FU to the 2 fat ass spicks on the bus today. Rush hour and you two twats got your 3 fucking kids screaming and crying the whole goddamn time. Not only that but your fucking strolers took about the entire middle of the bus. So no one could get out the back fucking door. Oh yeah and one more thing.. LEARN TO SPEAK FUCKING ENGLISH. :burnfucker:

Happy birthday, Bill Bixby, even though you're dead. How we loved when you turned green and started smashing stuff.

I never bought the DELL...sale ended, my company's bonus was half of last year for everyone...so, fucked, I built one. (ok, I cheated a bit getting the motherboard, porocessor and case together pre-assembled). Saved a bunch of cash. Used my old Sony harddrive. Everything works great....shockingly. However...computer thinks it's a Sony still. It thinks it's still a VAIO, just now with an AMD 2400 chip, ASUS motherboard & video card. Will this be a potential problem???

:damnpc:

This is for Gomez's eyes only. No peaking.

<!-- spoilerKillit --><table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td bgcolor="#000000" valign="middle" align="left"><font color="#000000" size="1">Spoiler (Highlight to Read):</font>
</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#ffffff" valign="middle" align="left"><font color="#ffffff" size="1"><!-- spoilerKillitEnd --><!--txtStart-->I'm going to make a break for it. Once I have restored my admin powers I'll come back for you.<!--txtEnd--><!-- spoilerKillit --></td></tr></table><!-- spoilerKillitEnd -->

I found this little article in newspaper:
Net Providers Must Help in Piracy Fight

Seems now ISP's are supposed to track down people sharing music, and turn them in.

What I want to know is how do they know to look for them?
is ISP supposed to monitor all internet traffic now?
What ever happened to 4th Amendment - isn't this
"search now and let's see what we find"?
Will they monitor all sites you visit?

This was the quote from the article that made me most nervous:

Quote:"This puts a huge burden on Internet service providers," said Harris Miller, head of the Washington-based Information Technology Association of America, a trade group. "It turns them into judge, jury and executioner just because someone makes an allegation about a problem."

:fuggin:

I'm fucking hungry.

Pancakes and Syrup with a couple of sausage links sound really good right now.

You must make a decision based on the information presented. Your decision must be immediate, and you must be able to justify your decision. You and only you have the power to make this decision.

Background

Persons A, B, C, and D are all successful businessmen. Each one is married with children, own companies that employ thousands of people, frequently make generous charitable contributions, and are law abiding, tax paying, model American citizens with unblemished criminal records.

Person E works for minimum wage, lives in his mother's basement, has a history of petty crime and even once served a sentence for manslaughter. He's known to associate with junkies, degenerates, and other criminals. He is currently awaiting trial for murder.

Dilemna

Person A needs a heart transplant, or he'll die.

Person B needs a liver transplant, or he'll die.

Person C needs a kidney transplant, or he'll die.

Person D needs a stomach transplant, or he'll die.

Person E is in perfect health, other than the fact that he lost a kidney in a prison fight many years back in which he was stabbed. Person E is the only potential donor for persons A, B, C, and D. He is a willing organ donor, but unwilling to die unnaturally. In this hypothetical situation, it is known that transplant operations have a 100% success rate.

Decision

A) You decide that person E must be euthanized, and his organs donated to persons A, B, C, and D, saving their lives.

B) You decide that person E stays alive, leading to the deaths of persons A, B, C, and D.

Justify your decision, taking into account the potential benefits and consequences of both the decision you did make, and the one you didn't.

You heard me

Wassup?