3,058 Forum Posts by "lapis"
It's great, but Azerbaijan > America
I downloaded NASA's World Wind ; also an app that makes you see satellite images. It's pretty cool, but only American cities are shown in detail, I can't see my house for crap using that thing. Best you can see (in Europe) is like the Eiffel Tower. Is this better, or completely different?
At 7/1/05 03:53 PM, Lidov wrote: Do you realy want to celebrate a murder of a politition by his own country civil?
I think it is a stupid thing to do, which makes you stupid.
Why is it stupid? Because murder is stupid? Then you would disapprove of the murdering of Sheik Yassin, the founder of Hamas, by the Israeli military. Or because it's stupid to rise against your own politicians? In that case, you hate the fact that Europe is no longer rules by Monarch tyrants since they were replaced by more democratic governoments due to uprisings.
Lol, Aznar would have never let this happen. And why did Aznar lose the election to Zapatero in 2004? Because muslim terrorists blew up the Madrid train stations (and because Aznar tried to blame the ETA). So Spanish gays owe this right to Osama and his friends. Weird...
Because he armed Saddam Hussain back in the eighties.
At 6/30/05 03:00 PM, Silverdawg wrote:At 6/30/05 02:59 PM, EclecticEnnui wrote: You ate a Goatse cookie.wtf is that, n00b
n00bs are people who don't know what Goatse is
At 6/30/05 11:45 AM, knuckle9 wrote: "Take off every zig"
What you say!!
At 6/30/05 11:38 AM, Porn_Dude wrote: wow that was about as funny as cancer. I don't mean a funny cancer like colon or something like that either. I totally want to die from cock-cancer.
Then fuck a toxic waste barrel. Hey, it might be good for your porn career.
At 6/29/05 09:38 AM, hypern wrote: tell me what to think about the EU'S foreign policy on china, they are lifting the ban on selling weapons and arms to china .
Yeah sweet. China is booming anyway so we might as well take advantage of it. Like you said, the EU is good for our economies and so is trade with China. And lifting the ban is going to make to Chinese like us just that little bit extra. Don't forget they supported us in the ITER-case. If they had backed Japan, then they would have had the world's first experimental nuclear fusion reactor. Maybe they use the weapons we sell them it to blow up Tibetans, I don't care, they're all hippies anyway. And the US supplied Saddam Hussain with new weapons back in the 80s so I don't see a moral problem here.
It's not like the US will stop supplying us with their newest weapons - they never did in the first place. The Netherlands joined up with the US in their F22-JSF project; turns out that we will get a version which isn't stealth, can't take off vertically and is not equiped with the latest technology, a 'monkey' version. We should have just joined the Eurofighter project anyway. It's maybe not as good as the F22 but it's cheap; what enemies do we have anyway: the missiles used to blow up a terrorist camp are a huge lot more expensive then the camp itself.
At 6/26/05 04:45 PM, SlipperyShah wrote: x = [-b +/- root(b^2 - 4ac)]/(2a)
Well if we're going to spam random formulas, then take this, you bastard:
exp(-I*Pi) + 1= cos(-Pi) + I * sin(-Pi) + 1= -1 + 1 = 0 !!1!!!one!!11!
At 6/23/05 04:21 PM, Funkybob2 wrote: Does anyone know Daniel Gajewski Jr.?
Yeah I'm Nathan Gajewski, he's my brother. How did you meet?
Piconjo's dead! He had focal segmental glomerulosclerosis, a kidney disease. He asked for money but you cold-hearted bastards gave him jack shit. I hope you're happy now, you filthy toadies >:(
:'(
At 6/22/05 04:11 PM, ChronicEntertainment wrote: No, we like them because there good for BLAM points.
Lol, yeah right, if you ever got a blam point from a SBC movie then I'm Martin Luther King Jr.
At 6/22/05 08:13 AM, FRIMA wrote: By the way I found
this about the inflation in the Netherlands.
Yeah look at the graph: inflation was over 5% the year before the euro was introduced. Holland was the country with the highest inflation rate during the entire year. Daily groceries got more expensive by 5.5 - 7%. This proves exactly what I was saying: products that used to cost 1 guilder were made 1.1 guilder right before the euro came. That's why inflation rates were relatively low in 2002-2003; they already fucked us hard in 2001. And we can see that inflation was extremely low in 2004, when the 'price battle' which we discussed earlier started.
I'm not saying this is the euro's fault; it's the shopkeeper's fault, they could have changed the prices of 1 gulden goods to 45 eurocents instead of 50. But I can honestly say that life has gotten more expensive after we got rid of the gulden.
