At 2/21/08 06:48 PM, morefngdbs wrote: This topic reminded me of a rumor/story that U.S. currency ,like 4 out of every 5 bills checked had trace amounts of cocain on them.

Then explain why they use drug dogs to "detect if money is drug money" and confiscate it if dog barks (..saw it on COPS)

At 2/27/08 11:53 PM, MortifiedPenguins wrote: See, one thinks Funkbrs to be a ravanous baby eating, beer drinking rocker.

But then he comes out and suprises everyone.

A paradox indeed. His social skin is not what you'd call endearing, yet he oozes tribal kred.

I don't think modern humanism is representative of mankind becoming devoid of social skills as much as re-evaluating a social skillset based on next phase technology. The doubts expressed over a young generation naively opening themselves and their daily lives to global inspection, whilst frittering countless hours in virtual exploration, are perhaps near sighted. While the odd bad case makes the news, or concern that business interests will prevail, doesn't fairly represent the possibilities and value of networking for young and old alike. The doubts before every technology ushered in in recent years have often given way to delight on the progress and possibilities side. One can just as easily see the rapid ascent of today's techno-capable generation as desirous, not solely by vested interests, but by the users themselves. After all, that is the main selling point.

.

Dare is ask who wrote this.

Not that i put it past your ability on an exceptionally good day, but as cogent theories go, this is a cut above standard NG flair, and then some.

I don't wanna disappoint anybody who is expecting my opinion on this whole global warming business either one way or the other, but at this stage i'd have to say i reserve my judgement 'til any of the abovementioned "exceptional climate events" pan out a bit more..

**DASHES OFF TO BUY A JETBOAT WHILE THEY'RE CHEAP**

At 2/24/08 11:06 PM, Kyle101 wrote: ..Pot should be ILLEGAL ..especially since i know people who got cancer from pot.

PROOF?

"Meanwhile, back in fantasy land..."

"[PROZAC] the world's most popular antidepressant, which is taken by over 40 million people, has been deemed no better than a placebo in latest research carried out by department of psychology at Hull University."

At 2/19/08 09:10 PM, AMP-d wrote: So, let's discuss poverty.. It's a bit of a Catch-22.

Poverty is when you fine someone who can't afford to do what you're fining them for.

The problem with Capitalism is that it places value on everything that can possibly be sold, excluding quality of life..

- The water in the bottle.
- The lumber in the rainforests.
- The family time of an executive.
- The exclusivity of a holiday resort.
- The "undervalued resources" of non-capitalist countries.

It's Capitalism's desire to own everything that can be owned..

- Sections on the Moon.
- The air that we breathe.
- The life-saving treatments.
- The "wasted lands" of indigenous peoples.

Once Capitalism owns everything, it seeks to own..

- The internets.
- Your beliefs.
- Your DNA.
- Your past.
- Your future.
- Ideas.

Anyone who refuses this Total Commodification, are grouped or divided for cassification, and demonized as if they possess evil corrupting powers.

end irony

At 2/17/08 08:36 AM, ThePretenders wrote: A Swiss national currently serving 4 years after 3 poppy seeds were found on his clothes by customs officials at Dubai airport. He had bought and eaten a bread roll at Heathrow before flying to UAE.

This guy must have looked like a serious gangsta baker's assistant.

At 2/17/08 04:46 AM, TheMason wrote:

17 years from now...

It's my own. I've been looking into India and China for awhile now..

Well sure, the advancing aging problem is looming on the horizon for most countries, but as a techie (not solely a dreaming TREKKIE like Al6200 ;O) ..there's one thing not be overlooked; namely robots.

Yeah I know, guys like me have been trumpetting the coming "Cambrian Explosion" for as many years as computers have been affordable, but honestly, their time will come. Honda for instance, when they first demo'd their prototype Asimo robot, they were quick to explain that although they had a good basic mechanical droid, they still expected that as far as hardware and software for artificial intelligence was concerned, that would still be at least another 10 years away. That was back in 2000.

Remember, Honda is not some small "investment" prototyping company. They are perhaps better placed for mass-production of high-end robots than anyone, having been a leader in high-end motorbikes for decades. If we say 5 more years to Honda's own large-scale production run, then another 5 for Japanese backed Chinese companies to ramping up for cost efficiencies and diverse designs, then we've still got another 5 years back-filling demand (say 15 years total).

During these 15 years the software/hardware side will go ballistic. And even if the artificial intelligence isn't quite up to independant labouring duties, then all those elderly folk (old bodies, young minds) will have a fit and strong buddy doing their labouring by supervised instruction. And those that can work independantly will do 3 shifts for every 1 human.

While labouring will continue to be outsourced to China and the like for decades without exhausting those populous', supervising robots should become a boon industry for the elderly job market, which will be sufficient to satisfy most localized labouring shortages.

.

At 2/17/08 04:46 AM, TheMason wrote: 17 years from now....

