Tonino Lamborghini’s $6,000 Android phone

There might be only 1,947 units of the 88 Tauri smartphone ever made, but each and every one of them is ridiculous. That’s the only way to describe Tonino Lamborghini’s $6,000 Android phone. With a stitched leather finish that’s the real deal (unlike a plastic Samsung) and gold-plated stainless steel surrounding this phone, you’re bound to stand out in the crowd if you’re crazy enough to even want to pay $6,000 for pure stupidity.

Tonino Lamborghini had two of the units here at the Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas today, perfectly matching the city’s passion for excess. Once you get past the raging bull logo, inside there’s a 2.3 GHz quad-core Snapdragon 801 processor, 3G of RAM, and 32GB storage. It’s all part of a 5-inch display running at 1920 x 1080, with a 20-megapixel camera on the back and an 8-megapixel shooter at the front. It’s not exactly a special smartphone inside, but that’s not the point. This phone is as insane and exquisite as a supercar, but it just doesn’t go from 0-60 mph in less than 5 seconds.

http://www.theverge.com/2015/1/5/7498785/88-tauri-tonino-lamborghini-hands-on

Top 16 Worst selflies

OR, when I saw this video parody, I didn’t stop taking instagram photos

Posted by Krissy Moore

• http://www.dailyhiit.com/hiit-blog/hiit-life/selfie-addiction-top-16-worst-types-selfies/

I have to be honest with you. RIGHT before I read this post, I had just taken a selfie of my 32 week pregnant belly(#11), standing with my kid (#7), right after working out (#1).
I have a love/hate relationship with the ‘selfie’. It reminds me of how I used to feel about texting. I thought it was the most annoying thing one could do, and I vowed I NEVER would do it. These days, TRY and get me on the phone. It’s impossible. If you can’t tell me in a text, then you are waiting a LONG time for a response. It’s just the way my life is these days. Too busy and too much going on, so I turn to texting to communicate quickly. Just as the ‘selfie’ allows me to post photos of myself to friends and family who may be remotely interested, and/or following me on my FB page.

As I mentioned, I had just came back working out, and was about to post said ‘selfie’, on my Facebook page, when I came across the article below. Listen, am I going to stop taking selflies? No. Just like when I came across this ‘someecard’ online, I didn’t stop posting about my workouts, but STILL gave me a pretty damn good laugh.It’s JUST SO FUNNY to bring to light things we do all the time and don’t think for a second, others MAY find it annoying or ridiculous. It’s the age in which we live. With all this technology, we are each given the opportunity to offer others a glimpse into our lives, no matter how boring or exciting they are. We used to be able to just take the photos. But now, with Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Myspace etc. it makes it that much easier to share these photos so instantly, that sometimes it’s just so hard to pass up! It’s harmless. But, when you come across a post like this, it’s a reminder of just how funny and/or stupid some of these so called ‘selfies’ come off.

I present the Top 16 Worst selflies out there….

Reposted from : http://wittyandpretty.com/2013/11/01/the-16-worst-types-of-selfies/ 

1. The Gym Selfie (Because the checkin isn’t enough.)


2. The Pet Selfie (If you want to post a picture of your pet, post a picture of your pet.)

Unless this happens, then it’s ok:

3. The Car Selfie AKA The Seatbelt Selfie (You LITERALLY got in the car and thought, “I look so good today, I better let everyone know before I put this thing in drive and head to my shift at the Olive Garden.”)



If you can combine the Seatbelt Selfie with the beloved Shirtless Selfie like this unattractive fella below, you..are…GOLD.

4. The Blurry Selfie (Why?)

5. The Just Woke Up Selfie

Yeah right you just woke up.

6. Or even worse, the Pretending to Be Asleep Selfie. (We know you’re not asleep, asshole. You took the damn picture.)

7. The Add a Kid Selfie (Extra points for a C-section scar.)


8. The Hospital Selfie (A rare gem. The more tubes you have hooked up to you, the better.)


9. The “I’m On Drugs” Selfie (This looker below also qualifies as theLook At My New Haircut Selfie.)

10. The Duck Face Selfie (Hey girls. This doesn’t make you prettier. It makes you look stupid and desperate. If that’s what you’re going for, carry on.)



