prev <-> next
[2006-09-27 11:11:11] - paul: yep. people don't understand numbers and how easy they are to misunderstand. ~a
[2006-09-27 11:10:10] - http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15018869/ Man with 10-year erection may not get his cash. -Paul
[2006-09-27 10:57:42] - a: Yeah, that's a pretty huge difference. They were expecting a big drop and instead get a big boost. -Paul
[2006-09-27 10:57:11] - http://www.slate.com/id/2150354/?GT1=8592 Interesting article about how numbers are used in medicine to try to sell drugs. It's an issue that's close to my heart.
-Paul[2006-09-27 10:55:21] - dave: so will TO go to a mental institution now? -sam
[2006-09-27 10:51:13] - "The gain was far better than the 3 percent decline economists had been expecting" ~a
[2006-09-27 10:49:35] - paul:
~a[2006-09-27 10:48:49] - http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/27/AR2006092700466.html New Home Sales Rise by 4.1 Percent. -Paul
[2006-09-27 10:36:35] - amy: I hope to be able to show up (it's practically in my own backyard, after all), but I won't know for sure until later tonight. -Paul
[2006-09-27 10:32:22] - http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/football/nfl/09/27/owens.report/index.html?cnn=yes TO attempts suicide by overdose on painkillers -dave
[2006-09-27 10:31:21] - here is the addres/phone number http://openmikes.org/listings/jimmysoldtowntavern -amy
[2006-09-27 10:31:13] - a and anyone else who wanted to see me play at open mic tonight: the place is called Jimmy's Old Town Tavern, it's in Herndon, I will be showing up at at 8.30-ish and open mike starts at 9-ish. -amy
[2006-09-27 09:38:35] - every morning at work i see the icon on my computer desktop that says "Shortcut to Internet" and i giggle - aaron
[2006-09-26 18:35:08] - fine. you convinced me. ~a
[2006-09-26 18:34:48] - ~a
[2006-09-26 18:34:46] - yeah, it's already dark.
[2006-09-26 18:33:33] - a: Heh, well, I think it's too late for me to go now so have fun without me.
-Paul[2006-09-26 18:31:41] - pushy. ~a
[2006-09-26 18:31:37] - paul: ugh. ok, fine! you convinced me. ~a
[2006-09-26 18:29:10] - paul: heh. i guess not. ~a
[2006-09-26 17:50:12] - a: Sounds like frisbee is on today, are you going? -Paul
[2006-09-26 15:38:41] - xpovos: unfortunately I'm not sure how much we could compare notes (other than profit %) since I exclusively do options now -dave
[2006-09-26 15:38:03] - amy: sure. ~a
[2006-09-26 15:37:32] - xpovos: ironically, many managed funds do worse than the spx over the longterm -dave
[2006-09-26 15:36:48] - xpovos: well, the best measure is that the SPX averages (over the longterm) 8.5-10% a year. So you can get that over the longterm with minimal managing fees -dave
[2006-09-26 15:20:00] - dave: We'll have to compare some notes next time we get together for poker. I need to do better on stocks, I know, but I really feel that I have a winning mutual fund strategy. It's averaged 9% a year for the past 5 years, and 12% last year, which was my most active. -- Xpovos
[2006-09-26 15:18:15] - a: still interested in gonig tomorrow? -amy
[2006-09-26 15:17:16] - xpovos: after moving mutual funds into broker, I also changed what I invested in, i'm much more risk-averse now that I have all my money there as opposed to before -dave
[2006-09-26 15:15:48] - xpovos: <nod> I did the same thing. I had most in mutual funds until I felt comfortable that I could beat them by myself, then moved everything to broker -dave
[2006-09-26 15:12:43] - dave: Interesting. I like my mutual funds for 'safe' investing. For me, the stocks I invest in are my high-growth high-risk options. This explains some why I've done poorly with those stocks, but well overall. I have a lot more money in my mutual funds. -- Xpovos
[2006-09-26 15:05:15] - a: gave me a healthy feel for how much risk I was taking. Now I'm a lot more risk-averse. Mostly play indices now. Stocks are more situational only for me now, instead of every-month things -dave
[2006-09-26 14:53:44] - amy: gah. paul has reminded me that today != tomorrow. ~a
[2006-09-26 14:47:39] - Paul: The Future is Now, With XS Technology. -- Xpovos
[2006-09-26 14:44:36] - a: Today != Tomorrow. -Paul
[2006-09-26 14:44:02] - a: True. And that's one of the reasons why the lessons need to be learned first-hand, I think, rather than just mentioned. You need to be able to develop your own feel for where the profit point is, and where the loss stop point is. -- Xpovos
[2006-09-26 14:42:06] - amy: there MIGHT be ultimate today. if there is no ultimate today, i'll be there and i'll give you a call before (say) 6. ~a
