jeffmeden

If ANY bank would just actually deny the transaction instead of letting it go through and tacking a huge fee onto it, people would start switching overnight. Why isn't there one? They wouldn't make any money! Personally I am fine with the fiscally handicapped paying the bills for my bank while responsible people pay little. That probably sounds elitist, but you guys are all over "let natural selection take it's course" so this should be an easily understood concept.

Overclocking the hard drive motor, eh? lolz? The likely reason for this is an OS crash during usage of said hard drive (no fault of the drive itself) which left some files in an 'unhappy' state and windows is hence refusing to boot. Depending on the extent of the problem, anything capable of mounting NTFS (like the linux boot disks suggested) will bring this back to life with no problem (or even a windows install disk, used in recovery mode to restore the necessary files but not delete anything.) Worst case is the entire directory table is garbage and you need a tool like OnTrack Easy Recovery to go through the disk line by line and get the (important) files off.

All banks 'rape u in the pooter with overdraft fees' if you run *yourself* out of money. It's one of the biggest sources of income for them; you think the interest they are making on holding on to the $200 in your free checking account is going to make them very much? Chase has overdraft protection like any other bank, why not get it if you are actively using an account that has a near 0 balance? They are more likely to waive some of the fees if you sign up for it, too.

But is that a long or short ton? Either way, a comparable truck would have to get around 20mpg to compete with that. And yes, rail usage is way up given that it's so much more expensive to ship by truck now. Just take a look around the 70/270 west freight yards, between the rail yard and the truck yards you see a LOT more trucks just sitting around, and a lot more trains coming and going.

Where exactly in Revelations did it suggest that the coming of the anti-christ will be muslim? I am fairly certain (but welcome to be proven wrong) that Revelations (since it's credited to the prophet John and to Jesus) was written well before Islam was even a religion, so any interpretation like that is probably some right-wing nutjob insisting that the rise of brown skinned people will mark the end of the world. Not that any of the rest of that op-ed piece of trash article has any actual relevance or hint of factuality, but this stuck out to me as being especially egregious.

Guesstimate how much copper is in there (the weight of the wire, minus the ferro core) and sell it to a scrap recycler. Transformers dont really count as 'electronics' imo, so unless you know the VA rating and can sell them to someone who is actually going to use them then the only real value is the copper in there.

Opening the chute is *not* the problem, anyone who jumps should be doing so with a velocity/altitude activated emergency chute regardless of if you are experienced, beginner, solo or tandem. The static line jump I referred to is a low-altitude (usually 3000') jump where you are attached to a 75' cord that acts as the pull for your chute. This makes opening the chute as easy as falling down, altho it's at the expense of a long freefall. Should the cord fail, slap you in the face and make you pass out, the automatic safety will still release the backup chute and you will glide relatively safely to the ground. Of course, the odds of that happening are slimmer than you getting in a car accident on the way to the jump site, but that's beside the point. If you ask me, jumping solo and piloting your own chute to the landing zone is so so so much more rewarding than being strapped to a guy's back, getting dragged out the door, and being deposited on the ground without any real involvement in the process.

Tandem jumps r 4 buttseks. If you want a real thrill and don't seem to get one when you're strapped to another guy, try static line jumping for your first few. It's not as easy as 'falling out of the plane' but you get to do it on your own, which IMO is more rewarding.

If you ask me, color temp around 3000k is good for 'soft white' light, and people generally prefer between 3000k and 4000k for 'white light'. Anything lower and it will get red/yellow, and anything higher and it will get blue. O and don't forget to look at the CRI rating (if provided) since that's what tells you how wide the spectrum is on the light. 90 is a minimum for most picky people, and higher is better (max is 100).

If you've been in Vance's about a year ago, they used to have a life size cutout of him by the door that would yell insults at people about buying glocks (if my memory serves me). I haven't been there in probably a year, maybe it's still there.

You know what else makes syngas? Garbage. There are so many alternative energies we could be investing in, it kind of makes you wonder why we are spending money bringing 'order' to the middle east when we don't really need them in the long run. For once I agree with Glenn Beck

Reusing is kind of like recycling. Half credit.

Only if you recycled it!

Pls learn 2 read. K thx bai.

What you don't really address is what good guns actually do in the hands of every single citizen, to preserve democracy from "hitler wannabees". No, you could not in fact go shoot some aspiring dictator no matter how sure of yourself you are. You are not a militia, thats the bottom line. It would take a lot of people, and a lot of guns, (something on the order of a state militia, perhaps?) in order to practically guard against that risk. Your reaction to anyone suggesting a law alter the second amendment in any way is to basically put your hands over your ears and insist that if you have a gun, you will be ok. The sad truth for the many many people who are victims of gun violence is that it's simply not the case. Am I saying we should ban guns? No. Am I saying that alternate legislation and enforcement should always be considered to reduce the many tragedies that occur in this country daily as a result of handguns? Yes, that would be my point. Here is a thought experiment for you. Say the government passed a law stating that any gun owner, whose gun was used to commit a crime by a person other than the owner and whom would not have otherwise legally been able to purchase a gun (felon, warrant, etc.,) would be charged as an accomplice to whatever crime was committed. What would you do?