Personally, i don't forsee any of that happening. Who's predictions were they?

China for instance, has got just as much chance of doing a deal with US over Taiwan in exchange for retiring it's massive bond debt prior to defaulting on payments. The difference between China's economic structure and Taiwan's isn't what it used to be ideologically speaking, ie. Capitalism vs Communism.

At 2/16/08 11:35 PM, carbanonzo wrote: ... "The only answer to these problems is a dramatic reduction in our energy and resource consumption".

I agree with the science, but i can't agree ^his conclusion to what is split equally between a global social and a global eco problem.

At 2/14/08 06:56 PM, Cuppa-LettuceNog wrote: The only similarities between it and the Israeli flag is the color blue...

Oh yeah, THAT, and the fact that;

- it would be the only flag in the entire region WITHOUT RED, BLACK or GREEN (except Israel)
- if the light yellow faded (as only light yellow can) then it would be only flag in the region appearing exclusively WHITE and BLUE (except Israel again of-course)
- in the hot midday Sun (you know, they have a lotta Sun in Iraq!) you wouldn't see the light yellow half the time anyway.
- it has NOT JUST BLUE, BUT EXACTLY TWO BLUE STRIPES, very much like Israel has EXACTLY TWO BLUE STRIPES.
- hanging dishevelled from a flag pole, you'd pretty much only see the WHITE with TWO BLUE STRIPES anyway.
- it has a FADED Cresent, which, if it had faded any more, you could pretty much gaffiti in a Star, and you'd have a passable fake Israeli flag to burn.
- and even if you did get caught burning it, you could make a strong claim that you were short-sighted/drunk/sun-blinded, and actually thought it WAS an Israeli flag!

..other than that, it was pretty fucken gay, and you gotta wonder what the American (coalition) was thinking at the time..

BRING ON the insurgency no doubt.

At 2/13/08 07:03 PM, SadisticMonkey wrote:

At 2/13/08 07:05 AM, JudgeDredd wrote: Thou, if only a few generations removed.

The removing of children from their families is not directly related to the English moving to Australia. That was my point, but I'm not sure what yours is.

You're sliding behind the term "not directly". You're "not directly" involved. English colonization is "not directly" the cause. The re-emergance of the issue following Howard's crackdown on indigenous communities is perhaps "not directly" your problem, because you're "not directly" old enough to vote. Maybe you're "not directly" sorry, because it "not directly" implies compensation. You tell me.

At 2/14/08 12:29 PM, Slizor wrote: The general conception of terrorists is not only widely misguided, but is construed in such a way intentionally.

Couldn't agree more.

At 2/13/08 08:36 PM, Slizor wrote: Terrorists don't have the ultimate aim of terrorising people,

..yet, as their name suggests, their goal is to spread terror.

..they have (mostly) tangible political goals that they feel are not represented/possible in mainstream politics.

Look, perhaps in the 70's and 80's that was true of the odd hijacking, but today's terrorists aren't exactly hanging around for a political anything. If a political outcome was their purpose, it would only be to draw America into a potentially endless unwinnable conflict, which is exactly what Bush has (upto this point) delivered them.

Except.. unless you are meaning the Iraqi insurgants, which we're often told, pretty much include former members of Saddam's Baathist Party, whom as we speak, are being re-admitted back into the Iraqi parliment. Yeah, their goal has always been political! As a matter of fact, America could have just posted that US $30 million on Saddam's head from the start, and with a bit of luck and timing, have bypassed the whole messy war entirely.

.

At 2/14/08 06:53 AM, RommelTJ wrote: Five years of occupation and that's political progress? ...

Hmpff! Failed to find an archive flag chart i was looking for ..but this pic sums up this "new flag announcement" just fine...
.

....OH-MY-GAWD!

What's this gay "whitey" surrender flag shit!? Even a blood splattered oily rag would be an improvement, not to mention, a tad more honest..

At 2/13/08 07:51 AM, Slizor wrote: Err......what does this topic have to do with terrorists? I was under the impression that terrorists would "win" when they achieve their goals, be that an independent state or the removal of Western forces from Islamic lands....not the death of a child in an airport.

I think you know the answer.. but i'll say it anyway..

Those two goals cannot be achieved by either peace or war of insurgants (lose-lose) against western superior technology. The weapon of terror is about the fear of the irrational mind.. when one's perspective is so wrought with fear that even a mother with her ill baby are considered a credible threat, because the potential for suicide is everpresent. This irrational logic becomes like a cancerous growth as it feeds on other rational minds, spreading fear and irrational behaviour ever wider..

The "freedoms they hate" (in this scenario) are the freedoms you are likely to lose before you say "enough!", and something in your mind snaps. In war they call it 'shell shock', and increasing levels of suicide of American troops are one such evidence of it's affect on the outwardly rational mind. In civil life we call it rage ..like road rage. When patience utterly collapses. A falling-down of the human spirit. Not too different when facing the two unachieveable goals you stated.

.