[2006-09-26 14:40:39] - hey i am planning to do open mic tomorrow in herndon at 9-ish, let me know if you want to go and i will give you details. -amy
[2006-09-26 14:39:51] - although, using #2 and #3 in practice is hard when you can't see into the future. ~a
[2006-09-26 14:38:50] - xpovos: seems like sound advice to me. ~a
[2006-09-26 14:35:30] - a: It taught me to stay away from certain stock picks, to be more agressive in my sales after profits, not hang on to losing stocks, and study fundamentals a lot more than trends. -- Xpovos
[2006-09-26 14:33:39] - Dave: I guess I agree. I'm just looking at it with respect to the rest of my stocks (which are largely up). -Paul
[2006-09-26 14:27:51] - xpovos/dave: what lesson was that? ~a
[2006-09-26 14:05:56] - xpovos: <nod nod> losing money those two months was one of the best lessons I had -dave
[2006-09-26 13:53:09] - dave: Some. There is definitely a learning curve involved with self-investing. And we learn best from our hardest lessons. And when all is said, 25% isn't that much absolutely, but I'd obviously like to be the other way around. So I need to learn how to get better, fast. -- Xpovos
[2006-09-26 13:48:13] - xpovos: well, if it's any comfort, I lost a ton of money the 2nd and 3rd months after I started -dave
[2006-09-26 13:47:17] - paul: why should it be up today? the nasdaq is around even, not really up that much. I just don't understand why it's DOWN so much. If it was even then it'd be what it's supposed to be -dave
[2006-09-26 13:31:20] - Dave: See? I told you that AMD always goes down when it seems like it should go up.
It's annoying today, though, since it's really preventing a big gain for my stocks. -Paul[2006-09-26 13:25:58] - dave: At least AMD has ups. I've had an impressively poor streak with the market since getting involved on my own. About a 25% drop-off. I'm pretty sure that beats the market. Just not the right way. -- Xpovos
[2006-09-26 13:04:26] - ok, so usually I understand the justification behind AMDs ups and downs, but today I just don't understand -dave
[2006-09-26 12:19:20] - importantly the time required to get a green recruit a security clearance when they had no real confidence in my ability to stay with them, and not be a total flake. Now I have a proven work history, so they're willing to take that chance, and it moves me back into a postion for a real job in a few years. -- Xpovos
[2006-09-26 12:18:11] - a: Having a clearance will make me more attractive to other companies. I wasn't hired directly from college because all of the companies who were willing to take me on as a Chemist wanted current clearances -or- at least a M.S. Better grades would have helped too, but ultimately, I got turned down for three jobs because they didn't want to spend the money and more ...
[2006-09-26 12:11:33] - why do you want a clearance? you can have mine. ~a
[2006-09-26 11:32:52] - a: Eh. Kaiser. So you tell me. Still, health insurance is really my least worry. It has a 401K with no matching (my 403b has no matching now too, though) and will give me a security clearance. That's the big part. -- Xpovos
[2006-09-26 11:32:08] - Paul: It will pay better than my current salary at the very least. I've been told that depending on the offer, my current organization may try to match to keep me. -- Xpovos
[2006-09-26 11:31:12] - a: Correct, sorry. On both points. Actually, the building I'll be working in is right next to The Lime, which is the gay club there. And it's of course right next to the construction for the baseball stadium, which is getting to actually look like a stadium already. -- Xpovos
[2006-09-26 11:17:40] - xpovos: do you get full medical?
~a[2006-09-26 10:57:43] - Xpovos: Does it pay better than your current job? -Paul
[2006-09-26 10:18:01] - well you could, if nation still existed. (cries) ~a
[2006-09-26 10:16:04] - xpovos: that's SW, not SE. but it's still pretty close to the navy yard (yikes). also, you could probably walk to nation.
~a[2006-09-26 10:10:08] - Paul: I am the kiss of fantasy football death. Emergency appendectomy, freak concussion, cracked foot, trade dispute... -- Xpovos
[2006-09-26 10:04:23] - Xpovos: Cool, *insert question that hasn't been asked yet* -Paul
[2006-09-26 09:58:30] - vinne: Contracting for the U.S. Coast Guard. a: Buzzard's Point in S.E. D.C., or more to the point of your question, George C. Sharp (Contracting company). -- Xpovos
[2006-09-26 09:19:55] - Unknown Error! http://filebox.vt.edu/users/sapatton/Other/unknown-error.JPG -sam
[2006-09-26 09:19:23] - xpovos: where would you be working? ~a
[2006-09-26 09:12:52] - - vinnie
[2006-09-26 09:12:49] - xpovos: what kind of job are you interviewing for?
