Zwhaler
Jan 9, 05:34 PM
I agree that we put lots of pressure to release the iPhone on Steve. But I am dissapointed to say the least.
johnbro23
Sep 24, 03:28 PM
Let's say the girl is almost 18, but they're in the same grade (seniors in high school).
Truffy
Nov 22, 03:00 PM
+ 1. The guy who sent this email undoubtedly sniffs his own farts.
HEY! WHAT'S WRONG WITH SNIFF...:o
HEY! WHAT'S WRONG WITH SNIFF...:o
likemyorbs
Mar 24, 10:36 AM
Personally, I find theocracy distasteful, but to describe Shari'a as stupid extremist ideology is absurd. From what I have read of it, much is a fairly reasonable social code. Hardly any worse than what prevailed through most of Europe's history.
Are you frickin kidding? Sharia law IS stupid extremist ideology. That's the only way to describe it. Maybe you should read some more. No, better yet, go live in a country that has it. When you get 99 lashes for expressing your religious beliefs, we'll see how "reasonable" you think it is. Why are you talking about europe's history and comparing it with sharia law today? Yes it was bad, but we're in the 21st century now and europe has changed quite a bit, and for good reason. Countries with sharia law are barbaric and seem to be intent on staying in the 15th century. This comment you just made just discredited anything you say on these forums, as a matter of fact, it's going into my signature to replace citizenzen's nazi comment.
EDIT: In addition to that, you have some damn nerve arguing with me over capital punishment, saying how horrible it is, and then referring to sharia law is reasonable social code. Seriously, get your priorities straight. Just, wow. Hypocrisy at its finest.
Are you frickin kidding? Sharia law IS stupid extremist ideology. That's the only way to describe it. Maybe you should read some more. No, better yet, go live in a country that has it. When you get 99 lashes for expressing your religious beliefs, we'll see how "reasonable" you think it is. Why are you talking about europe's history and comparing it with sharia law today? Yes it was bad, but we're in the 21st century now and europe has changed quite a bit, and for good reason. Countries with sharia law are barbaric and seem to be intent on staying in the 15th century. This comment you just made just discredited anything you say on these forums, as a matter of fact, it's going into my signature to replace citizenzen's nazi comment.
EDIT: In addition to that, you have some damn nerve arguing with me over capital punishment, saying how horrible it is, and then referring to sharia law is reasonable social code. Seriously, get your priorities straight. Just, wow. Hypocrisy at its finest.
more...
Rybold
Jul 11, 03:31 AM
What is the temperature there?
Here in SoCal, it was about 90degrees during the day, and it's about 65degrees right now.
Here in SoCal, it was about 90degrees during the day, and it's about 65degrees right now.
Crazysah
Mar 29, 09:40 AM
Hello,
Where can I see my two and a half year old Sony HDR-HC7 Camcorder? I tried Craigslist but all I'm getting is people trying to scam me. I"m trying eBay at the moment but it isn't working. What do you people suggest I do? Would anyone here want it?
Crazysah
Where can I see my two and a half year old Sony HDR-HC7 Camcorder? I tried Craigslist but all I'm getting is people trying to scam me. I"m trying eBay at the moment but it isn't working. What do you people suggest I do? Would anyone here want it?
Crazysah
more...
kainjow
Mar 20, 03:34 PM
This is piracy, not allowed here. See forum rules.
Huntn
Mar 3, 03:13 PM
You indicated that the rich weren't paying their 'fair share.' I responded by pointing out that the top 50% of wage earners pay 95% of the tax burden. That is completely separate (although obviously relative and related) from the tax 'rate' which they pay.
Then adjust it down and make the top 60% of wage earners pay 90% of the burden.
Let me get this straight... your definition of 'fair' is that people who make the right decisions in life, who invest in the right ideas, who don't waste their money on immediate pursuits so they can benefit in the long-term, who work hard and earn success, and yes... have a little luck should have their money confiscated by the state? By mob rule? Since you've determined that 'they don't need it', that translates to them not 'deserving' it and you being able to steal it from them via taxation?
Yes it is completely fair. What is your definition of steal? We could call taxation stealing. We could call exporting a million jobs out of the country stealing couldn't we? We could call breaking the union so executives, executives who all ready have a lot of money, can have more of labor's pay stealing.