At 2/12/08 11:51 PM, tony4moroney wrote: The TSA protect us from terrorist babies now

And before anyone (Memorize) says it, this has NOTHING to do with carrying infant milk bottles on planes, or islamic women feigning pregnancy for oversize strap-on bombs.

At 2/13/08 05:47 AM, SadisticMonkey wrote:

At 2/13/08 05:02 AM, fli wrote: *eye rollie*
People alway making excuses to invade and destroy peoples...

You do realise that "the stolen generation" has nothing to do England colonising Australia, right?

Thou, if only a few generations removed.

Let's see, did it have anything to do with kids being torn from their families (adopted out to whites, or raised in dorms) ..replacing the oppressive poverty trap of a loving family with the mental torture of suspecting your entire family and culture has been wiped from the earth like common genocide.

Damn, just saying "sorry" is a bargain at any rate.

Despite the pretty intensive recoding/redesign of the NG website over recent years, i've been kinda disappointed that voting hasn't extended beyond games/movies/audio (and perhaps the odd art comp of late). We can't even vote off idiots or thread spam (ie. left to the providence of hardened mods no less), and judging by it's authority structure NG is only marginly better than the reality on the outside (home-detention with a free ankle-bracelet). Heck, by the time the Fulps are insanely rich (threatening to sell to highest bidder) and the first internet wars begin, it'll be as close to real life as an actual stint in prison with oled-paper & surreptitious wifi.

Join ma crew or die noob..

digg the prison-grey color scheme yet?? ;O)

At 2/8/08 05:57 PM, Proteas wrote:

At 2/7/08 09:11 PM, JudgeDredd wrote: oversize coffins,

.... coffins. You're worried about the way fat people will effect the coffin industry?

Hey, being specific only as far as giving some examples here. Just talking about knock-on effects; next, herses or kilns not being wide enough. And perhaps before that, firefighters being unable to effect timely rescues on ladders or stretchers. And so on and so forth.

At 2/8/08 11:41 PM, SkunkyFluffy wrote: Charlie says MAOW!

Dan-Chan musing..
.

UOTD Leeloo-Minai!

Kitty Kat ready to pownce..
.

At 2/7/08 08:21 PM, Proteas wrote: Explain to me how one fat person weighing 300 pounds taking up two seats on an airplane is using more fuel than two skinny people that would have normally sat in those two seats.

More flights.

And as far as wear and tear on roads and infrastructure goes..

I'm not talking about a road bridge collapse (well, perhap the odd footbridge here and there) but more generally speaking; oversize coffins, upgrade of the gearing and electronics of devices for lifting and lowering people (like for those coffins again), recalculation of stadium capacity dependant on max structural loads, lift capacities, etc.

At 2/7/08 04:49 PM, ThePretenders wrote: Did you know that walking to the shops produces more CO2 than driving?

haha! So according to those calculations my cat's afternoon sleep costs the planet more than a car driven to the local gym and back.

At 2/6/08 10:31 PM, Al6200 wrote:

a law requiring doctors to warn their patients if they're significantly overweight and show them the risks of diabetes, heart disease, stroke, etc.

Oh what.. no public-service liposucking or stomach-stapling ads during the kids cartoons?? Yawn.

This is a problem that could spread (pardon the pun), and we might soon see fat tax at the airports, or obese regularly weighed at check-in and refused a boarding pass altogether.

Infact, fat is the new carbon footprint ..call it fatprint. They use more fuel whether they fly of drive across country. They cost cost more in hospitals. They add costs to 'weight bearing loads' in structural engineering design. Everywhere they go, there's more consideration and expense.

Obviously fat people should be confined to their houses (or at least those that can barely get out their front door ;-)

Someone trailling behind trumps up the Terror Card and garners widespread Republican support.

Nothing confusing here. Move along.

At 2/5/08 11:41 AM, Korriken wrote:

At 2/5/08 01:01 AM, TheMason wrote:

Okay, I'll try to say this a little more simply. With a 95% employment rate...those jobs going overseas are excess jobs.

Numbers of jobs isn't the only factor here.

Mason.. try.. s..i..m..p..l..e..r..

I'm pretty sure that a clothing or toy manufacturer would pay better than say, McDonalds or Walmart.

No. McD's is a service industry. Clothing and stuffed toys can be done by robots, or even cheaper by human robots aka Chinese.

While employment rate is 95% the poverty rate is 12.3% in 2006. Most of the people living in poverty either don't work, or work at such a very low paying job.

Despite being poorer paying for artificially high rents, and monopolized fossil fuels futures, the poor are wearing much better (newly imported) rags.

Excess jobs are a good thing, it means that companies will have to compete over workers and therefore have to pay a better wage/benefits.

100% employment means higher wages right across the board, which means higher cost of production and inflation, which means less exports.

The answer is simple... but the answer is not so simple as people try to make it out to be.

Like blaming the Chinese for perfecting American-style Capitalism.