no9t9

I have LOTS of hosting credits. If you make one long post rather than many short ones, you will get more creidts. By the way, I have 140 hosting credits. That gives me some serious away time.

the apprentice is the best show. never miss an episode

there are kits that you can buy for the v220 which is some software and a USB cable that will allow you to download things to your phone and also get the pictures from the camera paart of the phone. With the USB cable you can put as many different ring tones as you like. Even MP3's are not problem i believe.Anyway, my friend bought the software and the cable for only $8.

there is talk that the season may be uncancelled and there may be a deal in the works with a $45 mil salary cap. Saw it on TSN a few minutes ago

the problem with CSS is that positioning doesn't always show the same way across browsers. In tables, it is a lot more consistent.And, I don't want to get into the arguement of "compliant" browsers. Cause, there are differences between all "compliant" browsers. not all of them support the same CSS functions in the same way.If you are only going to use BASIC CSS functions then, it should display properly across all browsers.Edit: Personally though, I only care about IE, Firefox, and Mozilla. All others represent less than 3% (on my site). If, they don't see it properly. I don't care.Approx.IE 89%Firefox 6%Moz 2%Others 3%

I live in indonesia, and the job such newspaper seller are really worthless. You only get Rp250.000/month, you know how much is it in $? only 25$. It is'nt big enough to afford your life (in case, you live alone). And i don't want to have any job just because i need money for paid hosting since i should concentrate on my study.

$25 a month is plenty for paid hosting cause it only cost $10 a freakin year. And how many people in the world have school just like you but also WORK. You think it was EASY for me to pay for school which cost me $30,000 a year for JUST tuition? I HAD to have a job or I would have been kicked out of school for not being able to pay the fees.

Besides, selling newspapers will not take you 10 hours a day 7 days a week to make the $25 a month. It is ONLY $10 a YEAR. That is basically $0.83 a month. If you made $25 a month, it would only represent 3.3% of your income. Hell, you could even quit after that month and you would have enough money for 2.5 YEARS of hosting.

Don't give me that crap about a job being worthless. If it were worthless, the job would not exist.

how do you know those are the virus or spyware files? aim95 and wxbug are both files that are NOT viruses or spyware (unless it is infected). I am assuming that you know what the virus is because a virus scanner told you. anyway, a quick google search...

http://forums.xisto.com/no_longer_exists/

for more info.

i think the information on the site is very useful but it is a bit awkward and not userfriendly. The links have to be cut and pasted into a new browser window. This is my biggest concern. As for flash, I also do not like sites done in flash. Although it does look nice and the background music is good, I feel flash sites are more for media themed sites like a new movie or a graphic designers site.

the ftp name is simply your website name. but you need an ftp program to use it. or u can use IE

 

yourname.trap17.com, but IE ftp is slow and *BLEEP*.

There are only two solutions to "eradicate" crime completely.(1) Eliminate all laws. Make everything legal and you would have no crime! (2) Eliminate the human population. With no one out there to commit the crime, there would be no crime.Every other method cannot eliminate crime. There are always freaks out there that simply cannot follow laws because they are messed up in the head, even if it is temporary. Look at crimes of passion/rage, guy catches his wife cheating in his bed! He murders them on the spot. Now, most normal people would not kill them but it happens. There is no self control at that point.

i'm not sure if this thread is about "computers" in general, like hard drives, video cards, or other componenets. I think it's really more about the CPU rather than the other componenets. Anyway, it would be nice if there was a computer engineer who has experience in semiconductors to actually answer this question.From what I understand (I am not a computer engineer). Semi conductor technology has reached, or is very close to, its limits. Heat is now a severe problem and the SIZE of the CPU components are pretty much as small as they are gonna get.In order to make major jumps in CPU speed from now on, revolutionary type technology or manufacturing processes are probably the only way to go. One of the technologies they are researching is bio computers. Nature was the greatest inventor and it seems in order to reach the next level we have to go back to our roots. I read in one article, some scientists attached the nerons of a leech to a semi-conductor based chip to perform calculations. Maybe the final step in computing is to actually use the human brain? After all, there are many more brain cells in a human brain then a computer chip will ever have. By linking a controller chip in the brain (like in the leech example), we can use our brains as the processor for a computer. Then we wouldn't need monitors, keyboards, or mice anymore.

i think he is talking about recieving a invite LINK from Google while he did not have a gmail account. Gmail invites are useless now. It was cool before, because they were worth something. I could trade so many things with invites. Now I have like 400 invites just sitting there that nobody wants.