[2006-09-26 08:46:37] - Yay! I had another interview today. I am confident about receiving an offer. -- Xpovos
[2006-09-26 08:35:05] - http://arstechnica.com/reviews/hardware/ipod-2g.ars new ipod nano review. Screen breaks after first drop, but still functions, even after being put through the washer -dave
[2006-09-26 08:23:32] - if you stretch back a year instead of 6 months, the numbers are more even at 64 for firefox and 63 for IE -dave
[2006-09-26 08:22:32] - http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060925-7818.html 47 bugs found in firefox in last 6 months (38 in IE). Doesn't really say that Firefox is more vulnerable than IE, but it's interesting given that many believe Firefox is much more secure -dave
[2006-09-25 17:02:33] - Dave: Heh, the sports girl is beating the sports guy right now.
-Paul[2006-09-25 15:50:47] - Dave: Excellent timing for me.
-Paul[2006-09-25 15:49:56] - paul: trashed in in this week's paper which came out sat morning -dave
[2006-09-25 15:49:33] - haha, I love it that the Sports Gal now gets an unedited sidebar in the Sports Guy's columns -dave
[2006-09-25 15:44:30] - Dave: Revlon also had a bunch of bad news today which I'm sure didn't help. -Paul
[2006-09-25 15:43:50] - a: I believe you, but I also think inside the beltway might be due for the bigger fall since, like Dave said, it skyrocketed the most. -Paul
[2006-09-25 15:42:44] - Dave: When did they trash the stock? Just yesterday? That's unfortunate timing since I bought my Revlon stock on like Friday of last week.
-paul[2006-09-25 15:31:42] - http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=2602227 Josh Morgan and Chris Ellis suspended for Ga Tech game. Apparently they got arrested for disorderly conduct and not obeying officers -dave
[2006-09-25 15:26:05] - paul: actually, it's not infeasible that the barrons article is one of the reasons it's doing badly, hehe. I know that after barrons recommends something, it goes up sometimes -dave
[2006-09-25 15:25:08] - a: actually, i think the washington specific numbers are worse, because washington skyrocketed more than most when it was going up -dave
[2006-09-25 15:24:11] - paul: barrons trashed revlon as a stock in one of their articles in this week's paper -dave
[2006-09-25 14:57:53] - paul: inside the beltway, yes. i'm not sure about outside the beltway. ~a
[2006-09-25 14:38:12] - a: Are they still? -Paul
[2006-09-25 14:14:41] - paul: that's what the caption implies - aaron
[2006-09-25 14:13:09] - aba: Maybe he ran out of money after buying all of those gaming systems and games.
-Paul[2006-09-25 14:01:24] - paul: the reason i said the market is tied to much smaller regions is the housing prices in our area are going up. ~a
[2006-09-25 13:55:15] - paul: yeah, that's what i thought!! why just get a tv out of the dumpster if you are going to spend all that money on the gaming systems and games? - aba
[2006-09-25 13:50:57] - Stupid Revlon, offsetting my big gains with their stupid losses... -Paul
[2006-09-25 13:47:36] - aba: What a crappy TV for all those gaming systems. -Paul
[2006-09-25 13:43:59] - Somebody is in denial.