11. The Pregnant Belly Selfie (Send this to your family and friends, not the entire Internet.)

And yes, that’s a pregnant belly duck face selfie. It’s the unicorn of awful selfies.
12. The “I’m a Gigantic Whore” Selfie

Nice phone case, by the way.

13. The “I Have Enough Money to Fly On an Airplane” Selfie (AND I own earbuds.)

14. The 3D Selfie. (It takes talent…along with class.)


15. The Say Something That Has Nothing To Do With Anything Selfie(You had a great night? Oh.)


16. The “I Live In Filth” Selfie (We all make messes, but if you’re going to post your living quarters on the World Wide Web, pick up your damn room.)

There are so many more, but I’m running out of time on my prepaid Wi-Fi at the Internet cafe and I still have to check Youporn and Friendster. In conclusion: If there’s really something on your face or body you HAVE to share (Halloween makeup/costume, fine, whatever), and there is no one around to take a photo, then society will let you slide, but other than that, please try to refrain from letting the world know you think you’re hot in the most douchetastic of ways. And remember, friends don’t let friends selfie.
I miss flip phones,
Selfie Tom
*Photos 12, 14 & 15 from TheChive.com

I'm against animal cruelty

Jesus

Jesus    Read at least the first two lines....Never thought of it!    Jesus died over 2000 years ago. Nobody has ever referred to HIM as the late Jesus, Not even the heathens. Nowhere in history. Nowhere has HE ever been referred to in the past tense HE 'is' the Living God!    97% OF YOU WON'T SHARE THIS MESSAGE.   When Jesus died on the cross HE was thinking of you! If you are one of the 3% who will stand up for HIM, forward this. "May God Smile on You Today."

AN EAGLE KISS

AN EAGLE KISS  

This is the kind of story you need,

When it seems like the world is spiraling out of control…

 

Not many people get a picture of this proud bird,
Snuggled up next to them!

FREEDOM AND JEFF

Freedom and I have been together 11 years this summer.
She came in as a baby in 1998 with two broken wings.
Her left wing doesn't open all the way even after surgery;
It was broken in 4 places. She's my baby.

When Freedom came in she could not stand
and both wings were broken.

She was emaciated and covered in lice.

We made the decision to give her a chance at life,

So I took her to the vet's office.

From then on, I was always around her.

We had her in a huge dog carrier with the top off,

and it was loaded up with shredded newspaper,  for her to lay in.

I used to sit and talk to her; Urging her to live, to fight;

and she would lay there looking at me, with those big brown eyes.
We also had to tube feed her for weeks.

This went on for 4-6 weeks, and by then she still couldn't stand.

It got to the point where the decision was made,

to euthanize her, if she couldn't stand in a week.

You know you don't want to cross that line;

Between torture and rehab, and it looked like death was winning.

She was going to be put down that Friday,

and I was supposed to come in on that Thursday afternoon.

I didn't want to go to the center that Thursday;

Because I couldn't bear the thought of her being euthanized;
But, I went anyway,and when I walked in,

everyone was grinning from ear to ear.

I went immediately back to her cage; and there she was,
standing on her own, a big beautiful eagle.

She was ready to live. I was just about in tears by then.

That was a very good day. We knew she could never fly;

So the director asked me to glove train her.
I got her used to the glove, and then to jesses,

and we started doing education programs, 

for schools in western Washington .
We wound up in the newspapers,
radio (believe it or not) and some TV.

'Miracle Pets' even did a show about us.
In the spring of 2000, I was diagnosed

with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma.

I had stage 3; Which is not good

(one major organ plus everywhere);

So I wound up doing 8 months of chemo.

Lost the hair - the whole bit. I missed a lot of work.

When I felt good enough,

I would go to Sarvey and take Freedom out for walks.

Freedom would also come to me in my dreams,

and help me fight the cancer.

This happened time and time again.
Fast forward to November 2000.
The day after Thanksgiving, I went in for my last checkup.
I was told that if the cancer was not all gone,

after 8 rounds of chemo;

Then my last option was a stem cell transplant.

Anyway, they did the tests;

and I had to come back Monday for the results.