Once again, I really don't understand how you can claim my morals to be "warped." If it ain't broke, don't fix it. That's all I'm saying.

At least I agree with the last part. If it aint broke dont fix it. Personally, I don't think the way marriage works right now is broke.
English is not my first language, I did not learn any english until I started the equivalent of jr high. I have been living in an english speaking country for a long time now. And I guess you might say I am highly educated. I have a Masters level education which was done in the english.

BTW, constructive critisism doesnt start out like "don't go running your mouth off "

great script. works like a charm. The only thing I did to it was add a "Most users ever online" O, and I guess I'll give you rep for it.. you seem to have been very helpful with php for many other users.

Pretty much everything on my website is designed by myself. I haven't used any templates or any CMS system. I find CMS systems to be too buggy and have way too many opportunities for hackers to get in and screw up your site. With my own stuff, I just make what I need and it is a lot easier to manage (security wise)

Adobe has document management software that is pretty secure. Some documents are time sensitive where they will not open after a defined period. In addition, there are other options like passwords, call home, and I think even mac address checking.I'm not sure if they have protection against print screen. It is possible since adobe is external to MSIE and they could simply disable the printscreen function on the document area.You can goto the adobe website and read up on it. Maybe send them an email with your questions. They will know more than me.

New UNI.CC accounts don't have the option of changing name servers. they only have the option to forward the address. Atleast that was true as of the end of january when I created a uni.cc account.

Heck, if it's consensual, I say LET IT GO! Obviously pedophiles don't fall into that category, but if a brother and a sister are truly and genuinely in love with each other, I feel that nothing should be done to stop that. That isn't flawed logic. It's simply a matter of staying out of other people's affairs. Does that point to a possible warped sense of morals? Gimme a break...

 

Also, please realize that law is essentially a reflection of the social and moral values a society holds--a social contract, if you must. Hence, do not be so quick to deem my previous points as "garbage," because their implications extend to a point of relevance.

 

One final note: don't go running your mouth off like your name is Merriam Webster again, ESPECIALLY if English isn't your first language.

51352[/snapback]

Well, I don't really understand how it is "obvious" that pedos dont fall in the same category. Like you said, if they are both genuinely and truely in love and it is concensual why meddle in their affairs?

 

Next, a response that skirts the point in dispute with round about, wishy washy, muddy answers is certainly a response of lower value - hence "garbage".

 

And finally, you shouldn't go running your mouth off with your warped sense of morals and your lack of ability to hold and understand a conversation. In addition, you are clearly a VERY LIBERAL person which makes me wonder why you have to look DOWN upon people for whom their native language is not english. Hmmm.... warped sense of morals? I thinks so.

 

But, I digress... although trading insults with you is fun.. I fear that we are getting off topic. If you continue to resort to insults I cannot continue responding to you. Since, I don't want the topic to be closed..

And people have basic common sense. I love my dog, but I'm not going to marry her. My brothers love my mom, but they'd never marry her.

No they don't. Not every one has "common sense". In fact, there ARE people in the world who would LIKE to marry their own brother/sister. There ARE people in the world who have sex within the family. Just because YOUR brother wouldn't marry your mother, doesn't mean others wouldn't.

And polygamy has nothing to with gay marriage. Just because you are homosexual doesn't mean that you have to marry more than one person. Or that people will marry more people because you get married.

I never said gays or married people are inclined to wanting another spouse. Your arguement is that people should be allowed to love who they want. Well, if someone (doesnt matter if gay or not) loves TWO people, should they be allowed to have a threeway marriage? Current laws say NO (in most places).

Maybe the world will finally understand how shameful this is: repressing love.

Nobody is talking about repression of love. You don't have to get married to love someone.

as smoking bans that would do good to our society. Just because you're not used to it doesn't make it bad.

Just because you deem it bad doesn't make it bad either.

And marriage is an act of love, not religion as far as I'm concerned.

You are entitled to your opinioin but just know that there are many people out there who don't think the way you do.

@dropout. I'm glad you understand my point.

I also used a script like this for counting but I found that it wasn't really enough information. It would be more accurate to count per session using cookies or something. I did a counter with cookies but then I wanted even more information like referrer, time spent, etc. I kind of gave up on this and just joined statcounter.com. They do it for you and you don't have to waste time making the program. the only problem with statcounter is that it only shows the last 100 page loads for free accounts. But, I find the information very useful.O, thanks for putting up the code. It actually is a good counter if you aren't worried about analyzing traffic. Many people will undoubtedly find it useful.