This has been one of my long term themes. You live in a society for a reason. That reason is mutual benefit. Because you are smart (or lucky) and make the right decisions, and you end up with all most more money than you can spend or put another way, so much money to life like a King, should you? Oh, sure some people after living that way for years, start feeling guilty, and start a charity to ease their guilty conscious.
But my point is from a moral standpoint, how much money does an individual and his immediate family need to live a comfortable life? In this case of the successful business person, they should be at the top of the income scale. But I have proposed that scale be capped and a 90% income tax rate at a high level, say over $1 million a year is completely fair. "Damn it's so unfair. I only have $1M per year to live on, when I could have $10M, $20M, $50M, bastards!" Obviously you think it's fair if you are allowed to live in excess while others do without or do even you have a cap? ;)
Now you can muster up all of your capitalistic indignity and tell me why it's not fair. Which brings us back to my original premise. How much do you need to live on and still be considered a 'moral' person? What is your definition of moral, being a glutton? That is what the excessively rich are.
BTW, I don't hold anything against them, I don't envy them as I live what I consider to be a very comfortable life in the range of 150k per year income. But I am in the minority. A whole lot of people scrape by in this country. There is 'smart' and then there is 'opportunity'. Right now large multi-national corporations are doing there best to take away 'opportunity' from average citizens so they can increase their profits. Not only do they not give a damn about society, they have absolutely no national loyalty. Call them carpet baggers.
So in conclusion, I don't think excessive wealth is moral and I have no problem with the Federal government setting the top tax bracket at 90%. Call me a suedo-socialist. :)
I really like that quote where the Brit said it was easier being rich in the U.S. because instead of envying the fat cats, many Americans want to be like them. The inference being that they are cheering them on in hopes of one day being fabulously rich when in reality that is not going to happen for most of us, but we still support federal policies that hurt average people like lemmings heading off the cliff.
Then adjust it down and make the top 60% of wage earners pay 90% of the burden.
Let me get this straight... your definition of 'fair' is that people who make the right decisions in life, who invest in the right ideas, who don't waste their money on immediate pursuits so they can benefit in the long-term, who work hard and earn success, and yes... have a little luck should have their money confiscated by the state? By mob rule? Since you've determined that 'they don't need it', that translates to them not 'deserving' it and you being able to steal it from them via taxation?
Yes it is completely fair. What is your definition of steal? We could call taxation stealing. We could call exporting a million jobs out of the country stealing couldn't we? We could call breaking the union so executives, executives who all ready have a lot of money, can have more of labor's pay stealing.
This has been one of my long term themes. You live in a society for a reason. That reason is mutual benefit. Because you are smart (or lucky) and make the right decisions, and you end up with all most more money than you can spend or put another way, so much money to life like a King, should you? Oh, sure some people after living that way for years, start feeling guilty, and start a charity to ease their guilty conscious.
But my point is from a moral standpoint, how much money does an individual and his immediate family need to live a comfortable life? In this case of the successful business person, they should be at the top of the income scale. But I have proposed that scale be capped and a 90% income tax rate at a high level, say over $1 million a year is completely fair. "Damn it's so unfair. I only have $1M per year to live on, when I could have $10M, $20M, $50M, bastards!" Obviously you think it's fair if you are allowed to live in excess while others do without or do even you have a cap? ;)
Now you can muster up all of your capitalistic indignity and tell me why it's not fair. Which brings us back to my original premise. How much do you need to live on and still be considered a 'moral' person? What is your definition of moral, being a glutton? That is what the excessively rich are.
BTW, I don't hold anything against them, I don't envy them as I live what I consider to be a very comfortable life in the range of 150k per year income. But I am in the minority. A whole lot of people scrape by in this country. There is 'smart' and then there is 'opportunity'. Right now large multi-national corporations are doing there best to take away 'opportunity' from average citizens so they can increase their profits. Not only do they not give a damn about society, they have absolutely no national loyalty. Call them carpet baggers.
So in conclusion, I don't think excessive wealth is moral and I have no problem with the Federal government setting the top tax bracket at 90%. Call me a suedo-socialist. :)
I really like that quote where the Brit said it was easier being rich in the U.S. because instead of envying the fat cats, many Americans want to be like them. The inference being that they are cheering them on in hopes of one day being fabulously rich when in reality that is not going to happen for most of us, but we still support federal policies that hurt average people like lemmings heading off the cliff.
more...
