Paul
[2004-09-17 11:21:00] - and why is that we've had rain every day this week and now the day ivan is closest we had no rain this morning? - travis
[2004-09-17 11:20:20] - i've always wondered what the original sentences sounded like when they have to insert words like "Did she say anything to (you) to provoke any of this to happen?" how did that sentence make sense without "you" in there to begin with? - travis
[2004-09-17 11:20:10] - paul: haha, I see -dave
[2004-09-17 11:16:53] - Dave: Because the first couple of times I read it, I thought they meant killing the authors.
-Paul[2004-09-17 11:09:35] - paul: why do you like that first quote you listed? I dont' get what's special about it -dave
[2004-09-17 11:02:06] - "No one with a detailed grasp of the tragic events would say that Kofi Annan or Shashi Tharoor were ccountable for them. In both cases, those primarily responsible were governments." Another good one. -Paul
[2004-09-17 11:00:54] - mig: "The U.N. also sent the authors letters of reprimand and says it still reserves the right to terminate the authors." I like that quote from the second part. -Paul
[2004-09-17 10:53:16] - mig: I doubt he will get charged for his actions, and I would tend to agree with that -dave
[2004-09-17 10:51:31] - mig: how interesting. I hadn't heard about that at all, which I find amusing since the author refers to "national uproar" -dave
[2004-09-17 10:42:19] - http://view.exacttarget.com/?feb81079726d0279-fe22117076650c7a701d77 kerry's recent brush with gun control laws. - mig
[2004-09-17 10:38:13] - Mig: I'm leaving for BBurg tomorrow, so I should be at basketball today (even if it's raining). -Paul
[2004-09-17 10:37:45] - http://schwinger.harvard.edu/~terning/Canadians/ and http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/List-of-famous-Jews -Paul
[2004-09-17 10:34:44] - paul: are you going to be at bball today or are you leaving for bburg tonight? - mig
[2004-09-17 10:26:19] - Paul: examples? -dave
[2004-09-17 09:37:30] - Dave: Barely related to your Australian actors point, I've come to the conclusion that the coolest people always seem to be either Jewish or Canadian. -Paul
[2004-09-17 07:58:02] - incidentally, the basic ordinary differential equation functions for Octave (GNU Matlab) are also written in Fortran -dave
[2004-09-17 07:57:16] - http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/internet/09/16/hurricane.supercomputers.ap/index.html Complex algorithms used to track hurricanes....written in Fortran, heh heh -dave
[2004-09-17 07:54:26] - I can't help wondering whether all these stunts that point out glaring security deficiencies is such a great thing. Although it does help authorities understand how bad security is, it also brings it to terrorist's attention as well -dave
[2004-09-17 07:53:24] - http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/europe/09/17/uk.parliament.security/index.html Fake bomb smuggled into British Parliament -dave
[2004-09-17 07:34:45] - Out of curiosity, it seems like we get a huge number of actors/actresses from Australia -dave
[2004-09-17 07:34:18] - http://entertainment.msn.com/music/article.aspx?news=168187 Kidman Australia's richest young woman -dave
[2004-09-17 07:27:54] - paul: yeah, it's amazing the interesting things you can do to make money if you have $25k in capital ^_^ -dave
[2004-09-16 22:59:37] - http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/state/article/0,1299,DRMN_21_3185596,00.html voluntary army, huh? - mig
[2004-09-16 20:59:30] - paul: "'Cause she started kissing me, (inaudible) then she bent over and (inaudible)," haha. something tells me it wasn't audibility, but instead it was the content. ~a
[2004-09-16 18:25:17] - http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=1882812 Smart guy. -Paul
[2004-09-16 18:23:39] - http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=1883094 Yup, Kobe isn't the victim of anything here at all. Nothing for him to be embarassed about. Nope, we should be spreading ALL this information about him and making sure everybody knows it's associated with KOBE BRYANT. -Paul
[2004-09-16 17:16:09] - Travis: You mean 'now' as in this part of the year? Or do you mean in recent years? -Paul
[2004-09-16 17:14:48] - Aaron: Oh, no problem. I had my headphones on so it didn't cause any problems. -Paul
[2004-09-16 17:12:41] - has anybody else noticed a higher number of squirrel bodies on the roads or am i just empathizing with them more now and hence notice them more? - travis
[2004-09-16 17:11:31] - sound effects remind me of hamster dance and happy tree friends, just the high squeaky nonsensical voices - travis
[2004-09-16 17:07:46] - paul: I don't have sound on! i'll have to check that out when i get home. I'm sorry - i didn't realize they had sound. I would have warned you if i knew - aaron
[2004-09-16 17:01:20] - Aaron: I like the sound effects in their video. -Paul
[2004-09-16 16:52:13] - http://www.yankeeflipper.com/droll/index.cfm coolest bird feeder ever - aaron
[2004-09-16 14:39:36] - Pierce: I could be wrong, but I don't think judicial review is a power given to the supreme court in the constituion. I know you said "de facto" but that doesn't have much bearing on the constitutionality of it. -Paul
[2004-09-16 14:20:36] - Pierce: I don't know what his constitutional object to driving without a license is so I can't tell you. I just gave you his reasons (to the best of my knowledge). -Paul
[2004-09-16 13:36:13] - Paul: additionally, we already have a branch of government devoted to resolving inconsistencies between the constitution and the law, de facto if not de jure. So why should the chief executor of the laws be able to pick and choose his own interpretation of consitutionality at the expense of his other presidential duties? - pierce
[2004-09-16 13:33:10] - Paul: you still haven't addressed the consitutionality of driving without a license, which Badnarik is also civilly disobedient of. And I don't see the president as solely a "national sheriff", but you can't deny that that is constitutionally part of his job description. - pierce
[2004-09-16 12:58:48] - http://badnarik.org/blog/blog_a.php?p=1163&more=1&c=1&tb=1&pb=1 I find it interesting that the state that the Free State Project chose to move to might end up being the only state in which Badnarik is not on the ballot. -Paul
[2004-09-16 12:24:46] - I guess what I'm saying is that it seems silly to rank a black person who is illegally protesting segregation as less fit to be president than the police officers who turned fire hoses on them just because the police officer followed the law. -Paul
prev <-> next