I've been watching a few Quentin Tarantino movies lately, and honestly, I haven't really liked any of them. I say "unfortunately" because maybe I'm just not much of a fan when it comes to all that heavy macho stuff.
Nicole Morales3 said:Man, I wish Jeffrey Torres was my banker. I’d just roll up to the branch with a check that has three zeros on it, and he’d somehow flip it into one with seven.
I think that might be a bit harder than it looks. I mean, you're legally liable anyway, and you'd have to pay it back since they accidentally deposited money that isn't yours. Did you catch that story from a few days ago? Some people had a couple million dollars dropped into their account by mistake, and instead of reporting it, they withdrew some or wired it overseas to disappear. Now they've got Interpol and federal warrants out for them. Forget about needing a bank for that. ☕
Steven Nelson29 said:The keyword is "quickly." You missed a few zeros and turned everyone into millionaires.
I guess I just copied it quickly without actually doing the math. I mean, sure, maybe 7,000 people become millionaires, but then what happens to everyone else...🤣 It sounds like a lovely little utopia, though. Everyone becomes a millionaire, nobody has to work, everybody acts like an expert on everything, the whole country just hangs out in Congress, and everyone retires after spending two years sitting in a seat in D.C.
Ashley Rogers4 said:No matter how you slice it, half of that money would probably just get blown on PlayStations, iPhones, iPads, new tires, 22-inch rims, sticks, Porsches, and straw hats. After all that, the rest of us would still be stuck in the exact same mess we started in.
I guess I agree with this, especially when you factor in all sorts of other vices...😁
Eric Cook50 said:Let’s look at the math: 700 billion divided by 6.4 billion comes out to $104, so we're talking about ONE HUNDRED AND FOUR dollars, not one hundred million 🤣 . Meanwhile, France is sitting at 433 Euro 🤣🤣 .
Maybe someone's Calculator is acting up? It's actually pretty simple.
The best way to wrap your head around the difference between millions, billions, and trillions is to think about time: a million seconds is roughly 11.5 days a billion seconds is about 31.5 years a trillion seconds is 31,680 years!
Here is a little sad-but-funny post I put together after reading a Gmail. Just a simple math problem with a pretty shocking result. Some quick thoughts and calculations from a typical CNN viewer.
The plan to bail out the big banks will cost American taxpayers about 700 billion dollars. They've already handed over 500 billion, plus billions more in Euro from European countries. To help make sense of what that actually means, here is a little bit of math. There are roughly 7.7 billion people on Earth. If we divided that 700 billion dollars among everyone on the planet, everyone would get about 90 million dollars.🤣😂 I mean, if that money were actually distributed to end the crisis or poverty—rather than just making every single person on this planet a millionaire—it would be quite different. And honestly, who really cares anymore? It feels like nobody does. It seems like there is a massive issue with how things are being distributed and calculated; someone out there must be losing their mind. For example, let's say France pays 26 billion Euro from its taxpayers to pull its banking speculators out of the crisis. With a population of about 67 million, that’s roughly 388 million Euro per person. That means a family of four would essentially be paying 1.55 billion Euro. Now, think about what GDP per capita actually represents. How could one person ever pay that much if their annual GDP per capita is only 50,000 Euro (which isn't even that high)? We are talking 388 million Euro. How many years would that take? I guess maybe several hundred years, since it takes 20 years just to earn a single million. So, the crisis is still here, the government is laughing at the taxpayers, and they are once again funding the speculators who lost all that money in the first place. What is left for us? Nothing, because we are just the people. That is just how the world works, unfortunately.
I just quickly summarized this from somewhere else, so now you can do the math and let me know what you think.
boldcrane10 said:Thanks for all the input, everyone. My OB-GYN can't see me until Wednesday, and I'm honestly a little nervous. It feels like it might be getting bigger, which isn't ideal. :-(
I honestly don't think you need to worry too much. It sounds like it might be the exact same thing my daughter dealt with.
I forgot to ask, how long does the whole treatment process actually take? Besides amputation—which I assume is really just a last resort—what else will they be doing for him at the hospital? I'm curious about the total timeline, too. For instance, if they start him on some kind of therapy, I wonder if he'll be able to keep working or if he'll have to take medical leave. Thanks again to everyone for all the answers..
Wow, okay, that is actually getting pretty serious. Thanks to everyone for all the input and advice. He let me know he’s just waiting on a call to head into the hospital sometime today.
Thanks for all the replies. He’s pretty shaken up right now—and honestly, who wouldn't be? To make matters worse, the doctors here in the States are a total mess; everyone seems to have their own conflicting diagnosis. He was given some pills on Saturday to hopefully help things along, but unfortunately, he noticed this morning that his finger is starting to turn blue, all the way down to the pinky. I suggested he should probably quit smoking, stop eating heavy meat late at night (which he absolutely loves), and maybe try getting some exercise. I guess that might help him out. mistyranger51, what do you mean by "all sorts of things"?? Could you explain that a bit more please...
Could someone help me make sense of this? I’m asking for a colleague, not myself, and the doctors seem to be giving him conflicting information. They told him it's caused by clogged arteries. He’s a smoker, carries a bit of extra weight, he's 33, and his dad has vascular issues too. I guess I'm wondering if this is something he was born with or if there's a way to fix it. He messaged me this morning saying his pinky finger is starting to turn blue. Does anyone know what might be happening here? He doesn't have diabetes, and he was given some pills to help with the pain, but maybe they aren't working because now a second finger is turning blue. The doctors mentioned he might lose a finger, or maybe both? Has anyone dealt with something like this before? Thanks so much for any insight.
boldcrane10 said:Yesterday, I noticed a small lump about the size of a pea in that specific area. It doesn't hurt at all. It's right on the bottom side of the labia, near the opening. You can't really see it from the outside, you can only feel it if you touch it. Does anyone know what this might be? I can't get an appointment with my doctor for another week. I'm kind of worried it might be a tumor :-( Thanks in advance.