At 6/21/05 01:44 PM, FRIMA wrote: I'm dutch myself and it is true the dutch are very eurosceptical, but I don't think it's fair; the main reason they want the Euro back is because everything has become more expensive, yet I can remember my parents didn't want to pay me an ice cream or a drink when I was small because it was so ridiculously expensive.
A can can of coke used to be 1 gulden. Right before the euro was introduced, they made it 1.10 gulden, and then changed it to 50 eurocents. Now it's 60 eurocents (1.32 gulden). 32% inflation in 4 years. This is why people hate the euro. That and because Zalm (dutch finance minister) lied about the inflation.
Economists use special 'buckets' of goods to compare prices; these buckets also include a lot of stuff that people don't use regularly. But life has surely gotten a lot more expensive since the euro was introduced, politicians are the only people who claim something different.
People also believe shopping at supermarket has become more expensive yet it has been proven that shopping in supermarkets is cheaper than it was back then.
Prices in supermarkets are lower because of the 'price battle' or however you translate it, you know what I'm talking about. All supermarkets started lowering their prices to attract customers, a lot suffered losses. This has nothing to do with the euro. Right after the euro came, before the 'price battle', prices were higher anyway.
I once read in the newspaper an old woman saying "before I went to the supermarket with 100 Gulden, now I go with 100 Euros.", again I remember most people spent about 200 Gulden in supermarkets.
You bought 1 euro for 2.20 gulden. So your 200 gulden is worth about 90 euro, while the same goods now cost 100 euro, so you lose about 10%.
I think the people don't like the Euro because the people sort of miss the Gulden, not because the Euro is a bad coin or something.
People wouldn't have hated the euro if inflation hadn't been so high.
At 6/20/05 02:10 AM, totalwar wrote: That's what I said the Euro is doing for shit these days because the EU bank has interest rates pegged really high. China is seeing insane growth though, what planet have you been on for the past half year. I mean hell, most economists are worried that it's growing too fast.
Okay I'm a stupid foreigner: I thought 'abysmal' meant 'very good', so I totally misread your post. My apologies, english isn't my first language.
At 6/19/05 02:43 PM, totalwar wrote: Your seeing abysmal economic growth because you've still got your damn interest rates pegged so high.
Excuse me? Most European economies are in the gutter. China is seeing abysmal economic growth, Europe has an average of about 3% growth and that's because the 'newer' members (Poland, Czech) are doing well. The UK and the Scandinavian economies are also doing relatively good, but France and Germany have 0 - 1 % growth. The Italian economy has shrunk by about 0.8 %. America is doing a lot better.
I personally would love to see a united Europe, if nothing else it's a lot less nations to start a war. I don't think it'll happen though, hundreds of years of bitter hatred not to mention more languages then you can shake a stick at, are some damn big hurtles to clear.
I couldn't agree more. But it will be wishful thinking for the next few hundred years, there is no 'us, Europeans' feeling. And I don't think it will emerge either, unless the Russians invade or something like that.
At 6/19/05 02:02 PM, BaggieBoy2005 wrote:
Sorry, did you completley miss my point? and did you think about your answer? I was saying these luxuries weren't a waste of money, and you've just proven my point.
Why weren't these luxuries a waste of money? One could live without them right? Smoking isn't a waste of money to people because enjoy it - the same way you might enjoy internet without having to use it.
You couldn't live without a newspaper, or a radio. therefore - not wasting money.
Where in my post did you read that I couldn't live without the newspaper or a radio? Let me quote what I said earlier so maybe now you'll actually read it:
At 6/19/05 01:48 PM, lapis wrote: In fact, there is a huge amount of people who don't know shit about what's going on in the world. And they certainly aren't dying.
You can live LONGER without smoking, and it isn't essential to living - therefore wasting money.
To some people those few extra years of being a demented senior citizen have little value. At least not as much value as the pleasures of smoking.
At 6/19/05 01:23 PM, BaggieBoy2005 wrote: Unfortunatley, the above mentioned aren't a waste of money in the western world. How would you know anything without a T.V. , the internet etc?
I'd read the newspaper, or listen to the radio. In fact, there is a huge amount of people who don't know shit about what's going on in the world. And they certainly aren't dying.
could you walk the distances that you would need, without a car?
Trains and buses were invented for a reason.
exactly. you couldn't. If you say you could, then you are lying.
I could, really.
Smoking is a complete waste of money, see my earlier post.
That is just your humble opinion. Some people enjoy their cigarettes, and it's up to them if they want to pay for it, with money or with their lives.
At 6/19/05 11:05 AM, _Mary_ wrote: Smoking is a complete waste of money.
So are all luxury goods: cars, televisions, the internet...