I went in Monday, and I was told that,

ALL THE CANCER WAS GONE.

                                                   So the first thing I did was get up to Sarvey,

and take the big girl out for a walk.

It was misty and cold.

I went to her flight and jessed her up,

and we went out front to the top of the hill.

I hadn't said a word to Freedom;

But somehow she knew.

She looked at me and wrapped both her wings around me,

to where I could feel them pressing in on my back,
(I was engulfed in eagle wings),

and she touched my nose with her beak,

and stared into my eyes,

and we just stood there like that for I don't know how long.

That was a magic moment.

We have been soul mates ever since she came in.

This is a very special bird.On a side note:

I have had people who were sick,

come up to us when we are out,

and Freedom has some kind of hold on them.

I once had a guy who was terminal come up to us,

and I let him hold her.
His knees just about buckled,

and he swore he could feel her power course through his body.

I have so many stories like that...
I never forget the honor I have of being so close
to such a magnificent spirit as Freedom.
Hope you enjoyed this!

A SMALL REQUEST..

93% won't forward; But I'm Sure You Will.
A small request.. Just one line...

All you are asked to do is keep this circulating.
Even if it's only to one more person.
In memory of anyone you know,

Who has been struck down by cancer,

Or is still living with it,

Or just someone who enjoys a GREAT STORY!

The Real Lessons of the Zimmerman Verdict

• By John McWhorter
• 
  

  

  Following George Zimmerman’s exoneration, I find myself on the other side of the line from the good-thinking crowd that sees the decision as evidence that America doesn't care about black lives. Just last night, I was at dinner with perfectly sensible people who thought that Zimmerman should fry. "Contrarian" though I apparently am, I am always looking for something that I might have overlooked in my thinking. But this time, I'm not sure what I'm missing. 

  It’s not that I can’t see that Zimmerman “started it.” I am well aware that Zimmerman set in motion the chain of events that led to Martin’s death, and for a reprehensible reason. The case clearly speaks to how black lives are routinely undervalued by law enforcement, as well as by other figures of authority such as schoolteachers — and even self-appointed neighborhood “watchmen." I was repulsed by the way the media treated Martin’s friend Rachel Jeantel.

  Charles Blow puts it well in his decreeing upon Zimmerman – and this was before last night’s verdict — a cosmic kind of “righteous conviction,” declaring that “Martin will never be free from the grave, and Zimmerman will never be free from his role in assigning that fate.” Yes. Amen, even. 

  But there is a difference between these broader moral issues and jurisprudence, and I’m not sure the people who took to the streets last night – and will take to the columns all week now claiming that racism has proven its eternal vitality – are taking that into account.

  It comes down to this. Yes, if Zimmerman had stayed in his damned car – and hadn’t been packing heat – Martin would be alive. To many, this alone is supposed to mean Zimmerman belongs behind bars for 30 years. But the reason the law is complex is because sandbox logic like this isn’t always justice. It doesn’t even always feel like justice.

  Suppose Zimmerman had been a black man patrolling his mostly black neighborhood, and white teens from a couple of towns over had been coming through lately pulling off petty thefts. Suppose the exact same sequence of events had panned out, ending with a 30-ish black guy held down by a white teen good with his fists. Scared he’s about to be either killed or gravely injured, the black guy desperately fires his gun, and the white guy dies.

  I can’t help thinking that the people calling for Zimmerman’s head would not think this black man deserved to be sentenced to decades in prison – especially if the facts were as murky as they are in this real case. 

  More to the point, I suspect these same people would defend this black man because of a sense that the case had resonances for black-white relations in the larger sense – the black man would be seen as having tried to stick up for his people in the face of an age-old oppression. That would make it “different” – “you’re not seeing the context” would be a common objection. And let’s not even think about if the white boy had somewhere along the line called the black man an offensive name – or used that word in one of his tweets some months prior.

  Here, then, people perfectly capable of seeing how the law makes Zimmerman’s exoneration technically plausible are up in arms because of a deep sense that the verdict was supposed to be a statement about Amadou Diallo, Patrick Dorismond, Sean Bell, Ramarley Graham, Kimani Gray, and Oscar Grant, shot dead while handcuffed in San Francisco and now the subject of the filmFruitvale Station, so widely discussed in part because of how aggrieved so many people are over the frequency of murders like the ones of those men.

