I hope you don't work as an English teacher.

> dev needs the loosest reins (while still keeping separation so that the loosened policies don't allow for a security breach to compromise other departments.)

Oh thank you, thank you, for using 'loose' instead of 'lose'. I think I cried a little.

The irony is you feel compelled to inject useless noise into the conversation on the very same topic your signature asks us not to complain about.
Bait taken.

Yes, actually I did. I pointed out that he could get off the canoe right there and live in a hut and it wouldn't cost him a dime. His savings would most likely be enough to pay for whatever logistics he needed (plane tickets to visit home once a year, food, some clothes, etc). But he would be giving up the "normal" life he was used to. He thought about it for a moment and said he really wants to retire "in style" and not in a hut, and that he would have to "work his ass off" for a few more years to do that. At least he acknowledged what his priorities and trade-offs are.

I was on vacation on a remote island in Fiji, taking a canoe ride with some other American tourists. A man in his 50's sighed and said 'I hope I can afford to live like this one day'. The irony was totally lost on him that the people who's life he was jealous of woke up in their huts, had a little food, then played soccer and fished all day without owning a single penny.

"Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo"

( City of Buffalo bison that other city of Buffalo bison bully, themselves bully city of Buffalo bison)

> "Using the Internet can destroy your faith.

Oh God I hope so.

> the numbers of rats you'll find in places like .

I think this is the first time I've seen Unix "." used to mean "the current location" in the common English sense of the phrase. Kudos to you, sir! Now I will go ~ and smoke my |

>I suggest thinking vapid and friendly, like a labrador retriever, when you go into a job interview.

"Yes, I can write threaded code involving.... SQUIRREL!"

What a ridiculous idea. What condition do you think the convict will be in after 30 years equivalent of solitary confinement in a sensory deprivation tank? They will be completely psychotic

Guard: "Here's your cell phone and wallet, you are free. go enjoy life"
Prisoner: drool...drool...drool... whimper...

Why would we do this?

What does anyone gain by making the convict experience 1,000 years of mental torture? It doesn't improve the victim's life. It doesn't stop others from committing crimes. It doesn't do anything productive or helpful. It is just torture for the sake of revenge. It is stupid and sadistic.

Organized religion is a package of beliefs and behaviors that have been honed over tens of thousands of years to provide people with things they need both psychologically and socially. Until recently religious behavior couldn't really have been separated from the rest of tradition and society. It was one "package". Having all of these things wrapped up in one package makes it easier to teach and train people to follow good ideas, like "don't eat food that spoils quickly" and "don't spread STDs with promiscuous sex". Now that we have better understand of which behaviors are helpful we may not need all of the extra baggage that traditionally came with religion. But where is the new "package" of useful behaviors to replace the old ones? Often if you discard religious tradition you also discard good guidelines for living, and instead rely on random trends or worse profit-motive marketing for your guidelines.

I suspect religious people will get angry at this line of reasoning, thinking I am missing the entire "point" of religion. From one point of view I am discounting the whole purpose of their religion. But regardless of the supernatural truths of the universe, it is certainly true that religions carry a great deal of traditions and guidelines for living beyond the purely spiritual.

But, as someone who was not indoctrinated in religion when I was young and impressionable, how do I determine which of the following ideas to believe and follow:

1) Organized religion
2) Unicorns
3) Astrology

From my point of view these all share equal likelihood of being true, have equally convincing evidence, and all have proponents. Not being totally facetious here, from inside the "group" this may seem obvious to you, but from outside it doesn't. Why Jesus? Why not Buddha? Why not Zeus? Why not Wicca? Why not Xenu? And if I decide all but one of these ideas are poppycock, then how does one of them stand the same test of scrutiny?

I dup programming-language Forth loved! anything with-it could-do.

well done, sir. *golf clap*