Susuto

As usual, an inept comment from bam bam. Gold was as low as $761 today? How many investing firms have already indicated that the value of gold is being suppressed?

Quite frankly, I applaud those such as you. I know you aren’t buying it, I know you’re trying to convince others not to and therefore are making it easier to purchase.

Have you actually tried to buy any gold lately? You’d quickly notice that the purchase price and the spot price are vastly different. It’s this little thing called supply and demand. The demand far outweighs the supply and is causing 25%+ premiums on purchase.

Thank you for being you!

I think that OS X would have just as many because it was the first to go down in the PWN2OWN contest. Vista was a distant second, and Ubuntu never got hacked.

"Charlie Miller, principal analyst with Independent Security Evaluators and the researcher who found some significant flaws in Apple’s iPhone last summer, compromised the Apple MacBook Air in less than a minute." — http://www.securityfocus.com/brief/711

Macheads need to wake up and start protecting themselves.

FTA: "The best ally of a fundamentalist is a fundamentalist from a ‘competing’ religion. Each one becomes the ‘evil’ of the other one, feeding him with new arguments."

Right-wing fundamentalists need the other extreme in order to thrive. Obviously, they need the radical Muslims. Otherwise the whole strategy fails. Rhetoric breaks down, defenses are futile, attack is useless. Bush needs Bin Ladin. Maybe that’s the reason Bib Ladin is still alive today.

More to the practical point for us Diggers, right-wing fundamentalists also need ideological liberals. I doubt there is such a thing as a left-wing fundamentalist, but it the right-wing does its best to cast its adversaries into that mold.

The right wing has a harder time with liberals than with competing fundamentalists, however, because liberals have this irritating way of dragging facts into the argument. The right-wing folks cannot process this in quite the same way as the mutual damnations that come from competing fundamentalists. Rather than feeding on new arguments, they fall into a repeating loop

Also FTA: "The worst enemy of a fundamentalist is a person from the same religion who preaches tolerance, reason, and respect of the differences between individuals and cultures."

‘Nuff said.

Steps they should take:
- Clean out current TLDs of crappy useless squatter domains
- Remove little-used TLDs. Anybody been to a .aero domain lately?
- Stop introducting new TLDs. The concept of TLDs is to consolidate things nicely. It does not help to have 100+ TLDs.

Also, for fuck’s sake, I still cannot see this text. When will Digg actually fix the textbox bug in Firefox 3? I’m using the latest version there is, that isn’t beta. Now the text box is randomly changing sizes — jumping, almost. This is bloody annoying. Excuse me for hijacking my own post.

@Discola
I understand what that article is saying, however….
If speculation did not alter the price, and if the price was simply set by OPEC, then the price would not fluctuate up or down minute by minute… You would pay what price OPEC set.
From the article you posted- "Speculators do play an important role in setting the price of oil and other raw materials. But they do so based on their expectations of future trends in supply and demand, not on whims."
So, I do agree that they do not intentionally affect the price based on whims… but their fear of futures DOES play into the equation.

Did you just seriously call the unabashed and unapologetic extreme anti-religion hate-monger StaticThunder "rational?" Anyway, prolifemama asking him to expound on the point about social costs is just fine. Let’s see what the oh-so-rational one here can bring to light that justifies a position that says humanity, innocence, and morality are all irrelevant. I’m sure it’ll make sense to those who don’t understand any of those three terms and be utter insanity to the rest of us, but let’s give him a shot for a brief moment at least.

Prop 8 and laws like it would not be an issue if the government took out the tax benefits and other definitions of marriage. The state has no need for ‘recognizing’ marriages. If someone wants to get married they CAN. In WHATEVER religion they want to. Same sex or not. There should be NO tax incentives or government involvement. With no ‘laws’ defining it, the state cannot decide who and who can’t get married.

Is it more complicated than that??? People are blinded from logic by their faith in both government AND religion.
/rant

It’s because the Spanish had exposure to lots of other civilizations. Nothing breeds human diseases like other humans. The more and various human civilizations you have come into contact with, the more diseases (and antibodies) you (as a culture) develop. So…Im sure that some spanish were affected by a few rare diseases that the Peruvians had since become immune to, but most could fight them off. On the other hand, the Peruvians were exposed to hundreds of diseases that the Spaniards had since built immunities to (including some particularly nasty ones like smallpox, etc) that they couldn’t fight off.
Remember that when smallpox (or any other "big" disease) first attacks a new culture that has a hard time fighting it, it decimates them. If the population of that culture is small enough, then not enough people will survive to continue the civilization.

Why are all of Obama’s records sealed?
Why did Obama sponser Senate Bill 511 which specifically deals with the "Natural Born Citizen" issue for John McCain?
Put 2 + 2 together and follow the dots and you arrive at the conclusion that Obama is not a Natural Born Citizen.
But maybe Obama can serve as King of the USA, why does he need to follow the constitution, why shouldn’t he serve as leader for the rest of his life, why would he need to face any more elections at all? Maybe the Constitution is dead and rotting?

I’ve been strongly considering immigrating to Australia for a while now, but this makes me completely eliminate that as an option. As an above commenter stated, censorship only works under a totalitarian regime. First illegal sites get blocked, then borderline illegal but still legal sites get blocked, then entirely legal porn sites will get blocked, then illegal piracy sites will get block with legals ones mixed in with that, then critics of the government will start getting blocked…

Seriously, this Australian Firewall reminds me strongly of the Great Firewall of China. Do you seriously want your internet policy to be compared to today’s leading Communist state? I think not, and I refuse to move to a country that wants to pull that kind of bullshit. Quit assuming your own citizens are dumbasses, if they want to protect their families from stuff that parents don’t want their kids seeing, it’s not hard for them to do it themselves. Instead of doing something so controversial that can obviously be easily abused (and, like I said, compared to China), put that taxpayer money towards encouraging parents to take a more active role in what their kids look at online and give them information on how to set up their own filters. That way everyone’s happier.

The idiocy of people in power astounds me. Every elected office in the world needs term limits. All of them.