-Paul[2006-09-25 13:04:25] - dave: those are national numbers? who cares about the nation? real estate markets are completely tied to much smaller regions. ~a
[2006-09-25 12:52:30] - down by 1.7% -dave
[2006-09-25 12:52:18] - http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/060925/economy.html?.v=4 first year-over-year price decline in 11 years (housing). -dave
[2006-09-24 13:14:36] - http://www.engadget.com/2006/09/18/joystiqs-most-impressive-gamer-winner most impressive gamer? - aba
[2006-09-23 01:02:30] - title: lol - aaron
[2006-09-22 18:47:55] - Forrest Edward Mars's brother John Franklin Mars lives in Arlington, VA. He is also #21 on the list. -sam
[2006-09-22 18:42:45] - Forrest Edward Mars Jr, the 21st richest american lives in McLean, VA. His grandfather founded Mars candy company (products include snickers, Milky Way, 3 Musketeers, Twix, M&Ms, Skittles, etc.). http://www.forbes.com/lists/2006/54/biz_06rich400_Forrest-Edward-Mars-Jr_A8TH.html -sam
[2006-09-22 15:50:51] - oh the article covers that. ~a
[2006-09-22 15:48:29] - dave: isn't there some double-irony here though? "The Crusades were a series of military campaigns—usually sanctioned by the Papacy—that took place during the 11th through 13th centuries." ~a
[2006-09-22 15:43:27] - hmmm. 15k a month would be sweet. i mean, hell, that's a six figure income. it's probably non-taxable too, right? maybe i should marry someone from friends. ~a
[2006-09-22 15:41:30] - like me, the author finds irony in the fact that the pope's comments about Islam and violence spark several violent responses -dave
[2006-09-22 15:38:36] - http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/21/AR2006092101513.html Tolerance: A Two Way Street -dave
[2006-09-22 15:25:02] - http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/22/AR2006092200049.html $15,000 a month in child support!? -Paul
[2006-09-22 15:21:07] - lol. "thirst" trimester. ~a
[2006-09-22 15:15:10] - "If a person's home says a lot about a person" god i hope this isn't true. ~a
[2006-09-22 15:13:55] - regarding paul's link: spinning class ~a
[2006-09-22 15:10:35] - paul: yes. ~a
[2006-09-22 15:09:24] - Random question: Why is it always rape AND incest. Isn't the incest part somewhat unnecessary? -Paul
[2006-09-22 15:08:36] - http://www.aspentimes.com/article/20060921/COLUMN/109210037 Overanalyzed and underwhelmed. -Paul
[2006-09-22 15:05:23] - paul: legally imo: yeah, like you said i'm not sure. ~a
[2006-09-22 15:04:58] - paul: morally imo: i don't think anyone should have an abortion ever (MAYBE excepting rape/incest). i don't think anyone should have an abortion in the thirst trimester (imo: no exceptions). ~a
[2006-09-22 14:58:44] - a: Legally and/or morally. -Paul
[2006-09-22 14:58:11] - a: I think you and I have very similar beliefs on this topic, but our sympathies lie with different groups of people for whatever reason, and that causes the disagreement between us. -Paul
[2006-09-22 14:55:33] - paul: legally? ~a
[2006-09-22 14:54:38] - paul: yeah. me too. i strongly dislike it. i don't like the idea of the government telling me what to do. however, it's hard to argue that a late-third-trimester-fetus that could otherwise survive on its own is still just an organ. ~a
[2006-09-22 14:52:03] - a: Well, do you think a woman should be able to have an abortion for any reason (or no reason)? -Paul
[2006-09-22 14:51:44] - a: I pretty strongly do not like abortion, but the libertarian side of me is very leery against making it illegal. I would say I'm still undecided about whether or not it should be illegal. -Paul
[2006-09-22 14:50:56] - a: Yes. He made that phrase famous, but I take my own view on the situation, since my relationship with that organization is ... awkward. -- Xpovos
[2006-09-22 14:49:42] - xpovos: ah, the pope. ~a
[2006-09-22 14:49:21] - JP2? ~a
[2006-09-22 14:47:29] - a: And the cultural disease statement is from my own opinion on the 'culture of death' as it has been termed by JP2. In short it's an amalgam of selfishness, lack of moral conscience, materialism and relativism, though I'm actually pretty comfortable with relativism. -- Xpovos
[2006-09-22 14:46:16] - a: I'm willing to debate the "live human" aspect with you at some point, but probably not on the message board. It's just not well suited to long issues like that. I am convinced that the bulk of scientific evidence is on my side, though. -- Xpovos
[2006-09-22 14:45:58] - paul: also . . . if most pro-choice people aren't against abortion too much, then i'm mostly not pro-choice
~a[2006-09-22 14:44:50] - that's possible. what about you? are you against abortion? do you think it should be against the law? ~a
[2006-09-22 14:41:14] - a: Um... I don't think think the terms pro-life and pro-choice are very good for describing the groups. I think most pro-choice people aren't against abortion too much. -Paul
