Jump to content


Senior Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by JustStuit

  1. <Capn_Refsmmat> I need a "stupid nick detection" script that sets +N automatically

    <Reverend_fagel> that'd own

    <stu|calc> i fixed it :P

    <radiohead> you can't fix stupid :P

    <Capn_Refsmmat> :D


    <CanadaAotS> uh... do you just type <censored> or does the chat change it? lmao

    <Capn_Refsmmat> chat changes it

    <insane_alien> the chat sensors it

    <Capn_Refsmmat> it's the +G setting in the channel

    <Capn_Refsmmat> this channel is G rated :D

    <insane_alien> both words started with an f


    <Stu> im right where the hurricane is supposed to exit florida

    <AzurePhoenix> you should take up 'gator wrasslin'

    <Stu> ...

    <insane_alien> lol

    <AzurePhoenix> or you could go play shuffleboard with the old folk -_-


    <AzurePhoenix> yeah...

    <AzurePhoenix> incest can ruin a good door


    <Capn_Refsmmat> .- ... ...

    <Stu> -.-. .- .--. -. -.-. .- -. .----. - -.-. --- -.. . .-- --- .-. - .... .- ... ...

    <Capn_Refsmmat> ... . . . ?

    <Capn_Refsmmat> - .

    <Stu> ... . . . .-- .... .- -

    <Capn_Refsmmat> . . . . . . . . . . . . .

    <Reverend_Battlefield2> ....


    There are a few I found...good times.


    Drugs are a victimless crime. Period.


    And who are you to decide they are no victims? What about addicts who can't stop taking drugs and steal and break the law to buy drugs? Or the guy who got shot because he was walking down the road when a drug deal went bad? Drugs include many victims at all levels. I would like to see how you support there being no victims.

  3. So when you see your daughter cutting herself that isn't as bad as her smoking pot? Because this is what you are saying. Just wanted to let you know.


    If she is in that state, laws obviously aren't going to help her and the parents needs to consult her and get her help. However, from a legal standpoint, she won't be hurting other people with impaired judgment that way. And, by the way, that is not what I am saying and I will decide what I say, thank you. I suppose if you can't argue logically, the fallacies come next.

  4. Think of it as a right to self harm. Or so you think it should be illegal to harm ourselves?


    It's not only about yourself, which is the reason I would not want them legal. People can harm, cut, poison or whatever alone when it doesn't cause bodily harm to anyone and I wouldn't care.

  5. The problem is that when under the influence of drugs, you no longer have the necessary judgment skills to determine if your actions will damage other persons or property.

    That's the only problem I have with it too; I guess you can't save people from themselves but you can try to protect others from them.

  6. I don't think this is the approach you should be taking. The very last integral you state is quite non-obvious to integrate at first sight. However, you can solve your original equation by simply letting [math]u = a\sinh t[/math]. Then it transforms into:


    [math]a^2 \int \cosh^2 t \, dt[/math]


    by using [math]\cosh^2 t - \sinh^2 t = 1[/math]. Evaluating this integral is easy by using the double angle formulae for cosh2 in terms of cosh(2x). The result follows from taking the inverse of your substitution.


    Oh thanks! I'm new to the hyperbolic functions so I didn't think that at first. It looks much simpler now.

  7. In class today, we had a problem in which we needed to integrate a function following the form



    \int{\sqrt{u^2 \pm a^2}\,du}



    and it said to refer to the appendices which gave that integral was equal to



    \frac{1}{2}(u\sqrt{u^2+a^2}\pm a^2\ln{|u+\sqrt{u^2+a^2}}|)



    I tried to do this (using [math]+[/math] for the [math]\pm[/math]) and I first did some rationalizing



    \int{\sqrt{u^2 \pm a^2}} \frac{\sqrt{u^2 \pm a^2}}{\sqrt{u^2 \pm a^2}}\,du



    as to split it into



    \int{\frac{u^2+a^2}{\sqrt{u^2+a^2}}du} = \int{\frac{u^2}{\sqrt{u^2+a^2}}du} + \int{\frac{a^2}{\sqrt{u^2+a^2}}du}



    and the second fraction is, if I understand correctly,



    \int{\frac{a^2}{\sqrt{u^2+a^2}}du} = a^2 \sinh^{-1}\frac{u}{a} = a^2\ln{|u+\sqrt{u^2+a^2}|}



    which would reason that



    \int{\frac{u^2}{\sqrt{u^2+a^2}}du} = \frac{1}{2}(u\sqrt{u^2+a^2}-a^2\ln{|u+\sqrt{u^2+a^2}|})



    but I can't find how to do this. Am I overlooking a simple technique? I also can't look up the proof because I don't know the name or whatever. Can anyone explain this last step, or did I start wrong?


