Comments for nicholasguindon.com http://nicholasguindon.com Ramblings by Nicholas Guindon Sat, 30 Jan 2010 19:26:22 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 Comment on Protected: American Politics by Dudy Adityawan http://nicholasguindon.com/?p=416&cpage=1#comment-99 Dudy Adityawan Sat, 30 Jan 2010 19:26:22 +0000 http://nicholasguindon.com/?p=416#comment-99 Protected Comments: Please enter your password to view comments.

This post is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:

]]> Comment on CIBC & President’s Choice by Samer http://nicholasguindon.com/?p=411&cpage=1#comment-96 Samer Sat, 23 Jan 2010 02:30:46 +0000 http://nicholasguindon.com/?p=411#comment-96 That is absolutely ridiculous. Reminds me of a time when I went to Bell to change my phone number. I changed it, and wanted them to confirm that nothing on my plan changed. They repeatedly confirmed that my plan was not touched, but absolutely refused to give it to me in writing. I argued with them for half an hour to no avail. That is absolutely ridiculous. Reminds me of a time when I went to Bell to change my phone number. I changed it, and wanted them to confirm that nothing on my plan changed. They repeatedly confirmed that my plan was not touched, but absolutely refused to give it to me in writing. I argued with them for half an hour to no avail.

]]> Comment on Second Amendment by tea http://nicholasguindon.com/?p=268&cpage=1#comment-94 tea Sat, 16 Jan 2010 00:10:59 +0000 http://nicholasguindon.com/?p=268#comment-94 OR they're using scare tactics to fuel the "gun control" issue. Or security. OR they’re using scare tactics to fuel the “gun control” issue. Or security.

]]> Comment on Gallery fail by Francis http://nicholasguindon.com/?p=378&cpage=1#comment-80 Francis Sat, 19 Dec 2009 00:30:14 +0000 http://nicholasguindon.com/?p=378#comment-80 Come on, just 'cause you have few exams during the week, you don't have enough time to fix a little problem on your web site. Take care and I'll call you soon Francis Come on, just ’cause you have few exams during the week, you don’t have enough time to fix a little problem on your web site.
Take care and I’ll call you soon

Francis

]]> Comment on Indiana Jones and Facebook by Hachi08 http://nicholasguindon.com/?p=167&cpage=1#comment-41 Hachi08 Mon, 01 Dec 2008 04:49:41 +0000 http://nicholasguindon.com/?p=167#comment-41 Nick--a bit late on the comment here, but I found this entry coming off of another site! Unlike Francis, I don't consider your opinion of facebook too harsh; I, too, severely dislike all the noise and chaos though just a couple of years ago I was one of it's biggest fans. However, I am also very strongly opposed to the new facebook. Why? Yes, it solved the problem of the evil apps, but I feel that it also destroyed many of the things that made facebook good. For instance, personal information is no longer the main focus of the profile, having been replaced by a monster wall that jumbles together status updates, photos, videos, and comments into one giant mess. I miss being able to control and display to their best advantage the features I consider most important to my profile--namely my personal info, photo galleries, graffiti posts, and gifts. The latter two features have pretty much been given the boot by Facebook: I never receive graffiti art anymore, and the display box has been shrunk to a box so tiny that the art is barely visible. My wall is now ten times larger than the graffiti display. (Also, my many photo galleries no longer have a central place in my profile now that they are hidden away on a separate tab.) :/ As for gifts, I was silly enough to regularly purchase facebook gifts for friends because they were fun. Now I'm left with all these useless gift credits because they no longer remain on my friends' profile page. Who would pay $1 for something that gets lost in the random mess of the profile wall and quickly gets bumped off-screen? The fact that facebook developers made these changes without compromise or consideration for their devoted user base is annoying, that these changes detracted from the value of my money even more so. Sorry to rant in your comments, but I wanted to make it clear that not all users opposed to the new facebook do so because they've lost their trashy apps. Nick–a bit late on the comment here, but I found this entry coming off of another site! Unlike Francis, I don’t consider your opinion of facebook too harsh; I, too, severely dislike all the noise and chaos though just a couple of years ago I was one of it’s biggest fans. However, I am also very strongly opposed to the new facebook. Why?

Yes, it solved the problem of the evil apps, but I feel that it also destroyed many of the things that made facebook good. For instance, personal information is no longer the main focus of the profile, having been replaced by a monster wall that jumbles together status updates, photos, videos, and comments into one giant mess. I miss being able to control and display to their best advantage the features I consider most important to my profile–namely my personal info, photo galleries, graffiti posts, and gifts. The latter two features have pretty much been given the boot by Facebook: I never receive graffiti art anymore, and the display box has been shrunk to a box so tiny that the art is barely visible. My wall is now ten times larger than the graffiti display. (Also, my many photo galleries no longer have a central place in my profile now that they are hidden away on a separate tab.) :/ As for gifts, I was silly enough to regularly purchase facebook gifts for friends because they were fun. Now I’m left with all these useless gift credits because they no longer remain on my friends’ profile page. Who would pay $1 for something that gets lost in the random mess of the profile wall and quickly gets bumped off-screen?

