*squealing feedback*
We had a blizzard here yesterday, not quite spring yet...looking forward to it, though.

In reply to this comment by rougy:
Hey New Mexico.

Boulder calling.

Check 1, 2, 3

Check one, two, three

It's a beautiful spring

>> ^Bfresh99:

She took one big gulp of air before being slammed. The slammer grabbed a fist full of her hair to check her out. It's a fake.


That was likely to get "Meagan" to squeal or something to show she was only faking. Also, as pointed out, she was likely taking a breath to prepare blowing out any left over candles.

Yes, people who believe they are right believe they are right and get angry about it when others tell them they are wrong. These are neither the defining characteristics of religion nor atheism, but a part of the human condition. You're confusing your own stereotypes of religious people and dogmatists with what religion and theistic dogma really are, which is exactly what atheism isn't.

I lack belief in any god or religion, therefore I'm atheist. If you notice anything that atheists often have in common, that's causation (certain arguments which we hear from each other) or coincidence (anger and hate because we're human). Anything else is your own projection.>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:

The reaction that atheists have to topics such as this proves conclusively that they are as filled with hate, anger, blind faith, and zealotry as any misguided religious organization. If it quacks like a duck, walks like a duck, flies like a duck, and swims like a duck - then by gum it is a duck. And Atheism acts like a religion, talks like a religion, requires faith like a religion, has 'sacraments' like a religion, and has doctrines/tenants/and chatechisms like a religion. Therefore it is a religion - and no amount of stuck-piggery squealing changes that basic reality.

>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:

Heh - I used to think the sound of stuck pigs was unpleasant but seeing the Garlician/Vampiric reaction to one tiny, inoffensive comment from Shinyblurry has provided me with quite a bit of amusement. I think this - if nothing else - is sufficient evidence to entirely disprove Bill Maher (as if anything he ever said needed disproving). The reaction that atheists have to topics such as this proves conclusively that they are as filled with hate, anger, blind faith, and zealotry as any misguided religious organization. If it quacks like a duck, walks like a duck, flies like a duck, and swims like a duck - then by gum it is a duck.

Actually, most of the responses to shiny were funny, eloquent and well reasoned. Although I will agree that a few were just rude.

The reaction basically proves that some atheists can be assholes. Big surprise. However, there is an "atheist dogma" that insists on vitriol. I will also say that many theists don't share their religions blind adherence to despicable or ridiculous positions. People are people, theist or atheist and there will always be good or bad people in both groups.


>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:

And Atheism acts like a religion, talks like a religion, requires faith like a religion, has 'sacraments' like a religion, and has doctrines/tenants/and chatechisms like a religion. Therefore it is a religion - and no amount of stuck-piggery squealing changes that basic reality.

You're either really ignorant or being totally disingenuous. Frankly, neither would surprise me. Instead of making bullshit statements, how about you back them up with some "basic reality"? You cannot confuse the personal beliefs or ideologies of individual atheists with the concept itself, even if a large percentage of atheists happen to share them. BTW, it's "catechism".

>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:
On a side note - I am also quite amused with the hypocrisy of Athiests when it comes to Obama and his war on religion. Last week Obama said that he deliberately passes laws and pushes agendas because he thinks that is what Jesus wants.

Hang on, Obama is at war with religion while at the same time passing laws and pushing agendas based on religious belief?

At least, you're consistently inconsistent... carry on...

>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:
Now if George W. Bush had said that, then every Athiest Trog-Lib-Dyte would have started screaming bloody murder. And yet when a leftist radical twit like Obama does it the fiery indignation of the liberal left about the "Wall of Seperation" suddenly goes all quiet. Most illuminating... Most illuminating indeed for anyone who isn't blinded by partisan idiocy. Leftist goons also seem utterly uninterested in the "Wall of Seperation" when it comes to Obama's war on private charity hospitals. What a bunch of pathetic losers.


I assume you're referring to Obama saying that Jesus wants people to pay higher taxes? Well, aside from the fact that that is entirely consistent with the teachings of Christ (don't remember Christ ever encouraging anyone to go to war or benefit the rich), frankly we have better things to do than criticise Obama when he's doing what we want. Personally, I don't really have a problem with (most of) the moral teachings of Jesus. I would prefer a president that bases his decisions on rationale, but since that will never happen I will settle for one that doesn't claim that god told him to kill arabs or fix gays or whatever.

And that's the crux of the issue. Many people "on the left" (nothing to do with atheism, you'll note) are disenfranchised with Obama. They wanted a progressive, but got a centre-right politician. But they're also realists. They look at Obama, and then look at the alternatives (when only one of your candidates accepts scientific reality and lost and the least insane of the rest is a young earth creationist who wants to repeal the civil rights act, you know you have problems), and they go "best of a bad lot"

More insane, inaccurate, dishohnest ravings from another silly brainwashed cunt. Atheism has none of these things.