[2006-09-22 14:38:09] - orderby relevancy? ~a
[2006-09-22 14:34:09] - a: I have a bunch of opinions. Probably too many to just list without any kind of filtering. -Paul
[2006-09-22 14:33:42] - a: Heh, no. I saw your question, I just haven't had time to respond. -Paul
[2006-09-22 14:24:49] - paul: i guess you don't respond to things unless they have "paul:" in front of them. paul: yes. what are your opinions? ~a
[2006-09-22 14:22:48] - dave: right. calling it a "live human being" is the part that i have a hard time following. ~a
[2006-09-22 14:20:46] - dave: true. i understand what you mean. but you're assuming that you're going to be able to see the connection that you didn't make. in other words, keeping everybody out is impossible (unless you don't have a connection at all). so . . . why not let the "good" people in to protect you? in the end, it might be worse, but it's more likely to be better. ~a
[2006-09-22 14:15:58] - a: think of it this way - it's easier to detect a malicious connection to your pc if you only allow connections that you specifically make - that way if you see one that you didn't make, you know it's bogus. If you allow other people to connect to your pc, then you have to figure out whether the connections you didn't make are malicious or not -dave
[2006-09-22 14:14:23] - a: that is of course assuming that the fetus is a live human being -dave
[2006-09-22 14:14:07] - a: i think what he's saying is abortion is equivalent to 1st degree murder since it is premeditated - in comparison to homicide which isn't always premeditated -dave
[2006-09-22 14:06:56] - and the murder part. i don't think i understand that part either. ~a
[2006-09-22 14:05:53] - xpovos: interesting. cultural disease? i don't think i understand that part. ~a
[2006-09-22 13:59:31] - those, and then we can safely outlaw abortion as the form of murder it is without infringing on 'choice' or human nature, or our society. -- Xpovos
[2006-09-22 13:58:49] - be cured, so we must deal with it as best we can until we find a technological solution to replace it. That is, in the event of any form of unwanted pregnancy abortion could only be outlawed and remain outlawed if there were a way for a mother to pre-natally put her child up for adoption, as it were. External uterine replicators. Give it 50 years and we should have ...
[2006-09-22 13:57:15] - about innocence, life span, and the quality of the soul, abortion could rank higher or lower than homicide. In general I tend to rank it above (as in worse) than homicide because it inherently involves a "first-degree" aspect of fore-thought though perhaps not with strict malice. Ultimately, though, I feel that abortion is a symptom of a cultural disease which cannot ...
[2006-09-22 13:55:44] - a: My stance on abortion. It's killing a human being who is alive for reasons of convenience. As far as killing humans goes, it's quite high on the list of those unhealthy to society. War is bad, but sometimes justifiable. The death penalty could be made to be sane. That really just leaves accidental killings, homicide, and abortion. Depending on how you feel...
[2006-09-22 13:55:39] - dave: how so? malicious tampering is much easier to detect when the thing you're detecting isn't a black box. ~a
[2006-09-22 13:54:06] - a: well, i understand your point, but debatably, once you open up the kernel to third parties, it's harder for MS to detect an illegal access of the kernel. If only MS has access to it, you'd think detecting malicious tampering in the kernel would be much easier -dave
[2006-09-22 13:49:09] - xpovos: yes. ~a
[2006-09-22 13:41:46] - yes. what are your opinions? ~a
[2006-09-22 13:36:34] - a: I guess I would say I do not necessarily have a stance, but I have opinions. Does that make sense? -Paul
[2006-09-22 13:35:04] - I have a stance. Will that help?
-- Xpovos[2006-09-22 13:34:10] - oops that wasn't a question. ~a
[2006-09-22 13:32:58] - paul: i'm not saying that you MUST have a stance on the matter. i mean, hell, i'm agnostic. my question is if you have a stance, it would be easier to discuss things if i knew your view on the matter. you know what i mean? ~a
[2006-09-22 13:32:45] - paul: but i could guess that nobody here has a position like that. ~a
[2006-09-22 13:30:31] - paul: me neither. ~a
[2006-09-22 13:22:12] - a: It depends on what you mean by "stance". I don't really have any extreme positions like: "all pro-lifers are evil" or "anyone who has an abortion should be shot". -Paul
[2006-09-22 13:06:22] - yeah, i don't think i understand what a 188% decline could be. unless you don't understand math. ... and think that a 198% increase down to a 10% increase is called a 188% decline. ~a