Some crave them and others think it's a waste of money. You should have said "I think smoking is a complete waste of money" or something similar.
smoking increases the chance of dying from 100% to 100%
At 6/19/05 11:45 AM, Final_Sam wrote: If you hate people discriminating based on race...why are you disciminating the Dutch yourself? That's just wierd! It's like hating nazi's and also Jews!! Doesn't make any sense!
That's the whole point... it's from Austin Powers: Goldmember. It's just like the old "there's two things I hate: racism and n******" joke. Not to be taken seriously :)
At 6/18/05 04:18 PM, Final_Sam wrote: You lookid it up? That's flattering..
Yeah that's our country's specialty, like beer and chocolate..
You're forgetting locking several 15-year old girls in your basement and then raping and murdering them >-<
At 6/18/05 04:34 PM, Wes_is_king wrote: There are only two things I hate in the world, people who discrimate agianst other people becuase of race, and the dutch. Belgiums share a border with those filthy dutch so their just as bad.
Shut up, Nigel Powers. You look very toyt. Must be your toyt pants.
At 6/19/05 07:55 AM, _Nevyn_ wrote: belgium people hate dutch, you dumb fuck.
Heh, likewise.
you son of a whore, you
ta mère est une putain
je moeder is een hoer
tu madre es una puta
dein Mutter ist ein Notte
At 6/15/05 01:52 PM, lolomfgisuck wrote: But look at what you resorted to when I explained how piracy could effect something you do care about. Instead of comming back with anything of value to say, you had to resorted to idol threats and double-dog-dare's. "Go ahead, steal Newgrounds... I dare you". Nothing but a paragraph full of bullshit about how I would fail while completly ignoring the point at hand.
If you didn't want me to respond to a stupid point then don't bring them up in the first place. Yes, I wrote a paragraph full of bullshit because I had to respond to bullshit. "Oh look at me, I'm going to copy Newgrounds, lololol". I'm ignoring the point? If you don't give me stupid examples then I wouldn't have to point that out for you.
Do you think it's ok if I steal a copy of Alien Hominid from the store?
Nooo, like I said: copying and stealing are different because when you steal, you take something of material value from the other, which means that he loses something. When you copy, the other guy doesn't lose anything. Is this too hard for you to understand?
Stealing is wrong, copying shouldn't be.The Mona Lisa is copied and reproduced because it's done so legally. There is something called "Public Domain". If the one that ownes the copyrighted material is dead, then after 70+ years the copyrighted work enteres in to public domain where anyone can do anything they want with it.
Well maybe all art should be in the public domain.
At 6/15/05 11:34 AM, lolomfgisuck wrote:At 6/14/05 08:28 PM, JudoHobo wrote: Because they are. I don't make a profit from downloading music, and the people that would make "Newergrounds" would.
It's not about money. It's about the right to maintain control over copyrighted material. Websites are copyrighted material. If you think it should be legal to steal music, then you think it should be legal to steal websites and everything on them.
I think that my respect and appreciation is reward enough for himToo bad respect and appreciation doesn't pay the bills.
It's about the money, it isn't about the money... make up your fucking mind.
and I don't think people should have the right to keep others from enjoying things they made when it doesn't cost them a thing.Since when has recording music, creating new products, and mass producing software, webpages, movies, and books been free? Creating these things does cost us... it costs us everything from the supplies we need to make our dreams become a reality to the amount of hours we waisted creating such things.
I said SHARING won't cost them a thing. He makes the music, fans will use paypal, he's not making a loss. Any further sharing does not cost him a dime.
On top of that, there is usally a large cost in maintance that follows. I can't create a peice of software and then just walk away forever. I have to provide tech support, bug fixes, and patches with new and updated features. Music is no exception.
Well then people will just have to pay for those extra services. I never asked for support with music I downloaded. And before the internet became popular, things like patches and bug fixes were also nonexistent. It isn't like the end of additional service means the end of music and film.
This is by far, the stupidest thing I have ever read. Not only does it make absolutly no sense at all but it defies all logic in the business world. First and foremost we have to mention that 9 out of 10 movies never make any merchandise. When was the last time you saw somebody wearing a "Beaches" T-Shirt or a little kid playing with a "Thema and Luise" action figure? How are these movies going to survive?
People will still go to the movie theatre! Watching a movie at home behind your computer can't beat going out with friends. You call my post stupid while you lack the intelligence to understand that music and film won't die when anti-piracy laws are ignored. All you can do you is post exaggerations. Yes, there's piracy and yes, people are still making songs and movies. Artists are still creative enough to make money. And those few unknown artists don't need translators, special effects teams, editors etc.
Who's going to pay the printing company that prints out the movie posters? Who's going to the web developer that designs the movies web page? And what if a movie does have toys... who pays to design, create, manufacture, and ship them? I mean seriously, how many $5.00 action figures do you have to sell to cover the cost of a 7 million dollar movie?