My suggestion would be that churches should have nothing to do with the (legal) marriage. As far as I am concerned they may hold a marriage ceremony, but it would be a religious ceremony, like baptising or communion, with no official relation to the marriage (as seen by law). In other words, a true split of church and state. The current situation where the church has special rights to marry people is in my eyes undesirable.

 

That way a church (or other organisation) could deny anyone they like: gay couples, one armed people, people who make bad jokes. I don't care. The problem here is not same sex marriage, it's that churches are allowed to marry people (again, in the sense of the law).

 

About marriage having religious connotations for you, I'm sure it might have for you, and many christians, but it doesn't for everyone.

Finally, someone who actually provided a THOUGHTFUL response and seems to understand what my point is. Your suggestion is exactly what my point is. A seperation of church and state so that the church can marry whomever they want. Hence, my point of making a new name like "union" for the law. This will allow gays the same LEGAL privilages of other married couples.

 

And religious connotations of marriage, I know it doesn't for everyone but to those that it DOES have religious connotations, a gay marriage would be a slap to the face since those people's religion is not being respected by the law. That is what my problem is. Solution: As stated above. Also, I AM NOT CHRISTIAN. Don't insult me like that!

 

I have the exact same views as you.  I use the same sort of analogy, and the reason that it started out as a religious event when I debate this topic.

51249[/snapback]

I'm glad you understands. Bravo. That makes 2 people who understand.

I have not avoided ANY key points. I am trying to get your STUPID responses BACK ON TOPIC. YOU are the one avoiding answering questions and going off on tangents. How are you gonna argue with someone by NOT answering what was asked and spouting garbage that has no relavence to what was being disputed? And yes, I do believe you are of lower intelligence. And I guess "owning" someone is acceptable to you with your warped sense of morals. You support legalization of incestuous relationships. Next you will support a pedophile who "loves" children since they cant help themselves. Might as well make child porn legal since those guys will do it anyway... Great logic. And you think you're NOT dumb? Making stuff up??? Hey, when in Rome... maybe you should learn to read between the lines. By the way... you WERE making *BLEEP* up and deliberately avoiding the question. Either that or you are incapable of responding in a debate.All along, I've said.. I am talking about the LEGAL issues of allowing gay marriages. I don't give 2 shits if they can help themselves, or they choose to be, if they think it's fun, what they are thinking, or if they go *BLEEP* themselves.The fact is. Once gay marriages are legal, they can then move to the next step and say that since it is legal.. they cannot be denied access. You say that the church is allowed to refuse regardless of circumstance? What if I was not allowed to goto church cause I was black? Is the church allowed to refuse? No. All the black groups and equal rights tree huggers would be up in arms about this. the same thing applies for gays. Currently, gays are not LEGALLY allowed to be MARRIED. That means the church doesn't have to marry them otherwise they would be doing something illegal. Oh and malignant. whatever.. so english isn't my first language. Sue me.And by all means, continue until I crack. But, how will you know when that happens? I don't think you have the ability to determine when that point is. Or were you just spouting more garbage?

Easy for you to say...
I connect to the internet using a Wireless (802.11b) connection, which is limited to 128kbps, I pay in advance for bandwidth to download.

Wireless 802.11b is not 128kbps. It is 11Mbit/s. And most internet connections are not faster than this. So your wireless is NOT a limitation OR an excuse

I don't post very much, but I do READ topics, and the fact that Xisto is a big forum, and loaded with ads (which I try to click whenever possible), I use allot of my 100MB bandwidth (which, by the way, costs 130din - 2.5$, that is pretty much where I live).

http://forums.xisto.com/index.php/ is the lite version of this board which is mostly text.

I will probably struggle for another month while trying to make a 10$ transaction, I can't even think about getting paid hosting. (Serbia, yuck!)

I absolutely do not believe that you cant get access to a VISA card for a $10 transaction. A teacher, father, mother, aunts, clergy, friends, there are so many people that have credit cards. Besides this, there are many places that take other payment options like paypal. Now, I'll admit.. I am not sure that Serbia is an accepted country for paypal.

BTW: Get a JOB???
GET REAL! I'm not over 18, and it is very difficult, even for a 20-30 year old man, to get a job here...

You don't have to be 18 to get a job. I know some kids who are 11 years old that deliver newspapers. There must be restaurants, grocery stores, retail stores in serbia... go wash dishes, mop floors, or stack boxes. So it all depends on what you are willing to do.