[2006-09-22 13:03:56] - paul: so, since i apparently can't correctly state your views and can never get your views out of you, what is your stance on abortion? do you have one? ~a
[2006-09-22 13:03:09] - How do you have a 188% decline? Are there negative forclosures? -- Xpovos
[2006-09-22 12:59:52] - paul: "a: I probably read more pro-choice stuff than you do. In response to your related side note: I think it's misleading because normally pro-lifers aren't against choice." ~a
[2006-09-22 12:56:22] - a: Are you quoting me from when I said that "in some ways, the pro-lifers are probably pro-choice" ? Because I think the original is a much less strong statement. -Paul
[2006-09-22 12:53:33] - xpovos: no, there will always be holes. ~a
[2006-09-22 12:53:01] - paul: "pro-lifers aren't against choice" ~a
[2006-09-22 12:48:35] - http://realestate.msn.com/buying/Articlebusweek.aspx?cp-documentid=808749 Consider this a sequel to Andrew's article about the real estate market. -Paul
[2006-09-22 11:55:36] - a: Which is a direct quote? -Paul
[2006-09-22 11:28:15] - a: Ok, I agree, but if they do a decent job of it, and actually -do- lock down the kernel from all third party software, there shouldn't be any viruses in the kernel. -- Xpovos
[2006-09-22 10:55:01] - xpovos: runtime. if you cut third parties out of the innards of kernel that means that you can't have third party software that protects you from new viruses getting into the kernel. i don't know. i'm just guessing here. ~a
[2006-09-22 10:50:51] - xpovos: hmmm. well my speculation is that symantec has limited ability to read source code to parts of the kernel. ~a
[2006-09-22 10:48:53] - paul: oh. you mean all of them are false? but one of them is a direct quote (although you're free to argue i took it out of context) ~a
[2006-09-22 10:43:21] - a: Runtime. MS has made a point to have closed source code, so be it, I think open-source code is probably better in almost all circumstances. But for this issue, I'm following the assumption that design is inherently closed, so my concern then is with run-time. -- Xpovos
[2006-09-22 10:39:18] - paul: sure. ~a
[2006-09-22 10:39:09] - i.e. are you talking about keeping people out of the source code, or are you talking about keeping applications from interfacing with the innards of the kernel? ~a
[2006-09-22 10:38:51] - a: Those three statements you listed?
-Paul[2006-09-22 10:38:17] - xpovos: well that depends on what you mean. locking it down at runtime . . . or locking it down at design time? ~a
[2006-09-22 10:14:53] - Mortage defaults are up, so banks are paying the price for poor decision making in granting these loans. Sharks flee country. http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/06_40/b4003063.htm?campaign_id=rss_null -- Xpovos
[2006-09-22 10:14:03] - a: Explain, please, since I'm not a strict CS guy how locking down the kernel increases vulnerability, unless you mean that MS will continue to allow, say, Office and Internet Explorer unrestricted access to the kernel... which is just as stupid, I agree. -- Xpovos
[2006-09-22 09:52:50] - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d5Zvq8EBwZI&eurl= cover of 'baby got back'. - aba
[2006-09-22 09:50:07] - xpovos: i strongly disagree. if microsoft is the only party that has any access the kernel (at runtime, or at design time), then the kernel will continue to be the most vulnerable part of the operating system. ~a
[2006-09-22 09:47:03] - sam: this is an article i edit a bunch: List of billionaires (2006) (mostly because it gets a ton of vandalism) ~a
[2006-09-22 09:45:09] - 400 richest americans (9/21/2006) http://www.forbes.com/lists/2006/54/biz_06rich400_The-400-Richest-Americans_Rank.html?partner=msnbc -sam
[2006-09-22 08:20:49] - dave: I read this as, "Symantec says, 'Bad, MS! How dare you lock us out of the most vulnerable and most important part of the operating system. Don't you know, we're security guys?!'" which is of course, ludicrous. What's even more ludicrous is that MS was allowing third party kernel access to begin with. -- Xpovos
[2006-09-22 08:18:48] - Aw, I missed the abortion fun. -- Xpovos
[2006-09-22 08:09:16] - http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060921-7799.html Symantec upset because Vista locks third parties out of the kernel. Although I sympathize with Symantec, I'd rather MS be able to do it. -dave
[2006-09-22 07:53:57] - http://entertainment.msn.com/tv/hotgossip/09-21-06?GT1=7701 paris hilton at McDonalds -dave
[2006-09-21 17:01:34] - paul: so which ones of them are false (or somewhat false)? ~a
[2006-09-21 16:39:41] - a: Uh... I still feel like some of those aren't expressing my opinion totally truthfully. It's not as black and white as I think you're trying to make it. -Paul
