@ax8284: "Sorry but I know a lot of rich people."I'd forgive you for that, but I don't need to, because I don't think you really do.Million dollar watches are a wasteful display of wealth to show that you have the ability to waste wealth. Applied to sexual selection (as in natural selection), waste would seemingly be obviously detrimental - females want to mate with the hardiest male, and a peac**k's plumage makes it slow and awkward. But the plumage is what gets the chicks, because it shows they're so burly that they don't even need to worry about being burly. A thug with a rolex is saying he's got so much cash he can throw it away, even if he spent his last dollar to get it. A Ferrari screams lotto winner. Car kits, ice and bling, and any sort of patent leather will make you a big hit at the trailer park.If you're actually around wealth, wealth that wasn't gained in the last blink of an eye, these attempts at showing off appear shallow, vain, and vulgar. They're transparent. They scream neuveau riche. I definitely don't mean to say that rich people are better, simply that when one is actually wealthy, the act of showing it off all the time is a crass waste of time. Who are they really trying to impress? The ones that should know they have money already know. The rest don't matter. They are beyond plumage, to the point that tawdry displays hurt their image more than help it.So back to the point, @ax8284, you've just flashed your wealthy friends as bling, hoping that by the transitive property we think to ourselves 'Aha! ax8284 is surely a rich person!' You're flashing your plumage in the form of people you know. There aren't any chicks here, but maybe you'll get some alpha geek cred. And you might have even convinced a few people. But to the rest of us, it's revealed you're just trying to convince the trailer park of your wealth, hoping to gloss over the fact that you're in a home on wheels along with the rest of them.But hey, what do I know. I write long comments on Digg, the ultimate display of waste.
You're using a single =, which assigns the value from the right-hand size to the variable in the left-hand size. But on the left-hand side, he's got an expression (Poor > Rich) which is not a single variable name... thus not a proper left-hand value (lvalue) for assignment.
wibsMay 19, 2009
@ax8284: "Sorry but I know a lot of rich people."I'd forgive you for that, but I don't need to, because I don't think you really do.Million dollar watches are a wasteful display of wealth to show that you have the ability to waste wealth. Applied to sexual selection (as in natural selection), waste would seemingly be obviously detrimental - females want to mate with the hardiest male, and a peac**k's plumage makes it slow and awkward. But the plumage is what gets the chicks, because it shows they're so burly that they don't even need to worry about being burly. A thug with a rolex is saying he's got so much cash he can throw it away, even if he spent his last dollar to get it. A Ferrari screams lotto winner. Car kits, ice and bling, and any sort of patent leather will make you a big hit at the trailer park.If you're actually around wealth, wealth that wasn't gained in the last blink of an eye, these attempts at showing off appear shallow, vain, and vulgar. They're transparent. They scream neuveau riche. I definitely don't mean to say that rich people are better, simply that when one is actually wealthy, the act of showing it off all the time is a crass waste of time. Who are they really trying to impress? The ones that should know they have money already know. The rest don't matter. They are beyond plumage, to the point that tawdry displays hurt their image more than help it.So back to the point, @ax8284, you've just flashed your wealthy friends as bling, hoping that by the transitive property we think to ourselves 'Aha! ax8284 is surely a rich person!' You're flashing your plumage in the form of people you know. There aren't any chicks here, but maybe you'll get some alpha geek cred. And you might have even convinced a few people. But to the rest of us, it's revealed you're just trying to convince the trailer park of your wealth, hoping to gloss over the fact that you're in a home on wheels along with the rest of them.But hey, what do I know. I write long comments on Digg, the ultimate display of waste.
Closed AccountMay 19, 2009
yeah but at least we got rid of those ni.......
icyguyusMay 19, 2009
hey wait a minute, those 2 are equivalent!
mattsouthMay 19, 2009
there's a documentary out (2005) called "favela rising" it was very good i thought.....its about the slums of Rio and how music changed the mind set....<a class="user" href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0455949/">http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0455949/</a>
Closed AccountMay 20, 2009
@Komgol - nice gatsby reference :)
raptor007Jun 5, 2009
You're using a single =, which assigns the value from the right-hand size to the variable in the left-hand size. But on the left-hand side, he's got an expression (Poor > Rich) which is not a single variable name... thus not a proper left-hand value (lvalue) for assignment.
stardockApr 13, 2010
Only in Brazil