member since 07/21/2005
I'm a guy
About me: Male, 19 (going on 20). Your average nice guy who fails at life.
User Votes: 89 Helpful / 4 Funny / 5 Agree / 1 Disagree
RSS Icon

Activity for ThatOnePerson

52 days ago

It can be flashy, it can be dull. It can play games, it can write papers. It can be easy to install, it can be a pain to install. GNU Linux is the pinacle of computer development. An operation system that has been abused, neglected and hated from birth by the masses still fights on to secure its place in the modern world. Windows is getting crappier (yeah, i know windows 7 will be better...suposably) even though it was raised in the perfect environment for operation system growth (most hardware and software was built for it). Linux was raised out on the computer "streets"; being given nothing, having to work for its hardware and software. Linux is now a very stable operating system. It's now getting to the point where developers are starting to accomodate it instead of just the the big two.
    In terms of usability, linux is far easier to use than windows. I've used windows for years and switched to linux a couple years ago. You learn how to do things in linux that you can't do in windows. the thing that amazes me about linux is that, for an operating system that was put down for years in the harsh windows/mac environment yet still managed to get a foothold, people still hate it with a passion. Why hate linux? if it sucks so much then why did some of the most briliant developers work for free to build it? If you hate linux and think its good for nothing, then stop using the internet which became great with the creation of the apache server.
votes 1 Helpful / 0 Funny / 0 Agree / 0 Disagree

52 days ago

Used AMD for a few years now. Amd seems to be more focused on technology and quality than Intel which focuses on marketing (read about the p4 processors). While sometimes not as fast as intel, the Amd chips, especialy the dual cores, are better built. the HT technology allows for better board bandwith and the lower power consumption of AMD chips keeps the case cooler. Amd processors are better in terms of foreward and reverse compatability.
votes 1 Helpful / 0 Funny / 0 Agree / 0 Disagree

52 days ago

Open source software itself isn't that great. The concept even preceded closed source software in the early days of computers. The thing about open source software that makes it superior to its closed source oponets is that the development process is more decentralized and the software is programed to perform its core function instead of trying to pack in as much function creap as possible to impress the masses. GNU Linux and the BSD projects have yeilded some of the greatest computer leaps ever. GNU Linux allowed for the Apache server which, in turn, made the internet more suitable for widespread information exchange and commerce. If you want to know why open source is the best medium for software development, read: The Cathedral and the Bazaar (
votes 2 Helpful / 0 Funny / 0 Agree / 0 Disagree

52 days ago

I love C++. I know it isn't as easy to use as java or some of the other more modern languages but C++ still is a very functional and reliable. The syntax isn't as cryptic as many make it out to be and the OOP aspects of it are rather simple and easy to learn. five of five for the best language out there.
votes 2 Helpful / 0 Funny / 1 Agree / 0 Disagree

406 days ago

I agree. unfortunately people follow stereotypes. This whole election is nothing more than a game of stereotype-juggling.

416 days ago s_cant

thats my opinion. i owned one and i hated it.
votes 0 Helpful / 0 Funny / 0 Agree / 0 Disagree

438 days ago

Once you get past all the ad hominems of people like Fitman, you end up seeing that, looking that him through the eyes of reason and logic, he is a really good candidate. There are those that think that an ad hominem is more important than anything. No offense fitman but he is a libertarian. A libertarian, believing in individual negative liberty, wouldn't have any ability to harm any race no matter how much that person may distain that race. Sadly for you, the truth is that he isn't a racist and if he was, it wouldn't matter (much in the same way that gender doesn't matter). "well he said some racist remarks once many years ago LOLOLOLOLOL!!11!" so, that doesn't #$%^ matter idiots. If you don't understand political philosophy then do us all a favor and don't vote (soon your ignorant voting wll lead to a system where voting is banned). I think that you people have got to be the biggest idiots on the Internet. This is the very reason why i switched to Stop making all this worthless kipper people.

Aboot the man: he is a libertarian with good, true, beliefs that are rooted in negative liberty. If you think that is extreme, then that could be a sign that you are a non ideological moron. In that case, i can see your point and i guess that you can live with your bread and circuses of ad hominims and contradictory clinton style policies. Just move to another country and screw that country up, don't ruin this one. I hope that, if a third party candidate doesn't win the election, Ron Paul does.

votes 0 Helpful / 0 Funny / 0 Agree / 0 Disagree

438 days ago

To telll you the truth, i am a negative liberty supporting libertarian/political-conscientious-objector (this is so you know i am not saying this as an ad hominim smear attack). How do you define the word liberal? Are you talking aboot the negative liberty liberals that want capitalism and hate socialism or are you talking aboot the positive liberty liberals that believe in a restricted socialist state where someone else decides what you can do with your life in the name of potential? I know this man is nothing more than an incremental socialist who is trying to win the hearts and minds of the, though often contradictory, inner directives (just like Clinton tried with the Vchip crap and bus safety).