[2006-09-21 16:25:49] - a: what made it more odd was that the two times i remembered, I either wasn't sure whether he really thought that, or was definitely sure that he didn't (have the view you said he did) -dave
[2006-09-21 16:24:35] - a: it just seems a tad presumptuous to state paul's opinion's for him, unless you're trying to use him as support for something you're saying -dave
[2006-09-21 16:22:25] - a: not upset at all. just went home -dave
[2006-09-21 16:08:18] - paul: it's ok, it seems like the heated discussion went away. ~a
[2006-09-21 16:07:15] - paul: ok. three statements: paul believes that the government should not regulate abortion. paul DISAGREES with: most pro-choice people believe that abortion is wrong. paul believes "pro-lifers aren't against choice" ~a
[2006-09-21 16:07:15] - a: I'll check back occasionally, but I don't want to get into a heated discussion now. -Paul
[2006-09-21 16:06:42] - a: Heh, sorry, I probably have to leave too. I was waiting for the go-ahead to do something and I just got it. -Paul
[2006-09-21 16:06:17] - a: I'm sure most would say they think abortion is wrong, but I also think that for many, their actions don't match their words. -Paul
[2006-09-21 16:05:21] - oh. paul's here. ~a
[2006-09-21 16:05:09] - ok everybody left? ~a
[2006-09-21 16:05:05] - a: (1) Not sure, lean towards true. (2) See previous (3) Not sure. -Paul
[2006-09-21 16:03:11] - you want me to ask questions? ~a
[2006-09-21 16:03:09] - i hope i didn't make him mad. ~a
[2006-09-21 16:03:04] - it seems like dave left. ~a
[2006-09-21 16:01:34] - yes. ~a
[2006-09-21 16:00:53] - Heh, sorry. I didn't mean to start a fight. Can I end this by answering some simple questions? -Paul
[2006-09-21 15:58:01] - paul believes that many/most pro-choice people believe that abortion is wrong. true/false? ~a
[2006-09-21 15:57:41] - ok. i was trying to decide whether to put "many pro-choice people" or "most pro-choice people". if paul DOES agree that "many pro-choice people believe that abortion is wrong." then i concede. ~a
[2006-09-21 15:55:55] - a: <cough> that wasn't the statement in question -dave
[2006-09-21 15:54:51] - cough. paul believes that the government should not regulate abortion. true/false? ~a
[2006-09-21 15:54:37] - a: your statement was "(paul will disagree but) many pro-choice people believe that abortion is wrong." -dave
[2006-09-21 15:52:57] - paul believes that the government should not regulate abortion. true/false? ~a
[2006-09-21 15:52:53] - Erm... I don't know if that made sense, but essentially I think in many places, the will of the majority (in essence, the "choice" of the people) is being over-ruled by the courts. -Paul
[2006-09-21 15:52:21] - dave: wait wait wait. what? ~a
[2006-09-21 15:51:56] - I was going to comment on that, how in some ways, the pro-lifers are probably pro-choice in that they would prefer laws based on majority vote rather than the legislative branch. -Paul
[2006-09-21 15:51:11] - a: yes really. I could be wrong of course, but that's been my experience -dave
[2006-09-21 15:50:56] - a: i think he did, both times, but then you just overrode him and said you did indeed represent his views correctly, which you didn't -dave
[2006-09-21 15:50:42] - dave: really? ~a
[2006-09-21 15:49:41] - paul: if i'm misrepresenting your opinion, let me know when i do it. everybody makes mistakes. ~a
[2006-09-21 15:49:39] - a: I don't think that's true at all. I think most pro-choice people think the govt should rule on it, and give them the right -dave
[2006-09-21 15:48:51] - (for the most part) ~a
[2006-09-21 15:48:44] - paul: pro-choice people believe that the government shouldn't rule on abortion. ~a
[2006-09-21 15:48:13] - a: clarification, he's not using you as a straw man, he said you could set up a straw man just fine, since you were setting one up and calling it "paul" -dave
[2006-09-21 15:48:06] - xpovos: abortion-rights vs. abortion-control. i agree. that's a more accurate and semmetrical terminology. ~a
[2006-09-21 15:47:57] - a: I would say that pro-choice people, in general, believe that people shouldn't have abortions unless they want to. I equate that to me saying that I believe in free speech as long as it's not something I don't like. -Paul
[2006-09-21 15:47:04] - a: yeah, i second paul's statement that you've mis-stated his views at least twice in the not-too-distant past -dave
[2006-09-21 15:45:59] - the issue all about choice, which it isn't. It's about abortion, from both sides. -- Xpovos
[2006-09-21 15:45:44] - a: I follow aaron's logic, and to some extent agree that they are asymmetrical, however both camps set it up that way intentionally for positive spin. Many people who call themselves pro-life are still pro-choice-for-abortion in some cases, the classic rape&incest pro-lifers. The pro-choice camp wanted to distance themselves from the theme of abortion, so they make ...
