| ||||||
| 2007/2/11-12 [Recreation/Dating] UID:45708 Activity:high |
2/8 "Halle Berry Monster's Ball sex scene"
http://www.youporn.com/watch/4619
Is that really Halle Berry!? I didn't know she was in X-rated movies.
\_ This is more of a story and not porn for the following reasons:
1) she didn't suck cock 2) he didn't eat her 3) he didn't pull
1) she didn't suck cock 2) he didn't eat her ass 3) he didn't pull
out and shoot into her mouth 4) less than 3 positions
(technically you need at minimum: doggy, missionary, and
cowboy)
cowboy) - emarkp
\_ Not really xrated, you don't see any genitalia. You don't even
see her vagina. Just tits.
\_ I see her naked crotch rubbing against his scrotum in the frames
around 2:48. Pay attention to the third thrust of her.
around 2:48. Pay attention to the third thrust of hers.
\_ So is this work safe? (I work on a farm)
\_ NSFW. |
| 2007/2/11-13 [Computer/SW/Mail, Academia/Berkeley/CSUA, Computer/SW/WWW/Server] UID:45709 Activity:nil |
2/11 \_ Is POP back up? Haven't got it to work since Soda got back
up. (SSL http://soda.csua.berkeley.edu port 995)
\_ Legitimately curious, why use POP when you IMAP is available to you?
-dans
\_ Uh, isn't IMAP still down? I still can't access it
-pmw
\_ I neither know nor care. I forward mail off soda to a box
where I run IMAP. :) -dans
\_ In the past (1997) when I used IMAP, it would mark my messages
as "read" when I read them on my client machine. I don't like
this, I like to have the messages as two distinct instances, one
on Soda and one on my home machine. If I read it on my client I
want it to still show and unread on Soda. Also, IMAP is more for
people with always on connections, which I don't have. That's
why I prefer offline processing (Pop) vs interactive processing
(IMAP).
\_ Hmm, I don't understand why you'd want things you've read not
to be marked as read, but if that's how you work, more power
to you. It's worth noting that many modern IMAP clients, eg
OS X's Mail.app, have excellent offline modes, which serves
the same purposes as POP, but with IMAP's richer semantics.
-dans
\_ Thanks, maybe I'll check it out again. 10 yrs of software
development may have fixed my intial hang-ups. |
| 2007/2/11-13 [Industry/Jobs] UID:45710 Activity:high |
2/11 So apparently minimum wage increases do in fact result in layoffs.
http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/0210biz-teenwork0210.html
\- yeah, and vaccines kills people
\_ So do you still think the Iraq occupation was the right thing?
\_you are an idiot.
\_ your an idiot.
\_ Is this supposed to be funny?
\_ But they do not result in layoffs of unoin workers, which is why
unions are so keen on pushing minimum wage increases. This is not
new.
\_ Many union contracts are written such that the base wage is a
multiple of the minimum wage. Thus, raising the minimum wage
has nothing to do with the working poor they claimed to be
helping and everything to do with a *huge* gimme to unions.
\_ Exactly. Another reason is that raising minimum wage makes
hiring unskilled workers more costly, and hiring skilled
workers not as costly in comparison. So employers will be
more likely to hire skilled workers, which again doesn't help
the working poor they claim to be helping. -- PP
\_ Did you even read the article? The layoffs are amongst
teenagers, not the "working poor." In fact, it implies
that older and more experienced workers were becoming
more valuable. This is a good thing, imho. Also, it is
forcing workplaces to become more efficient, which is
the best way to improve standards of living. Without
knowing what the unemployment rate is before and after,
you are not really measuring much. Maybe all those
laid off fast food workers found more economically
prodcutive activity.
productive activity.
\_ No one said the working poor were laid off. Yet. Two
things were said: raising the minimum wage is a gimme
to unions, and that teens are getting axed. I do like
the idea that firing people improves their lives. That
sure worked well for employees in the 2001-2004 era.
\_ "... nothing to do with the working poor they..."
Someone sure said that. Give me some real stats
and not just anecdotes, otherwise you are just
talking out your ass.
\_ Quote them please. Stats: there are no stats that
demonstrate the legal fact that union contracts
are based on a multiple of the minimum wage. It
is a legal fact, not a numeric statistical event.
You really need to keep up with what is being
said, especially if you're going to accuse other
people of "talking out your ass".
\_ Scroll up 20 lines. I am not going to repeat
something that was posted three paragraphs
ago. Do you have a reading comprehension
problem?
\_ You spent more time talking about how you're
too cool/smart to quote than it would have
taken to quote. Except, oh wait, there is
really nothing there for you to quote that
backs up what you said. Quote it.
\_ Minor quibble here: telling teens you're cutting back shifts and
hours constitutes "layoffs"? I thought you had to employ someone
fulltime in order to lay them off.
\_ Okay, whatever: ^layoffs^hour reductions
\_ Okay, whatever: ^layoffs^reduced employment
\_ You ever been laid off a real job? On the way down, some
companies will cut hours or force lower wages (which obviously
isn't possible in this case), before finally cutting for real.
And how is it that cutting back a shift isn't a layoff/firing
if it was your shift that got cut? No job, but good worker =
laid off.
\_ In answer to your question, yes. They gave me a severance
package and paid my health insurance for two months. As I
said before, I thought you had to employ someone fulltime
in order to lay them off.
\_ Layoff has simply become the nice way to say "fired". It's
also used in the same way as it used to be.
\_ If you are working 30 hours per week and your employer
tells you he doesn't need you anymore, then you've
been laid off. What does full-time have to do with
anything?
\_ Nothing. I also think it's funny that he thinks firing
people is good for them. |
| 2007/2/11-13 [Transportation/Car/RoadHogs, Science/GlobalWarming] UID:45711 Activity:nil |
2/11 http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/05/14/ING3RIPSO01.DTL "Predictions of the demise of suburbia, choked to death by high gasoline prices, may be greatly exaggerated." \_ We shall see. How many times has Alvin Toffler been used to explain everything. Are jobs really going to move to the suburbs? The only way that would decrease commuting is if they formed sort of "company town" kinds of clusters where everyone lived close to the same big employer. And a lot of the other stuff he claims is happening is bunk, like suburban sprawl in Europe. I personally think that alternative energies will allow Americans to use electric cars to commute, but they will be much smaller, much more efficient cars. And I think that denser communities will still have an advantage in an era of higher energy costs. Haven't densities actually gone up this last decade? Anyone got any hard numbers on this? They certainly have in California. |