438 days ago

Apart from the fact that this man is clearly a socialist/communist, there is also the problems with his actions, like everyone but Paul, of not telling us exactly (i.e. Not abstractly) what he wants to do. I went to one of his rallies and he claimed to support what sounded like a draft only he didn't mention the part aboot going to war (a peaceful draft where we all walk around and clean curtains and mop floors until, of course, a neocon comes into power and sends us to the Front). The other problems i have with him other than his hatred of freedom include: his supporters (you are not a hippies and this is not the sixties. They are all a bunch of racists who tell us how bad we are for being white), his fear of us knowing what he will want to do, and his disdain for the protection of life. You may say “but he is an African American and that means he is better than everyone else LOL!1!!!” good for you, idiot. Man i bet there will be some flaming posts for this one.
votes 0 Helpful / 3 Funny / 2 Agree / 0 Disagree

631 days ago

wikipedia is a problem. I am not trying to be some ungrateful jerk by attacking this but instead a detector of crap. Wikipedia was a good idea in theory but became like all things supposedly aiming to be democratic: dictatorial. The founder(s) of wikipedia had a great idea but it became, not an encyclopedia but instead, an instrument for propaganda and a false form of information. See, the problem with wikipedia is that it has a hierarchy that is not completely, how'd you say, neutral. Read an article about socialism(or rights) and it is like reading a piece of propaganda for socialism, wile capitalism's article is more of a in theory it works but here is criticism and more criticism. Check out the wikiquote for capitalism and socialism, there is a big difference in the amount of criticism each page has. The biggest piece of crap that wikipedia does is its goal to both be ignorant and turn a blind eye to ignorance. They use fallacies of logic such as strategic word usage in order to convey one side of a political issue. One good example is how they use words such as progressive and rights in clearly a one sided and BS manner. I know a lot of you atheist out there who art of the cult of science (i.e. You blindly support a form of secularism and squelch any opposition even if science proves you wrong) think that labelling something like the Young Earth belief as pseudo-science is unbiased, but it is in fact very biased. Calling religion fake science is just some stupid atheist way of not thinking and blindly following their own prophets (charles darwin, karl marx, and peter singer [their names don't deserve to be capitalized]).

Another thing about wikipedia is that it lacks any true value in society. When you use a real encyclopedia for research you get two things (usually): 1, clear words; and 2, a long enough article for you to understand something about the subject. Wikipedia seems to have a bunch of arrogant administrators and arrogant inner-circle editors. wikipedia has neither of those two things.

My lastish argument is this: what is the point of wikipedia? Before wikipedia there was something called GNE (recursive acronym for GNE is Not an Encyclopedia) that never really got anywhere because of wikipedia. The idea was smart: have a repository of information that is appropriate but can be anything (no scumbag editors dumping new articles because they go against their personal beliefs). It was a repository where you could actually explain stuff in English and you could go in-depth, not some worthless scan-over like wikipedia. If you want the truth instead of a horridly abridged subjective lie then make a GNE-like thing or cry. try to make a page about Libertarian Wiki and it will be deleed within three days. More info about wikipedia is:



oh and one last thing: the wikipedia article about Fascism is BS. fascism is not nazism. nazism is an ideology that combined atheistic and animalistic views on humans wile contradicting itself with non animalistic freedoms especially in economics. Fascism is an ideology that stresses the view that humans are conscience, sentient, non instinct-relient beings but that there are times when the opportunity benefit outweighs the opportunity cost when it comes to harmful acts (there is more to this than that simple sentence). because of that fascism is much like a safer version capitalism and wikipedia is wrong and is lying to millions!

votes 1 Helpful / 0 Funny / 0 Agree / 1 Disagree
By the Numbers
jgls Donovan Beloved ANSGARD DrEntropy Randyman
GenghisTheHun The Red Yoshi HistoryFan BiRyan inferno89 bleedmyselfdry15
oddsox01 Alaninohio2 BTVC hstsuperstar browneyes3076 LIbertarianfreedom4ever