I guess you probably don't need to worry too much, but it’s definitely better to check with a doctor. My 11-year-old daughter actually had a similar lump in that exact same spot. My wife and I were both pretty scared because it kept growing for about two months and just got bigger and bigger. She saw doctors two or three times in the meantime and was prescribed some creams, but nothing seemed to help. Eventually, we scheduled a minor surgery, but the lump was still growing. It reached about 2 cm in length, though it wasn't thick—maybe more like half the width of a pencil. While she was waiting for her surgery date, she was given one last cream to apply to try and stop it from getting larger. Within two weeks of using that, everything just cleared up on its own, so she didn't even need the operation after all. All in all, it wasn't a fun experience, but things ended in the best way possible. Maybe just go to the doctor and you'll likely just get a prescription for a cream and that'll be that.
And honestly, the movie was great. It’s right up there with all the classics like Taxi, Rambo, Terminator, Conan, Die Hard, Star Wars, Alien, Predator, Chronicles of Riddick, xXx, The Mummy, Two-Face, Deadly Weapon, and hundreds—maybe thousands—of others I've watched. I think I actually have most of them on DVD. Some people might call these kinds of movies trash, but for me, they're just a perfect way to spend two hours relaxing and unwinding.
redowl90 said:While most people will probably tell you the movie is terrible, I still have to point out that it was a masterclass in marketing. It’s hard to argue with a product coming straight from the desk of producer Jerry Bruckheimer.
The film has everything you'd expect from a two-hour popcorn flick: big special effects, tons of action, a star-studded cast, some humor, and a straightforward plot that anyone can follow without thinking too hard.
It even snagged 4 Oscars (including one for Best Original Song—Aerosmith: "I Don't Want to Miss a Thing") and pulled in massive numbers at the box office.
Unfortunately, though, none of that actually makes it a good movie. And you'll all agree that being a hit shouldn't be the same thing as being good.
Yeah, sure, it has flaws. But honestly, the best movies are those indie productions where we just watch a lonely woman sitting in a kitchen on a chair, wearing torn tights and messy makeup, while some guy washes dishes in a white undershirt and boxers. And their main dialogue throughout the whole film is just discussing how to pick rose hips and what technique to use when gathering them. What a masterpiece! They deserve an Oscar, a Palme d'Or, and every other award possible. Those are the kinds of films that maybe 0.1% of people understand and call "art." I don't have anything against those types of movies—you can live without them—but if someone really wants a movie tailored specifically to their own taste, maybe they should just pick up a book, read it, and imagine the scenes exactly how they want them. That's it. A movie should be two hours of entertainment meant to help us relax, laugh, and escape everyday life, but just for two hours. And if someone tries to take life lessons from a movie like this, well, they might be having a hard time.
I was an active smoker for about 12 years, but I’ve been breathing in secondhand smoke since the day I was born. I quit five and a half years ago and I don't think I'll ever pick it up again. It’s not just a health thing, either—everything in the house ends up smelling like smoke, all your clothes, and honestly, a smoker's skin just carries that scent. Now, I'm not saying we should euthanize smokers or anything, but maybe they could just enjoy their hobby in spots where they aren't bothering non-smokers. I actually support banning smoking in public places, though maybe not just because of the smoke itself. A big part of it for me is how messy some people are with their cigarette butts, just tossing them wherever, usually right on the ground. But there is something else that really bugs me. Back when I used to smoke, I always made sure to ask if the smoke was bothering anyone or if it was okay to light up. Nowadays, it feels like 90% of the smokers I know just don't care. They just light up and put the cigarette in an ashtray, but the smoke drifts right toward the non-smoker. To them, it seems totally normal, even when you see someone visibly flinching or moving their head to avoid the cloud. I mean, a cigarette is supposed to stay in one place, right? That’s why I don't visit certain friends anymore. At my place, everyone sticks to the balcony; there's absolutely no mention of smoking inside the house.
Such an incredible movie, truly beautiful. It carries so many wonderful moral lessons about how we should act and the kind of people we ought to be. I think those messages represent the most important values regarding character and how people should behave, even if they often don't. Humanity and morality are essential, regardless of who is in power or what era we are living in.
rowdyridge402 said:It might be a good idea to have a couple of different antivirus programs installed, just for extra scanning since you can sometimes clear out certain threats manually,
Running two antivirus programs at once?? Are you joking or actually being serious right now????????😬
I’d say Symantec is definitely one of the top-tier antivirus options out there right now. Installing it or getting rid of it is a total breeze, which is a nice change of pace compared to Norton or some of those other brands, especially Norton 2006. Just a quick heads-up, though. I don't think there's really such a thing as a "perfect" antivirus that can protect you from absolutely everything. In my experience, I've set up maybe 1,500 Symantec licenses, and I ran into issues maybe five times? But honestly, most of those were probably just hiccups caused by conflicts with other software or some pesky Adware, or maybe because the PCs weren't updated with Service Pack 1 or anything else. Maybe try downloading the free version of Symantec from www.bitdefender.com first. You should just test it out before deciding. Don't just take my word for it, or listen to your friends, cousins, or relatives—just run the test yourself. Every PC seems to react to software a little differently, I guess.