If you think owning a handgun, shotgun, rifle, or anything else easily obtained legally is doing anything to preserve democracy, you are pretty darn naive. What the founding fathers had laid the groundwork for was a well run militia, at the smallest necessary level, to defend the sovereignty of the people. Read: Army, National Guard, State Guard, etc. They did NOT mean every man/woman/child should have guns in their basement because one day the government might try to do something you don't like. You are going to be pretty ineffective when the revolution comes. You think I hate the second amendment? You haven't heard a word I've said.

The problem with the pro-gun lobby in the US is that the basic message is that 'anyone (without abridged rights) should be able to have a gun any where, at any time, since it says so in the constitution'. The problem with refusing to recognize that gun control laws do have benefits, is that the opposite is insisting that no gun control law has a benefit, and therefore any laws should be thrown away in favor of a gun-rich society. Some would even go so far as to argue that it's a citizen's *responsibility*, not just a right, to carry a gun at all times in order to defend themselves. Looked at from a second amendment prospective, this argument makes sense. What the founding fathers didn't foresee was the modern handgun shrinking in size and cost to the point where it is trivial to obtain one and conceal it to the point where you can be a mortal threat with little advanced warning. This is where gun control laws have stepped in and attempted to return civil society to just that, a civil landscape where people don't have to fear imminent death if they should choose not to carry with them the means to defend themselves to any possible threat. My point, in summary, is that refusing to value gun control laws has just as grave a consequence as refusing to value second amendment rights. When the gun control issue comes up, and people immediately respond with "pry my gun from my cold dead hand", they are basically saying they prefer anarchy to civility. Open your minds just a little and consider that properly executed gun control might improve what has become, there is no doubt, a very unfortunate consequence of the evolution of the handgun.

You are completely missing the point. Just because something is possible to obtain illegally, does not make it logical to insist that it be legalized. You are basically saying that no laws should ever be passed, and no enforcement should ever be attempted against anyone at any time, and it is the individual's responsibility to protect themselves from a particular threat.

That's it? That's the best argument you all have? Heron(sic)? God have mercy on us. Do you people realize that guns don't, in fact, grow on trees in tropical climates?

Disclaimer *** I am pro-gun, and hold an Ohio CCW permit *** Does it occur to any other pro-gun zealot that maybe gun control laws aren't really written with the intention of taking guns from law abiding citizens and leaving criminals to lay waste to the population? Consider the long term effect of strict gun control; that being *the source of guns used to commit crimes will go away*. Someone hit on it earlier, how many registered gun owners commit crimes? Not many? Well then, where do the criminals get guns from? And how can we reduce or eliminate this as a source for criminals to obtain weapons? Get over your quaint little "if guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns" rhetoric and think about the bigger picture here. Just for a second.

Dreamhost, lol. I am surprised they still have customers left after all the screw-ups they've made. I host with godaddy, it's cheap and you get a ton of space and bandwidth. If you know how to use an FTP client and have some patience to work through the database settings (it's all explained on their site), you can upload any sort of prefab web page kit you want (blog, CMS, photo gallery, etc.) The only drawback is that they don't dedicate a lot of CPU time to you, so if your web site uses a lot of server side scripting it can be slow at times.

So you knowingly wake up a lot during the night? My impression of the description is that you may not actually feel like you wake up until the next morning, but during the night your body is pulled away from deep sleep due to your breathing pattern. Do people suffering with apnea ever have dreams?

What's the difference between sleep apnea and just plain not getting enough sleep? Not trying to be a smart ass, but half or more of my days at work i just think "god, i feel like i could use an extra 3 hours"... This was especially bad back when I started at 7AM, it was pretty much daily that i was tired as hell for the 12+ hours at work. Days off were fine though, or the random day where i managed to get a full 8 hours.

Rest in peace Chuck. Right about now I suspect the real Moses is saying "no, it wasn't quite *that* dramatic." He will be missed.

The company may have not made any money, but I bet the two execs that fled the scene just recently got a generous compensation package for all their 'hard work' running a failing airline. This is just another case where executives get well paid and aren't the least bit responsible when the company they run goes under. And once again, the regular employees get screwed. I will /rant now before I get started on how this is all the republicans' fault.