Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: Eeyore on 30 Nov 2006 10:53 jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > >jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > >> krw <krw(a)att.bizzzz> wrote: > >> > >> >It's not a "3" it's "=3F" (the code-point for the apostrophe). I'm > >> >not sure what I did (it just happened recently). If someone has an > >> >idea how to fix it I certainly will! > >> > >> Did your system get hexed? > > > >Can you explain what you mean in normal language ? > > START: MOVEI T1,[ASCIZ/Did your system get hexed?/] > OUTSTR T1, > END START > > /BAH I never get involved in assembler aside from DSP. It's far too difficult to maintain and far too easy to write nonsense code. Graham
From: Eeyore on 30 Nov 2006 10:57 Ken Smith wrote: > In article <6f64d$456af1d5$4fe771a$31908(a)DIALUPUSA.NET>, > unsettled <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> wrote: > [...] > >The druggie problem is usually a dual one. The largest > >percentage resort to crime to acquire the funds with > >which to purchase. Long term incarceration tends to reduce > >the crime rate. > > This could be an argument for simply giving them the drugs. It would be a > lot cheap than jail. A few countries have tried this and as far as I know > the sky hasn't fallen. A British Assistant Chief Constable has also very recently made the suggestion that heroin addicts should be given free heroin ( we don't have that crack cocaine and crystal meth stuff much here AIUI ). It'll simply result in less crime. Graham
From: Lloyd Parker on 30 Nov 2006 05:49 In article <95d74$456dc13c$4fe7752$20089(a)DIALUPUSA.NET>, unsettled <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> wrote: >Lloyd Parker wrote: > >> In article <485af$456c7009$4fe7665$9791(a)DIALUPUSA.NET>, >> unsettled <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> wrote: >> >>>Lloyd Parker wrote: >>> >>>>In article <ekhdog$8qk_001(a)s1016.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, >>>> jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >>> >>>>>>But again, what you get doesn't depend on your ability to pay. >>> >>>>>Huh? >>> >>>>In a pure socialistic system, you'd receive what you need without regards >> >> to >> >>>>ability to pay, right? That's how the military works. >>> >>>In the military physical performance is required and >>>routinely tested. Inability to perform results in >>>separation. >> >> >> But you get ahead without regard to wealth. Your ability to pay doesn't >> affect your advancement, as it does with a capitalistic system. > >Performance is the only currency deciding advancement, >which isn't socialist at all. Sure it is. While everyone gets what they need to stay alive and healthy, the best advance. However, wealth isn't a consideration in advancement as it is under capitalism. >If it were a socialist >system we'd allow cripples in the US military. > >>>They have to have the ability to "pay" in terms of >>>services provided.
From: unsettled on 30 Nov 2006 12:05 Lloyd Parker wrote: > In article <95d74$456dc13c$4fe7752$20089(a)DIALUPUSA.NET>, > unsettled <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> wrote: > >>Lloyd Parker wrote: >> >> >>>In article <485af$456c7009$4fe7665$9791(a)DIALUPUSA.NET>, >>> unsettled <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> wrote: >>> >>> >>>>Lloyd Parker wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>>In article <ekhdog$8qk_001(a)s1016.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, >>>>> jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >>>> >>>>>>>But again, what you get doesn't depend on your ability to pay. >>>> >>>>>>Huh? >>>> >>>>>In a pure socialistic system, you'd receive what you need without regards >>> >>>to >>> >>> >>>>>ability to pay, right? That's how the military works. >>>> >>>>In the military physical performance is required and >>>>routinely tested. Inability to perform results in >>>>separation. >>> >>> >>>But you get ahead without regard to wealth. Your ability to pay doesn't >>>affect your advancement, as it does with a capitalistic system. >> >>Performance is the only currency deciding advancement, >>which isn't socialist at all. > > > Sure it is. Nope. > While everyone gets what they need to stay alive and healthy, the > best advance. That's no advance, that's status qou. > However, wealth isn't a consideration in advancement as it is > under capitalism. If a soldier has a heart attack they're discharged from military service. Under socialism they'd be cared for and returned to duty, lighter duty as necessary. Stretching your arguments? Compare Young's modulus. >>If it were a socialist >>system we'd allow cripples in the US military. >>>>They have to have the ability to "pay" in terms of >>>>services provided.
From: T Wake on 30 Nov 2006 12:39
"JoeBloe" <joebloe(a)thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote in message news:8pssm2tanl39t92dnbfrqbtn8ah9h4nf8o(a)4ax.com... > On Wed, 29 Nov 2006 19:43:09 -0000, "T Wake" > <usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com> Gave us: > >>Your originality is breathtaking. >> > The shame is that it isn't working. Read what I write a thousand > time. Perhaps you can asphyxiate yourself. Funny and witty. You are amazing. Did some one help you with that or did you come up with it all on your own? |