    (Either the whole derivation or just how to integrate [math]

    \int{\frac{u^2}{\sqrt{u^2+a^2}}du} [/math] )

  8. I'm all for laws against endangering others because of your state of mind. Drunk driving laws are a good example of this. And if I neglect my kids because I'm stoned all the time, by all means, hold me responsible for that as well. But you can't, with a straight face, tell me that some guy smoking marijuana with his friends in his own home is dangerous to anybody.


    And what "good" comes from anything recreational? "Why allow them to be used?" Shouldn't the question in free societies be "why NOT allow them to be used?"


    The problem I see, is how can you ensure it goes to the guy who just stays in his house and doesn't affect anyone else? If it could be isolated and not affect anyone, I'd be all for the free society, but I don't believe it can.

  9. Well, first of all, so what? What right do you or even the majority have to prevent me from hurting myself, if I'm not hurting or endangering anyone else in the process?


    And second of all, it IS possible to use most drugs without inherently abusing them, despite the fact that yes, they are going to alter your state of mind. Just like with alcohol. Unless you're going to tell me that any alcohol consumption whatsoever is inherently irresponsible and abusive and should be outlawed?


    Well, like the seatbelts, laws have been made to protect people from themselves. And the drugs often affect other people because of the actions people do while under the influence. So you can protect people from themselves and innocent people from others.

    The drugs are so often abused, compared to the other things, and what good comes from them? Why allow them to be used? Alcohol's fate has already been determined and accepted so I will not argue with it.

  10. But your argument doesn't hold water since the same can be said of food, tv, video games, alcohol...anything can be abused and does inevitably hurt others, but we don't make it illegal because of it. We hold those people accountable for themselves. I don't believe it's consistent with the core theme of freedom that's supposed to be present in the constitution. Do you have any idea how many working fathers, husbands are doing years in prison, ruined family's - broken homes - all because they like to smoke pot after work?


    There is no reason you need sugar. There is no reason you need table salt. There is no reason you need TV, or to gamble, or Fatty foods...Since when do you find yourself so important that you should decide what people "need"?


    Yes, but with the exception of alcohol, you can use those and still have proper judgment. Those things can be abused, but how can you use illegal drugs without abusing them inherently. Sugar and salt don't make use do stupid things you might not otherwise do.

    Your argument doesn't hold water because those are different than the illegal drugs; they can be used without a high chance of bad effects. And since they are illegal now, I'm not the only one who decided that people don't "need" them.

  11. so you know how easy it is to get drugs then. unless you mean a few kids having a smoke round the back of the building by 'a lot of drug activity'


    Yes, and I don't see how making it legal will make it any harder. They will find older friends to buy a bunch and they would still have it. Plus there would be a bunch of older delusional people with cars and possibly families.

  12. No, they should not be. They can be too tempting for some people who can't control their urges and it inevitably hurts others. I've seen it many times. Yes, people ought to be responsible, but they can't. And if they don't sell it to minors, it still becomes easily accessible and ends up with minors. Plus, there is no reason they need it.

  13. I'd suggest everyone give it a bit of time to get used to. Once your eyes get used to glancing in the right spots to read the post, it'll seem a lot better.


    We'll probably be able to offer a variant with the old-style post layout as well.


    ooo...I like the change after being gone for a while.

  14. I understand that eating nonvegetarian is always harmful to humans as we are not animals with four legs but well civilized ones .Anyhow, I have some details about Bacon:


    Chemical added to processed meat products is responsible for a 67% increased risk in pancreatic cancer, says author and nutritionist Mike Adams. The conclusions are based in part on research conducted at the University of Hawaii that reveals a 67% increased risk of pancreatic cancer in people who consume large quantities of hot dogs, sausage and other processed meats, versus those who consume little or no processed meat. The study was led by Dr. Ute Nothlings and was announced at the annual gathering of the American Association for Cancer Research.


    You may want to post a link or cite your source when copy and pasting information. Good habit anyway.

  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.