The fact that facebook developers made these changes without compromise or consideration for their devoted user base is annoying, that these changes detracted from the value of my money even more so. Sorry to rant in your comments, but I wanted to make it clear that not all users opposed to the new facebook do so because they’ve lost their trashy apps.

]]> Comment on (Mediocre) Handiman by Francis Guindon http://nicholasguindon.com/?p=195&cpage=1#comment-42 Francis Guindon Wed, 08 Oct 2008 12:56:04 +0000 http://nicholasguindon.com/?p=195#comment-42 La prochaine fois, ferme le couvert de la toilette avant de prendre une photo. Sur les photos de salle de bain les toilettes sont toujours fermées. La prochaine fois, ferme le couvert de la toilette avant de prendre une photo. Sur les photos de salle de bain les toilettes sont toujours fermées.

]]> Comment on Indiana Jones and Facebook by Francis Guindon http://nicholasguindon.com/?p=167&cpage=1#comment-40 Francis Guindon Tue, 09 Sep 2008 16:41:47 +0000 http://nicholasguindon.com/?p=167#comment-40 Je ne vois pas le lien avec le petit bonhomme dans la plante(mais c'est bien drole)s'il y en a un, explique le moi. Aussi, c'est, je crois, une impression tres sévère de facebook, même si je n'aime pas facebook. Je ne vois pas le lien avec le petit bonhomme dans la plante(mais c’est bien drole)s’il y en a un, explique le moi.
Aussi, c’est, je crois, une impression tres sévère de facebook, même si je n’aime pas facebook.

]]> Comment on Internal Server Error Fixed by nicholasguindon.com » Repairs complete http://nicholasguindon.com/?p=107&cpage=1#comment-39 nicholasguindon.com » Repairs complete Fri, 04 Jul 2008 17:13:24 +0000 http://nicholasguindon.com/?p=107#comment-39 [...] to import from an RSS Feed. Try focusing on getting useful technical features working instead of opening the floodgates on stupid garbage, [...] [...] to import from an RSS Feed. Try focusing on getting useful technical features working instead of opening the floodgates on stupid garbage, [...]

]]> Comment on Thoughts on the recent debate by Michael Payton http://nicholasguindon.com/?p=88&cpage=1#comment-21 Michael Payton Tue, 25 Mar 2008 04:56:22 +0000 http://nicholasguindon.com/?p=118#comment-21 Mark, just so we are clear, you are arguing from a false analogy. As often before, and informal fallacy has reared its' ugly head in the course of your argument. If you would like to know why a false analogy is a bad thing read this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_analogy (I hope you appreciated that little strike against intelligent design) You are arguing that cognition is as arbitrary as reproductive ability and since one of these is absurd, the other must also be absurd. However, niether Nick or I have conceded to you that cognition is in any way similar to reproductive ability. In fact, Nick has repeatedly stated the opposite. Please tell me why your analogy between cognition and reproductive ability should be accepted. Without establishing that link you cannot plead your case effectively. Mark, just so we are clear, you are arguing from a false analogy. As often before, and informal fallacy has reared its’ ugly head in the course of your argument. If you would like to know why a false analogy is a bad thing read this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_analogy

(I hope you appreciated that little strike against intelligent design)

You are arguing that cognition is as arbitrary as reproductive ability and since one of these is absurd, the other must also be absurd. However, niether Nick or I have conceded to you that cognition is in any way similar to reproductive ability. In fact, Nick has repeatedly stated the opposite.

Please tell me why your analogy between cognition and reproductive ability should be accepted. Without establishing that link you cannot plead your case effectively.

]]> Comment on Thoughts on the recent debate by Nicholas Guindon http://nicholasguindon.com/?p=88&cpage=1#comment-22 Nicholas Guindon Tue, 25 Mar 2008 01:49:50 +0000 http://nicholasguindon.com/?p=118#comment-22 Cognizance isn't what I'm talking about, although you keep referring to it. That's just one small part of a larger picture, mentioned in my previous post: "likes, dislikes, skills, memories, experience and emotions" All of which stem from our brain. There are only two possible ways to argue this: 1. The secular perspective, in which case you must acknowledge that our brain is our "self", or the part that makes us different from each other. Thousands and thousands of studies have exhaustively shown this to be the case. Our level of intelligence, I might add, is also the only reason we would have any more right to life than bacteria. I also established this argument already in my original post. 2. The theist perspective, in which the "self" can be whatever you want. Cognizance isn’t what I’m talking about, although you keep referring to it. That’s just one small part of a larger picture, mentioned in my previous post:

“likes, dislikes, skills, memories, experience and emotions”

All of which stem from our brain. There are only two possible ways to argue this:

1. The secular perspective, in which case you must acknowledge that our brain is our “self”, or the part that makes us different from each other. Thousands and thousands of studies have exhaustively shown this to be the case. Our level of intelligence, I might add, is also the only reason we would have any more right to life than bacteria. I also established this argument already in my original post.

2. The theist perspective, in which the “self” can be whatever you want.

]]>