  But criminal verdicts are not theater – we’re not in a movie like Fruitvale Station (and even that film offers no easy conclusions). When verdicts do become dramatic, the results tend to serve little purpose. The exoneration of O.J. Simpson was dramatic, the jury making a “statement” about the LAPD’s racism. But what kind of teaching moment is it when no one learns anything?

  The Trayvon Martin story is not a sign that racism never dies. Just twenty years ago, there wouldn’t have been enough public outcry around his death even to get Zimmerman arrested, much less bring together crowds of Trayvon supporters full of white people as well as black ones. Anyone who doubts that wasn’t there or wasn’t paying attention.

  Zimmerman’s exoneration, rather, is a call to revise the Stand Your Ground law, and is also as resonant an indication as the Newtown shootings that it’s too easy for people to get guns in their hands in this land. 

  Protest and indignation are well in order – but of a less ad hominem stripe than the kind that tars Zimmerman as a bigot, assails the jurors for coming to their decision because they aren’t black, and magnifies the whole episode into pretending Martin Luther King died for nothing. America is hardly perfect on race, but it has changed.

  Progress is getting ahead, not getting back at white people. This is one time when the usual suspects must acknowledge this, if Trayvon Martin’s death is to create anything but histrionics soon to be forgotten.
  http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2013/07/real-lessons-of-the-zimmerman-verdict.html?test=true
   

Reasons For Being Fired From Toys 'R' Us

Reasons For Being Fired From Toys 'R' Us

 15. A little too much joie de vivre while demonstrating the erector set, if you know what I mean.

14. Every time you're passed over for a promotion, you stick your head in an Easy Bake Oven and threaten to "end it all."

13. You got caught adding a garage to your house using embezzled Lego bricks.

12. Numerous parental complaints about your "Tickle Me Carl The Stock boy" display.

11. You went overboard with your GI Joe Militia display by adding the Tonka truck full of fertilizer.

10. Cross-dressing the Ken and Barbie dolls and telling kids they're the new "Jerry Springer" edition.

9. The "My Little Taxidermy Kit" (with starter squirrel) is not selling.

8. Impromptu demonstrations of why Malibu Ken is not anatomically correct.

7. Got caught doing your Dolly Parton impression with basketballs again.

6. Source of reefer smoke finally traced to "nostrils" of Geoffrey the Giraffe.

5. Jaws of life needed to pull your knees out of your chest after you jackknifed a Big Wheel.

4. Caught hocking phlegm into tykes' hands and telling them it was "homemade Gack."

3. Your sales display, "Barbie's Struggle for Survival in Post-Nuclear Holocaust Malibu" was not exactly an overwhelming success.

2. Too many reports from people who swear they saw Geoffrey the Giraffe in a leather bar.

1. Regardless of the question, you answer, "Bite me, kid -- I'm on break."

Mail order brides from Vietnam, warranty one year!!!

Mail order brides from Vietnam, warranty one year!!! Looking for a new wife - Vietnam is the place ! I like conditions 1 & 4

what a jokes? ha ha

LINCS FM PHONE-IN Presenter: Which is the largest Spanish-speaking country in the world? Contestant: Barcelona. Presenter: I was really after the name of a country. Contestant: I'm sorry, I don't know the names of any countries in Spain .. NATIONAL LOTTERY (BBC1) Question: What is the world's largest continent? Contestant: The Pacific. ROCK FM ( PRESTON ) Presenter: Name a film starring Bob Hoskins that is also the name of a famous painting by Leonardo da Vinci. Contestant: Who Framed Roger Rabbit? THE BIGGEST GAME IN TOWN (ITV) Steve Le Fevre: What was signed, to bring World War I to an end in 1918? Contestant: Magna Carta? JAMES O'BRIEN SHOW (LBC) James O'Brien: How many kings of England have been called Henry? Contestant: Er, well, I know there was a Henry the Eighth ... ER. ER ... Three? CHRIS SEARLE SHOW (BBC RADIO BRISTOL ) Chris Searle: In which European country is Mount Etna ? Caller: Japan. Chris Searle: I did say which European country, so in case you didn't hear that, I can let you try again. Caller: Er ........ Mexico ? PAUL WAPPAT (BBC RADIO NEWCASTLE ) Paul Wappat: How long did the Six-Day War between Egypt and Israel last? Contestant (long pause): Fourteen days. DARYL DENHAM'S DRIVETIME (VIRGIN RADIO) Daryl Denham: In which country would you spend shekels? Contestant: Holland? Daryl Denham: Try the next letter of the alphabet. Contestant: Iceland? Ireland ? Daryl Denham: (helpfully) It's a bad line. Did you say Israel ? Contestant: No.

