Cory fish tattoo, cloverleaf tattoo, cut throat tattoo,

Jeni · Guest

Haha. Great, a few years ago the word of the year was "Google" as in to Google someone. Now Unfriend. makes sense. but in my mind that is not a common word at all. But lol, I am not a Facebook addict.
By advanced, you mean more features crammed in? I have news for you, that sort of crap does not fly in the western world anymore. The number one feature people want is usability followed by expandability of features through third party apps. By offering too many features in a hard to use UI, you are defeating the purpose of having those features which would be for people to "use" them.

Nerida · Guest

“My dude! Earlier time is a little unnecessary, but I DVR so who gives a *****.

Anyeta · Guest

yeah pretty much xD then again.. parts of the gov't ARE the drug lords -.-;.
Has anyone used this TunesPro site that they mention? It looks like they sell albums for about $2. Is this legit?!

Bartliff · Guest

I find it far more likely that a Libertarian would argue that the best remedy for rogue ISPs blocking their favorite traffic is market competition.For places that are free to choose between different ISPs (like cable vs. DSL) there is a strong incentive for ISPs to offer services that people actually like.For places where only 1 (evil) ISP exists, there is usually a strong incentive for another ISP to realize markets where people are unhappy and offer a better alternative.Furthermore, people in cities with only 1 cable or 1 telephone company that controls those respective intra-city lines, if they are angered enough by their ISPs, can initiate local measures to revoke the ISPs charter with the city and offer these contracts to other ISPs willing to offer services that the voters want.These are not always the best solutions. The question is whether having the federal government regulate the internet is a better solution than the free market one. Many of the founders of the the various technologies that power the internet to not favor Net Neutrality because they think it will stifle internet innovation. The sorts of regulations Net Neutrality wants to mandate would make new algorithms like "fair queuing" illegal for ISPs to implement. The government is just not tech savvy enough to regulate the specifics of internet protocols effectively. They will have a nearly impossible job legally differentiating between "fair" traffic shaping (like giving latency priority to voip traffic over data transfers) and unfair traffic shaping (like limiting the speed of bit torrent traffic).?
I guess Dobbs is going to try his hand in politics now.

Prarthi · Guest

Gee..just another day dealing with the sea of corruption within the democrat party and its core constituencies

NYLAY · Guest

You don't necessarily have to be conservative to exploit conservatism for money and attention. Everybody's doing it these days.

Mershanda · Guest

"She bought life insurance and was murdered within months"9 days, actually.

Bijoy · Guest

!

cfc tattoo