>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:

And Atheism acts like a religion, talks like a religion, requires faith like a religion, has 'sacraments' like a religion, and has doctrines/tenants/and chatechisms like a religion. Therefore it is a religion - and no amount of stuck-piggery squealing changes that basic reality.

Heh - I used to think the sound of stuck pigs was unpleasant but seeing the Garlician/Vampiric reaction to one tiny, inoffensive comment from Shinyblurry has provided me with quite a bit of amusement. I think this - if nothing else - is sufficient evidence to entirely disprove Bill Maher (as if anything he ever said needed disproving). The reaction that atheists have to topics such as this proves conclusively that they are as filled with hate, anger, blind faith, and zealotry as any misguided religious organization. If it quacks like a duck, walks like a duck, flies like a duck, and swims like a duck - then by gum it is a duck. And Atheism acts like a religion, talks like a religion, requires faith like a religion, has 'sacraments' like a religion, and has doctrines/tenants/and chatechisms like a religion. Therefore it is a religion - and no amount of stuck-piggery squealing changes that basic reality.

On a side note - I am also quite amused with the hypocrisy of Athiests when it comes to Obama and his war on religion. Last week Obama said that he deliberately passes laws and pushes agendas because he thinks that is what Jesus wants. Now if George W. Bush had said that, then every Athiest Trog-Lib-Dyte would have started screaming bloody murder. And yet when a leftist radical twit like Obama does it the fiery indignation of the liberal left about the "Wall of Seperation" suddenly goes all quiet. Most illuminating... Most illuminating indeed for anyone who isn't blinded by partisan idiocy. Leftist goons also seem utterly uninterested in the "Wall of Seperation" when it comes to Obama's war on private charity hospitals. What a bunch of pathetic losers.

Still quite happy so far. I have noticed that the battery seems to drain more quickly than with Gingerbread- not sure if that's due to my simply playing with it more.

Also, there was one weird thing that happened. The phone shut off and rebooted in the middle of a call! Now if there's one thing that any phone should be good at, smart or otherwise , it's making calls, It had never happened before, and hasn't happened again, so we'll let that slide for now.

As for general operation, yes the phone is really, really snappy. Apps seem to launch more quickly and there are no delays when scrolling through menus. The camera is a huge improvement- yes it's pretty much instant now, and the automatic panorama feature is really cool. I wonder how Google managed to pull off the quick camera thing, as phone cameras are notoriously slow to launch and use. Hell, it's the same camera, just a software change, so I'm curious.

Anyhow, all the best to you and yours for the Holidays. I personally celebrate Festivus, but haven't yet been defeated in the Feats of Strength, so I guess it's not yet over!

In reply to this comment by lucky760:
Because of the many vast improvements over my old phone, I'm still quite thrilled with it, but my problems are a bother. Connectivity is definitely spotty. Most times I have no 4G and when I do, most times a speed test will result in surprisingly low transfer rates (5-9mbps down), but occasionally I'll get 20mbps/19mbps (down/up).

Also for whatever reason, during some phone calls it's been giving me high-pitched electronic squealing/squeaking/cracking that's like needles in the ear drums. Problem is I have time to exchange it, but since they are so scarce, I probably won't be able to.

Awesome that you got ICS on your phone. Are you enjoying it? Is it pretty snappy? I'm more than happy with how incredible the OS is versus the old Androids. Since they say it's purely a software improvement, does ICS provide zero-delay photos for you now?

In reply to this comment by therealblankman:
Sorry to hear about your troubles with the Galaxy Nexus. Has it got any better? Are you having the signal problems that others are reporting?

I'm still happy with the ICS update. My only mild disappointment is that Face Unlock isn't part of the package with my Nexus S, maybe later on they'll add it or maybe it's only for the Galaxy... who knows.

Because of the many vast improvements over my old phone, I'm still quite thrilled with it, but my problems are a bother. Connectivity is definitely spotty. Most times I have no 4G and when I do, most times a speed test will result in surprisingly low transfer rates (5-9mbps down), but occasionally I'll get 20mbps/19mbps (down/up).

Also for whatever reason, during some phone calls it's been giving me high-pitched electronic squealing/squeaking/cracking that's like needles in the ear drums. Problem is I have time to exchange it, but since they are so scarce, I probably won't be able to.

Awesome that you got ICS on your phone. Are you enjoying it? Is it pretty snappy? I'm more than happy with how incredible the OS is versus the old Androids. Since they say it's purely a software improvement, does ICS provide zero-delay photos for you now?

In reply to this comment by therealblankman:
Sorry to hear about your troubles with the Galaxy Nexus. Has it got any better? Are you having the signal problems that others are reporting?

I'm still happy with the ICS update. My only mild disappointment is that Face Unlock isn't part of the package with my Nexus S, maybe later on they'll add it or maybe it's only for the Galaxy... who knows.