what is LOVE

The Meaning of Freedom

Mike Treder

Mike Treder
Ethical Technology

Posted: Sep 17, 2009

Freedom stands for something greater than just the right to act however I choose—it also stands for securing to everyone an equal opportunity for life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

---

To most reasonable people, freedom means more than just ‘free to do whatever I want’. Taken literally, that approach would produce anarchy—every man, woman, and child for himself or herself. Fortunately, none of us has to live that way (unless you’re reading this in Somalia or a similar disaster area).
Certainly freedom does mean the right to do as one pleases—to think, believe, speak, worship (or not worship), move about, gather, and generally act as you choose—but only until your choices start to infringe on another person’s freedom.
This still leaves a great deal of latitude. There is a long list of things that one can say, and say freely, for example, that excludes shouting “Fire!” in a crowded theater.
One way to think of this is the difference between “freedom of” (or “freedom to”) and “freedom from”—a point eloquently made by President Franklin Delano Roosevelt in his State of the Union Address delivered on January 6, 1941:

We look forward to a world founded upon four essential human freedoms.
The first is freedom of speech and expression—everywhere in the world.
The second is freedom of every person to worship God in his own way—everywhere in the world.
The third is freedom from want—which, translated into world terms, means economic understandings which will secure to every nation a healthy peacetime life for its inhabitants—everywhere in the world.
The fourth is freedom from fear—which, translated into world terms, means a world-wide reduction of armaments to such a point and in such a thorough fashion that no nation will be in a position to commit an act of physical aggression against any neighbor—anywhere in the world.
That is no vision of a distant millennium. It is a definite basis for a kind of world attainable in our own time and generation.

The Four Freedoms

Securing freedom from fear and freedom from want is very likely to entail some collective, organized action. That kind of activity is often carried out most effectively and efficiently (although, admittedly, not perfectly) by the government. If we want to live in a society where freedoms are protected and where the opportunity to exercise freedom is assured, we have to rely on some form of governance. So far, liberal representative democracy seems to do the best job of it.
Note also that Roosevelt spoke in “world terms.” He and his colleagues (including his wife, Eleanor, one of the greatest women of the 20th century) operated according to a vision in which the United States belonged to a family of nations. This family was interdependent, cooperative, and shared common values. The U.S., in their eyes, would act as a member of that family—a leading member, to be sure, but not a belligerent or domineering one.
In the same speech, Roosevelt said:

There is nothing mysterious about the foundations of a healthy and strong democracy. The basic things expected by our people of their political and economic systems are simple. They are:

• Equality of opportunity for youth and for others.
• Jobs for those who can work.
• Security for those who need it.
• The ending of special privilege for the few.
• The preservation of civil liberties for all.
• The enjoyment of the fruits of scientific progress in a wider and constantly rising standard of living.

These are the simple, basic things that must never be lost sight of in the turmoil and unbelievable complexity of our modern world. The inner and abiding strength of our economic and political systems is dependent upon the degree to which they fulfill these expectations.

