Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 Internet speed test! ×

Comment Re:Depends on how you count "conventional"... ~16 (Score 1) 357

Kinda off topic, but have you ever considered outsourcing your payroll and tax stuff to a Payroll company, it's not all that much in terms of fees, and you never have to worry about "tax problems" again. A lot of the better payroll companies also offer HR packages that make the "running the business" piece, well, a piece of cake.

Contact me or reply if you would like any information

PS, I do IT work for a payroll provider myself, and while I've only worked for this company, in this industry, I can guarantee they can be of vast service to someone like yourself.

Comment Re:Sick of the anti-gay groups (Score 1) 1364

YA know, the only thing that scares me, and I in no way mean this as being anti-gay, or anti-black/white/blue/purple, BUT, your comments make me somewhat worry about what WILL be socially acceptable down the road. I understand that Marriage should be defined as Two Consenting adults, however that definition opens the door for Incestous Marriage, and yes I know that has been used as a stop gap to allay the whole hearted bigotry of the whole Anti-Gay marriage crowd, however, 50 years ago, a SIGNIFICANT percent of America's population thought that homosexuality was "morally wrong, and disgusting" (I do NOT agree with that, merely using it as a stepping stone to my next point). So here we are now, 50 years later, saying, not only is being a homosexual not a personal PREFERENCE but actually a Genetic predisposition, but also, that even if it wasn't who am I to tell YOU who you can't marry. Well that's all well and good, but you are giving rise to the "Slippery Slope" effect. I whole heartedly beleive that homosexuals should have every right that anyone else has, and I'd be the first person in line to stand up with them as a straight man and fight for that right, HOWEVER it's a scary thought to have when you see just how far we've slid the Societal norms and Values, and while I do agree with how things are TODAY, I fear that 50 years from now, people will feel that as long as they are consenting and in LOVE, then who am I to tell YOU that you can't marry your blood-sister, or who am I to tell NAMBLA they are wrong.

Please don't misunderstand my opinion and my concerns. I understand I'll still be pianted with the hatred and bigotry brush, but I merely am trying to point out that at some point, we have things much worse to fear than simple Homosexual marriage, and we are laying the framework today, for tomorrow's freak shows. Marriage should be completely out of the realm of politics, but we do need to (as someone above said) draw a line in the sand that will make this issue JUST about THIS issue, and not lay a foundation for people who are truly Morally wrong (and yes I mean you NAMBLA! I hope one of you sick f$#% is reading this and I hope you DO hate me for what I say) to build their evil intent on.

I think any legislation passed to allow same sex marriage should have language put in that truly defines marriage as an institution, and makes absolutely NO allowance for any further (mis)interpretation of it's definition.

Comment Re:No one should have expected (Score 1) 1364

Then along that same vein, why is it ok for people to be told they can't do drugs, or what form of medication they can and can't buy over the counter. What's to stop two consenting Siblings from marrying, or for that matter, what right, in anyway, does the government have, to dictate ANY action I take on my own property or put into my own body, or do to my own family?

There's the slippery slope for you, when people start screaming about the GOVERNMENT prohibiting them from doing something that only impacts THEM, you open the gates to allow ANYTHING personal, that is prohibited by the Governemtn, to be repealed (which I agree with) BUT I wonder, how many people who use that point, really wanna see Heroin or Cocaine sold in Pharmacy's and convenience stores, And I know we all chuckle when we see the Crack vending machines on Futurama, but when it's real life, will you be soooo quick to say that Government should or shouldn't have some say? I am willing to bet a LOT of people who thump on this ideal would very quickly shy away from repealing Drug laws.

Comment Re:what i would say (Score 1) 494

And I bet your the same person that would piss and moan that someone had the audacity to collect welfare. Those "scumbags" have at one point had my lovely wife amongst their ranks (not debt collection but telemarketing) and I tell you what you frickin asshat, that job paid the bills, and that was ALL it did. Those people need to feed and care for the ones they love just as much as you do douchebag, so try putting three seconds of thought into the assinine comments you spew before you mentally vomit on my monitor again.

Comment Re:Makes Sense (Score 2, Interesting) 257

I understand that, my point is that our bodies have some tendency to have organs perform functions that in today's world are overkill, i.e the fact that you can survive with only ONE kidney.

I wasn't implying I didn't understand their function, or that I thought I could EASILY live without one of my kidneys, however I was commenting on how I find it interesting, that due in large part to modern medicine, and our diets, we can function, in some cases thrive, while missing entire ORGANS, I think that is "neat" and also makes me curious on how contaminated things like our blood and urine must have been to require 2 kidneys and other "non-essential" organs

Comment Makes Sense (Score 1) 257

Anyone ever wonder why the human body seems to have organs that we don't "need". I wonder if studies had ever been done to correlate any other "useless" organs, to early death/higher risk of disease.

You can lose a kidney, gall bladder, tonsils, etc. and they MUST have either had a use at one point or are meant for a very specific, yet seldom used task, i.e the Spleen being a repository for big white blood cells

This is quite interesting!

Comment Re:Profits, but for whom? (Score 1) 624

You honestly propose that the FDIC would have had the FUNDS available to cover that substantial of a collapse?

You think we'll be paying for the BAILOUT for years? Imagine if we had tried to compensate EVERY bank in America through the FDIC (which also, in terms of individuals, only protects (now) up to $250,000 and not everyone worth that was a pig)

Slashdot Top Deals

Prototype designs always work. -- Don Vonada