Hey there sonny, you're on fire

What's with calling people "boy" and "sonny"? Does that give you a sense of power over me?

You do understand that being gay is not a gesture to spite God. A man does not love another man in order to displease the divine sovereignty, nor does a brother when he loves his sister, a man who desires two wives, or even a man who *truly* has feelings for his dog. This attraction is borne out of an unexplainable nature. IT JUST CANNOT BE HELPED.

omg. I am not talking about WHY they are gay. We are talking about the LAWS and making it LEGAL. Why do you people have to make *BLEEP* up and get off the subject all the time? It makes it difficult to have an intelligent conversation. You haven't answered the question... disregard the fact that they can't CHOOSE who they fall in love with. If a brother loves his sister and wants to get married.. would it be OK to make a law allowing it? This is a direct response to your (and others) statements about gays loving each other and should be allowed to marry. Please answer the question. It is a simple yes or no answer. Basically, in order to support your gay love arguement, you MUST answer YES.
It is clear that you are avoiding the question because you have no real answer. In fact, I am just pointing out that LOVE has nothing to do with marriage in a LEGAL perspective which is what the topic is all about.

Based on this, it is safe to assume that there are devoted Catholics (yes, Catholics, since it is principally the Catholic church that has a beef with gay marriage) who may in fact develop these feelings, which invariably clash with their ideology. It soon becomes a battle of heart and conscience. This conflict arises against their will--they do not wish to place God and love on a scale, expecting one to outweigh another in the ultimate moral solution.

Catholics, christians, whatever.. it doesn't matter to me. I am talking about the LEGAL ramifications of ALLOWING gay marriages by LAW. I know that many people who practice a religion that does not allow gays yet they are gay. So what? That is not the point. The point is, if gay marriages are allowed by law.. it will open up the debate on gays RIGHTS by law to get married where ever they choose.
I also find it interesting that you use the words a "battle of heart and conscience". The way you are writing your comments indicates that you support gays but still think it is wrong. That is very interesting.

It is absurd to think that a gay couple actually has malignant intentions when they plan to get married. They don't wish to brainwash the church. They merely want to compromise. If that notion cannot be properly acknowledged, then the church has got some serious priority questions to tackle...

Again, I wish you would stop making things up. I never said gays were out to hurt people or they had an agenda. If you read the posts, I talk about gays wanting equal rights for marriage. That's the issue, nothing more. I have been and am still debating on the LEGAL aspect of allowing gay marriages. You, and others, continue to talk about moral and social implications.
And the word isn't malignant, it is malicious.

My believes state that I HAVE to sacrifice one homophobic christian every week. What right has the law to force me to set that believe aside?

If it were actually a religion, the right to religious freedom would allow it. As long as you aren't affecting someone elses right (ie. to live). do you understand the context in which the word beliefs is being used? Just because you believe someting it doesn't make it a religion. Think of a better example.

You keep saying marriage between gays is unconstitutional, when in fact the constitution protects every race, age, or sexual preference from this kind of discrimination... During the Spanish Inquisition religion thought it justified to torture and kill anyone they felt like. Church (& society as a whole) once thought it justified to shut blacks out of their human rights.

If you actually bothered to read the post, at no time did I say marriage between gays is unconstitutional. So... please stop making things up. I said it would be unconstitutional to make a law FORCING gay marriages on people for whom their religion regards as a sin. Gays can get "joined" all they want, but not through the institution of marriage.
OMG, you are now talking about church and state issues. In no way am I saying the state should apply laws that discriminate against gays. I already said (I don't know how many times anymore), that they SHOULD be allowed to have all the same LEGAL rights as a "married" couple... but not through the institution of marriage.

Wake up boy. This is the 21st century. Gays will get married everywhere within your lifetime. Let it go...

Oh boy... is that supposed to be an insult? Trying to act older or what? Gays will be married, I have no doubt about that. Some already are. What is your point? Does that mean I am not allowed to discuss my point of view?

Oh and marriage is not a Church (and by htis you seem to mean only the Christian church) institution. You just stole it and called it yours (like Microsoft), as you did with Easter and Christmas, and a lot of pagan things you couldn't get rid of...

Again, stop making things up. I have never said that marriage is a church nor have I EVER talked about any SPECIFIC religion since gays are not accepted in MANY religions. Next, you assume I am christian... which I am not. Finally, I think YOU are the one who doesn't understand what the institution of marriage actually means.