No, action figures alone can't make a 7 million dollars. But I guarantee you that George Lucas would have made those 7 million anyway if downloading was legal. I said action figures AND STUFF. It was one of the many things. Cinema tickets, fan donations, you name it. You underestimate the creativity of man.
At 6/14/05 01:20 PM, lolomfgisuck wrote:At 6/14/05 11:45 AM, lapis wrote: This site isn't art - the movies and games here are.Piracy doesn't exclude art. I love how you pro-piracy people change the rules at will to make it work the way YOU see fit. I've already defined the word once and I recall it saying "Copyrighted material"... last time I checked newgrounds and everything on it was copyrighted material.
So in other words, If it's ok for you to steal music, then it's ok for me to steal Newgrounds. Strange, Piracy doesn't sound that great anymore does it?
Go ahead, steal Newgrounds. People will notice that you copied it, trash your site on forums so you won't see lots of people there anyway. And you haven't got the money to run a site as big as Newgrounds, and who's going to advertise on a copycat site? People will still go to the original Newgrounds to post their latest games and movies so your site will always just have outdated material.
And like I said before: I think art should be distributed freely, as long as the authors are being credited and you're not using it to make money. So I think it's okay if you copy Newgrounds as long as you let people on your site know that Tom Fulp, Liljim, etc made all the graphics and did all the programming.
If some other guy wants to use them then it's okay as long as they credit the original author.No, it's not OK. When somebody creates a flash cartoon, that cartoon is initialy copyrighted to the one that made it. He now owns that specific cartoon.
Yes, he owns that cartoon, and he always will. But we're not stealing it, we're COPYING it. Since when has it been illegal to copy the Mona Lisa? You can buy Mona Lisa posters for less than a dollar. It's not like the Louvre is going to sue you.
Stealing is wrong, copying shouldn't be. All scientists copy the work done by others in the past, and they credit the one who did that research. That's how it should be.
He then CHOOSES to send it to Newgrounds and allows it to be viewed free of charge. However, he only gave Newgrounds that permission. Sure, I'm allowed to watch it but I'm not allowed to reproduce it.
Yeah sure, I'm not allowed to reproduce it. But that doesn't mean that I'll feel bad whenever I do. I think that my respect and appreciation is reward enough for him, and I don't think people should have the right to keep others from enjoying things they made when it doesn't cost them a thing.
Can you imagine if that's how the world worked? I watched something so now I own it. I watched Star Wars 3 just the other day, does that mean I'm entitled to entire Star Wars franchise now? Of course not.
What franchise? As long as you're not making money when using Star Wars characters, and as long as you credit George Lucas, then I think that you should have the right to post it on a site for other people to watch. When people watch it, he'll make money by selling action figures, Dark Vader clothing and stuff like that. No one has to go bankrupt because he won't let others copy his work.
At 6/14/05 11:31 AM, lolomfgisuck wrote: But hey, who am I to judge. Newgrounds is a pretty popular site and Tom seems to make a pretty decent living off of it. So maybe I should do the same. I think I'll copy all of the images, scripts, layouts, flash filmes, etc on this site and make my own site. I'll call it "newergrounds". It's not stealing, I just "copied" the files from Tom and thousands of users without their permission. In fact, I'm helping everybody by getting their works out to more viewers... so what if you don't see a dime of all the profit I make from advertising after you hard work draws in countless of "newerground" fans? It's not about the money... it's about the "art".
This site isn't art - the movies and games here are. If some other guy wants to use them then it's okay as long as they credit the original author. The people here don't charge us to watch the movies or play the games. If they would - then I wouldn't care if some other dude stole their movies and put them on his site.
The people here spent time and effort on games and movies because they wanted respect and possibly entertaining people. They don't have to ask people for money - neither do musicians. They can use paypal, or go to fairs in order to make some extra money.
At 6/14/05 11:11 AM, lolomfgisuck wrote: How? Why? Simple. Because it's not up to you to decide how my music is distributed. It's up to me... because it's my music. Do you not understand rights? I own that song, that song is my property and if I don't want people to get it over a P2P network then that's my choice and you should respect it as so. Piracy removes that right from me and makes it legal for you to do as you see with my property and that's wrong.
When they made that song they made art, and art belongs to society.
Stealing - To take (the property of another) without right or permission
We're not stealing. When you steal you TAKE something from someone else. When you're downloading songs off the internet you're not taking anything, you're copying it. The guy that you copied it from doesn't lose a thing. It's still illegal, but at least I won't feel bad. I don't respect him anyway if he's just doing it for the money.
you have to solve: sin(Pi/12) = x / (cot(Pi/12) - x)
So that gives x = 0.767 or something.
Right?