This message is now nearly six decades old, but still rings as true today as when first spoken. We can hardly improve on FDR’s description of the fundamental goals and objectives of technoprogressive policies.
Of course, in 2009 we must take into account new issues and possible new areas of freedom—and potential infringements on freedom—that could not be anticipated in 1941.
In the next 50 years, artificial intelligence, nanotechnology, genetic engineering, and cognitive science will allow human beings to transcend the limitations of the human body. Our senses and cognition will be enhanced. We will have greater control over our emotions and memory. Our bodies and brains will be surrounded by and merged with computer power. We will use these technologies to redesign ourselves and our children in ways that push the boundaries of “humanness.”
One central mission of the IEET is to protect what we call “morphological freedom”—the right for individuals to manage, maintain, augment, and upgrade their own bodies as they see fit—so long, of course, as their actions don’t negatively impact somebody else’s freedoms.
It is interesting that in his 1941 State of the Union Address, Roosevelt spoke of heath care issues that sound immediately familiar in light of the current debate on the U.S. over health insurance reform. He said:

We should bring more citizens under the coverage of old-age pensions and unemployment insurance. We should widen the opportunities for adequate medical care.

The argument about health care as a human right and access to basic medicine as an important part of freedom is not a new one. Nor is the effort by opponents of expanded coverage to cast the provision of benefits as a threat to freedom.
As Thomas Frank points out in this important op-ed from yesterday’s Wall Street Journal:

Conservatives of the 1930s, led by an upper-crust outfit called the American Liberty League, certainly felt that way. “That Roosevelt was a dictator there was no doubt; but Liberty Leaguers were not quite sure what kind,” wrote the historian George Wolfskill in “The Revolt of the Conservatives,” a 1962 study of that organization. “Some thought he was a fascist, others believed him a socialist or Communist, while others, to be absolutely sure, said he was both.”

Frank’s piece is titled “The Left should reclaim ‘Freedom’—The Right was wrong about FDR too.” He says:

There are few things in politics more annoying than the right’s utter conviction that it owns the patent on the word “freedom”—that when its leaders stand up for the rights of banks to be unregulated or capital gains to be untaxed, that it is actually and obviously standing up for human liberty, the noblest cause of them all. . .
Any increase in the size or duties of government, the right tells us, necessarily subtracts from our freedom. Government is, by its very nature, a destroyer of liberties; the Obama administration, specifically, is promising to interfere with the economy and the health-care system so profoundly that Washington will soon have us all in chains.
“What we’re going to end up with is higher taxes, bigger government and less freedom for the American people,” House Republican Leader John Boehner said on Fox News in July. “We’re going to have a real fight for how much freedom we’re going to have left in America.”

Hogwash.

Today, of course, we know that the right’s tyranny-fears [about FDR] were nonsense. Most of Roosevelt’s innovations have been the law of the land for 70 years now, and yet we are still a free society.

In closing, Frank makes this vital point:

The reality of misgovernment, meanwhile, is not something you can grasp simply by donning a tricorn hat and musing on the majesty of Lady Liberty. It requires, among other things, close attention to the following irony: That many of the most destructive and even corrupt policies of the past few decades were engineered by exactly the sort of people who claim to be motivated by freedom and liberty.

During the recent horrible administration of George W. Bush, I often pleaded with people not to view Bush, Cheney, et al., as conservatives. They were clearly and profoundly not interested in conserving the liberties or the general welfare of Americans, as was their Constitutional duty. Rather, they were intent on maximizing the security and strength of powerful corporations, on whose boards they and their cohorts have so comfortably sat.
Have you ever taken the World’s Smallest Political Quiz? While it is far from perfect, it does offer a useful alternative to the traditional left-right spectrum, opting instead for a diamond-shaped depiction of U.S. political positions.

The red dot shows where I score on the quiz. I would submit that supporters of Bush-style politics, including many of today’s alleged ‘conservatives’, are really much closer to Big Government Statists. Bush, after all, increased the size of the federal deficit far beyond what any of his predecessors had done, while at the same time overseeing the most heinous incursions into civil liberties of any President since, well, perhaps ever.
Although I’ve openly stated my displeasure with the extreme positions of certain declared libertarians, I am not at all opposed to many of the tenets of libertarian thinking. I’ve even at times declared myself to be a “libertarian socialist.” Social freedoms should, in my view, be free from government restraint in almost every case.
Being a technoprogressive means being in favor of freedom. What we have to make clear, though, is that freedom stands for much more than just the right to act however I choose—it also stands for securing to everyone an equal opportunity for life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

---

Mike Treder is a former Managing Director of the IEET.
http://ieet.org/index.php/IEET/more/3411