Trey1984
May 1, 11:35 PM
Please pm
Clive At Five
Nov 29, 02:34 PM
Clive, I am with you, but unfortunately we live in a society that worship celebrities and violence. It won't change.
Teachers should start salaries in the $100k a year and climb up from there to the amount of years in the job. But it's a dream that will never happen.:(
Okay, I think $100k is a *little* excessive... and could encourage those who aren't as passionate about children to pursue a teaching job just for the money.
I think starting at $50-60k would be more than reasonable... I mean for only working 9 months out of the year plus receiving the benefits that teachers usually do... that'll sweeten the deal a lot. Especially in my field, physics, the way things are now I could either start as a teacher for $40k if I'm very lucky, or $50k+ in the industry. I'm just out of college and as poor as a rat... what do you think I would do? I'm not Mr. Materialistic or anything, but I have school and an apartment to pay for.
I think the real monetary incentive in teaching should be the bottom right corner of the matrix... those who have higher degrees and have worked for many years. It'll encourage people to be into teaching for the long-haul. However, that might introduce problems with ever-changing research on effective teaching styles, so maybe that isn't just a great idea.
Just some thoughts.
-Clive
Teachers should start salaries in the $100k a year and climb up from there to the amount of years in the job. But it's a dream that will never happen.:(
Okay, I think $100k is a *little* excessive... and could encourage those who aren't as passionate about children to pursue a teaching job just for the money.
I think starting at $50-60k would be more than reasonable... I mean for only working 9 months out of the year plus receiving the benefits that teachers usually do... that'll sweeten the deal a lot. Especially in my field, physics, the way things are now I could either start as a teacher for $40k if I'm very lucky, or $50k+ in the industry. I'm just out of college and as poor as a rat... what do you think I would do? I'm not Mr. Materialistic or anything, but I have school and an apartment to pay for.
I think the real monetary incentive in teaching should be the bottom right corner of the matrix... those who have higher degrees and have worked for many years. It'll encourage people to be into teaching for the long-haul. However, that might introduce problems with ever-changing research on effective teaching styles, so maybe that isn't just a great idea.
Just some thoughts.
-Clive
more...
Samsquantch
Aug 2, 12:19 AM
http://i428.photobucket.com/albums/qq5/mkiesse/August2010.png
You can see the full-size version here (http://samsquampch.deviantart.com/#/d2v69t8).
You can see the full-size version here (http://samsquampch.deviantart.com/#/d2v69t8).
tech324
May 5, 12:26 PM
I am past the 14 day return window but I have only had my MBP for roughly a month now. I am noticing a dead pixel on the screen. Will Apple fix that or does Apple require a minimum amount of dead pixels to fix?
Thanks in advance.
Thanks in advance.
more...
Lennholm
Apr 29, 04:12 AM
So Samsung believed Apple was violating it's patents all this time but decided to do nothing about it. Now that they have been pushed they decide to act. Sounds to me they are trying to find whatever they can to bite back at Apple.
Well it could be that they thought they had a mutual understanding with Apple that they could borrow some technologies from each other but now that Apple choose to sue (Apple waited too you know, the Galaxy S wasn't exactly launched two weeks ago) Samsung is not gonna let it slide. I'm not commenting on the validity of the claim but I want to point out that people should remember that patents aren't only for the tangible things we consumers see, like the similarities between iOS and Touchwiz, but also the transparent to us consumers- under the hood technology, for which Samsung holds lots of patents.
Well it could be that they thought they had a mutual understanding with Apple that they could borrow some technologies from each other but now that Apple choose to sue (Apple waited too you know, the Galaxy S wasn't exactly launched two weeks ago) Samsung is not gonna let it slide. I'm not commenting on the validity of the claim but I want to point out that people should remember that patents aren't only for the tangible things we consumers see, like the similarities between iOS and Touchwiz, but also the transparent to us consumers- under the hood technology, for which Samsung holds lots of patents.
jrko
Apr 9, 11:49 AM
ok so hunting 10.5 disc that doesn't cost more than the machine in the first place!