You're a funny guy Mr Pennypacker
>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:

[...]
But American Exceptionalism is not jingoism or arrogance. It is a quick way to summarize the American spirit of enlightened self-interest combined with personal freedom and entrepreneurism. The liberal left hates to admit it, but the US Constitution, economy, and position in the world was no accident of chance or random luck. Our constitution was a model to the rest of the world. Our freedoms and way of life still make us the envy of just about everyone. People still want to come here in droves to escape oppression, poverty, and intolerance. America was innovating, inventing, testing, and producing when the rest of the Western world was literally standing still. This is not arrogance or snootiness. It is just fact. American Exceptionalism summarizes this - and apparently makes Proglibdyte leftists squeal like stuck pigs when they hear the words.

Where in there was a justification for global empire? We aren't debating words "the left hates." We're debating why we were attacked by a handful of radical folks. Further we're debating whether or not our military engagement, specifically since WWII, has been productive in any measurable way. Can you provide some examples?

>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:

The only reason the Proglibdyte left is such a fan of Ron Paul is because he is a non-interventionist. The liberal left's vision of the ideal world is the United States giving all its cash - no questions asked - to the United Nations. At that point the US is supposed to sit down, shut up, and do whatever the UN orders them to do. Then - in the minds of the left - we will have world peace. RP would do about 90% of that by just being an isolationist. He won't give the UN any money, but the left will settle for the US just shutting down all its involvement (especially military).
But American Exceptionalism is not jingoism or arrogance. It is a quick way to summarize the American spirit of enlightened self-interest combined with personal freedom and entrepreneurism. The liberal left hates to admit it, but the US Constitution, economy, and position in the world was no accident of chance or random luck. Our constitution was a model to the rest of the world. Our freedoms and way of life still make us the envy of just about everyone. People still want to come here in droves to escape oppression, poverty, and intolerance. America was innovating, inventing, testing, and producing when the rest of the Western world was literally standing still. This is not arrogance or snootiness. It is just fact. American Exceptionalism summarizes this - and apparently makes Proglibdyte leftists squeal like stuck pigs when they hear the words.

The only reason the Proglibdyte left is such a fan of Ron Paul is because he is a non-interventionist. The liberal left's vision of the ideal world is the United States giving all its cash - no questions asked - to the United Nations. At that point the US is supposed to sit down, shut up, and do whatever the UN orders them to do. Then - in the minds of the left - we will have world peace. RP would do about 90% of that by just being an isolationist. He won't give the UN any money, but the left will settle for the US just shutting down all its involvement (especially military).

But American Exceptionalism is not jingoism or arrogance. It is a quick way to summarize the American spirit of enlightened self-interest combined with personal freedom and entrepreneurism. The liberal left hates to admit it, but the US Constitution, economy, and position in the world was no accident of chance or random luck. Our constitution was a model to the rest of the world. Our freedoms and way of life still make us the envy of just about everyone. People still want to come here in droves to escape oppression, poverty, and intolerance. America was innovating, inventing, testing, and producing when the rest of the Western world was literally standing still. This is not arrogance or snootiness. It is just fact. American Exceptionalism summarizes this - and apparently makes Proglibdyte leftists squeal like stuck pigs when they hear the words.

I've always hated, especially as a little boy, when little boys get hurt due to their own stupidity and immediately start screaming/squealing at the top of their lungs. I never did this. If you were alone, would you be screaming like that? No. It's communication when you do that. If you're communicating, you're not that hurt. So shut up, take the pain, and use your brain next time.

I have one friend who, when we were younger, if he encountered any pain at all, would literally go into WWF-style histrionics, flopping about on the ground, covering his face and kicking his feet. Still get douche chills when I think about it.

>> ^longde:

One thing that I pointed out to a former professor, is that the threat of retaliation is never accounted for in the simple game theory model. For the prisoner's dilemna, I called it the "threat of being shanked" if one chooses to squeal.
As we see in the video, the emotional response to being played is a deep one that can lead to a Law and Order episode.
As mentioned above, repeating the game a few times would somewhat account for the consequences of uncooperative behavior.


The threat of being shanked is truly a part of more sophisticated game theory - "Reiterated Prisoner's Dilemma" is what you're referring to and it's much more biologically accurate, most notably for predicting whether organisms will cooperate or not in mutualistic or commensal associations whereby they have to interact over and over, so something like you saw here would NOT go unpunished.

One thing that I pointed out to a former professor, is that the threat of retaliation is never accounted for in the simple game theory model. For the prisoner's dilemna, I called it the "threat of being shanked" if one chooses to squeal.

As we see in the video, the emotional response to being played is a deep one that can lead to a Law and Order episode.

As mentioned above, repeating the game a few times would somewhat account for the consequences of uncooperative behavior.

Heartless Cat knows not how to play; ignores your fearful squeals