[2006-09-21 15:45:43] - a: Heh, I've seen you twice make claims about my opinion which I think are various forms of untrue, so I just feel like I certain views are being attributed to me which don't actually reflect my views. -Paul
[2006-09-21 15:45:20] - paul: plus you and i have exactly the same view on abortion laws so i don't see why you have to use me as a straw man. ~a
[2006-09-21 15:45:03] - a: well, I don't think I agree with you that pro-choice people generally think that the fetus is alive - but if you're saying they do, and that they're just taking advantage of a loophole in the law to say that the woman's right to choose is more important than the child's life, then that's something I can understand -dave
[2006-09-21 15:44:24] - "That's like me saying I'm pro-free speech unless somebody says something I don't like." explain this one to me because i'm at a loss. ~a
[2006-09-21 15:43:33] - paul: what? ~a
[2006-09-21 15:42:53] - a: I can understand if you believe the fetus is alive, but then also believe that the woman's choice is more important than the life of the fetus -dave
[2006-09-21 15:42:51] - dave: the tenets of pro-choice is that the fetus isn't human in the eyes of the law. the pro-choicers all know (however) that the fetus is a potential human and shouldn't be ignored completely (just ignored by the law for the most part). ~a
[2006-09-21 15:42:24] - I guess I don't have to be here arguing my side, Adrian can set up a straw man perfectly fine on his own.
-Paul[2006-09-21 15:42:11] - Paul: hehe, nice example. -dave
[2006-09-21 15:42:00] - a: Thank you for putting words in my mouth, I appreciate it.
-Paul[2006-09-21 15:41:46] - a: or even bad -dave
[2006-09-21 15:41:32] - that's why you can be pro-choice and anti-abortion. but since the term is assymetrical, you can't be pro-life and pro-abortion. ~a
[2006-09-21 15:41:11] - That's like me saying I'm pro-free speech unless somebody says something I don't like. -Paul
[2006-09-21 15:41:09] - a: well, given the tenets of pro-choice (mainly that the fetus isn't alive), I don't understand why abortion would be wrong -dave
[2006-09-21 15:40:44] - a: Well, I don't have time to get into a full blown debate right now (moderately busy at work) but I guess I just don't see how how pro-choicers can be pro-life in a meaningful way because essentially they are saying they are pro-life unless the mother decides she doesn't want the baby. -Paul
[2006-09-21 15:39:01] - dave: (paul will disagree but) many pro-choice people believe that abortion is wrong. they just think it's not something that the government should be regulating. so it IS better to bear the child than abort it, and it DOES make a difference what the mom does. it's better to bear the child because abortion is generally bad (though the government should stay out) ~a
[2006-09-21 15:37:22] - aaron: other than a desire to have a kid that is. -dave
[2006-09-21 15:36:34] - aaron: because the abortion might cause emotional trauma to the parents? Other than that, I'm not sure I see a good reason to bear the kid -dave
[2006-09-21 15:35:44] - aaron: secondly, if pro-choice people do indeed believe that it's better to bear the child than abort it, then I'm not sure I understand their reasoning for that. If the fetus isn't alive, then what difference does it make what the mom does? Why would it be better to bear the child? -dave
[2006-09-21 15:33:02] - aaron: I'm not sure I entirely agree with your statement about pro-choice people. For one, they don't think the fetus is a life, so whether they abort it or not, it can't be pro-life or pro-death -dave
[2006-09-21 15:31:16] - paul: don't you follow aaron's logic? like he says, the terms are asymmetrical. ~a
[2006-09-21 15:20:15] - a: My only point is that if you're going to say one term is misleading, it makes no sense to claim that the other one isn't. -Paul
[2006-09-21 15:08:20] - paul will tell you "pro-lifers aren't against choice" (quote was from 2003, not 2002, sorry). ~a
[2006-09-21 15:01:57] - aaron: i've tried to make that exact same argument many times before (though the last time was in 2002). everybody laughed at me and told me i was being dumb (basically they were saying i was biased and that's why i felt that way). in other words, i agree 100%. ~a
[2006-09-21 14:58:23] - it's that asymmetry between the terms which bothers me more than anything. person a: "i'm pro choice!" person b: "yeah, well i'm... pro life!" person a: "but.... i'm pro life too..." - aaron
[2006-09-21 14:57:29] - but people labelled "pro-life" are not in any way "pro-choice" - they do not want people to be given the choice of whether to bear children or not - aaron
[2006-09-21 14:57:06] - i think my problem with the terms is that people labelled "pro-choice" are in most cases "pro-life", in that they would rather parents bear children rather than abort them... - aaron
[2006-09-21 14:52:44] - well, i don't fault the terms for not giving context.
~a[2006-09-21 14:47:48] - a: I guess that's mostly it. -Paul
[2006-09-21 14:25:43] - paul: you mean the terms don't give context? they don't specify the context is regarding abortion? ~a
[2006-09-21 13:56:32] - a: I think the point that using the term "pro-life" or "pro-choice" in most contexts is kinda misleading since they are so general. -Paul
prev <-> next