Will 2Gb of ram solve my video streaming issues? I've been looking at ATI 9800 with 128mb ram and they are pretty cheap from a pc.
how do you go about flashing one?
more...
wallpaper room ideas.
These smart edroom ideas will
more...
dining room ideas,
Retro Bedroom with Purple,
Ralph Lauren Wallpaper
Will 2Gb of ram solve my video streaming issues? I've been looking at ATI 9800 with 128mb ram and they are pretty cheap from a pc.
how do you go about flashing one?
more...
ghostlyorb
Apr 29, 07:34 AM
once people get to upgrade their phones... iPhone will be #1 on verizon.
AndrewR23
Apr 29, 12:17 AM
Sorry I didn't know where else to post this, but is it true we need to buy an iPhone 4 white with a Contract?
I just talked to a ATT rep and he said they don't sell them without contract? Is that true?
Go to Apple. Pay 599/699 and you won't get a contract.
I just talked to a ATT rep and he said they don't sell them without contract? Is that true?
Go to Apple. Pay 599/699 and you won't get a contract.
more...
Osarkon
Oct 17, 08:20 PM
yes ok this is the fourth time you've posted it, we get the idea. there's a pretty image.
easy4lif
Nov 29, 12:57 PM
hey movie studios, if you made more great movies on the Calibre of spiderman, Cars, or Pirates of the carribean people would be willing not to steal in the first place. case in point, Cars DVD sold 6 million in one week. Crap like Battlefield Earth witch cost 100 million to make but only made 20 million in box office sales sucked on several levels
you want to make money off your movies
MAKE GOOD MOVIES! ! !
you want to make money off your movies
MAKE GOOD MOVIES! ! !
stlredbird
Jul 2, 10:56 PM
Trying to jailbreak my 3GS for hours and no sucess .
it has the new ios 4 software , tried with pnwage tool 4.0 ,
got a message sayig that firmware is not compatible .
tried with redsnow , didnt work
any suggestions ?
My only suggestion would be to post in this forum instead:
http://forums.macrumors.com/forumdisplay.php?f=105
it has the new ios 4 software , tried with pnwage tool 4.0 ,
got a message sayig that firmware is not compatible .
tried with redsnow , didnt work
any suggestions ?
My only suggestion would be to post in this forum instead:
http://forums.macrumors.com/forumdisplay.php?f=105
HarryPot
May 4, 01:26 PM
I would have rather let Osama bin Laden go undiscovered than torture someone to find out where he was.
But what if torturing a person who is involved in the plans of a terrorist attack could prevent thousands of deaths?
Torturing would never be a good action, but it is like killing someone to defend yourself, killing is bad, but the result of killing saved your life.
In the case of torture, it is the government defending its people (country). If it can be avoided better, but I would rather authorize torture instead of letting attacks happen.
EDIT: As with everything, every single case needs to be analyzed separately.
But what if torturing a person who is involved in the plans of a terrorist attack could prevent thousands of deaths?
Torturing would never be a good action, but it is like killing someone to defend yourself, killing is bad, but the result of killing saved your life.
In the case of torture, it is the government defending its people (country). If it can be avoided better, but I would rather authorize torture instead of letting attacks happen.
EDIT: As with everything, every single case needs to be analyzed separately.
bigrobb
Oct 10, 10:06 PM
here is my bootcamp one
quadroid
Apr 26, 07:47 PM
When menus closed, I have found everything I wanted, and he still continues searching at the background.
Can I make Spotlight stopped searching after I will choose something from the results?
Can I make Spotlight stopped searching after I will choose something from the results?
Cydonia
Mar 23, 08:59 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8F190 Safari/6533.18.5)
I seem to recall Craig Federighi demoing Mac OS X Lion and he did a good job. Slightly nervous shaky hands but a watchable presenter.
I seem to recall Craig Federighi demoing Mac OS X Lion and he did a good job. Slightly nervous shaky hands but a watchable presenter.
sochrisash
Oct 15, 06:33 AM
http://i418.photobucket.com/albums/pp263/sochrisash/Picture1-8.png
Emma stone :D
Yeh my boring iMac desktop, haven't got round to customizing it
Emma stone :D
Yeh my boring iMac desktop, haven't got round to customizing it
No comments:
Post a Comment