Yes, it has a list of almost everything you did on the internet since they started monitoring.

yes, actually, they do. they have government facilities to store this information too.

You don't watch the news do you?

does norway do this? i think (hope*) NOT

wasnt that shot down a while ago?

looks like a year-long wanking session on my hands now (i have some weird fetishes)

it would be FAR too expensive to store that much data on that many people for that long period of time. all they really do is look for keywords or phrases related to terrorism, none of it is actually stored. it goes in, is checked for threats or dangerous plots, then goes into a hold period for a few months where a second scan is run, then after that its deemed irrellevent information and discarded

There already building a massive storage building in order to store all the data. Watch the news man. no offence

Dude, we have $5 flashdrives that store 16GB of data. That's after increasing the price to may the retailer for distribution. 16 gigs can store a lot of data, just think how much internet history can be stored if they only spent $100,000 on storage. Considering your history can be stored as a text file, that's a lot of people's history for quite a long time. Money is of no issue.

But yes, you are correct.

Actually storage on a mechanical hard drive can cost less than 0.05 cents per a gigabyte so 100,000 dollars can get you 2000 terabytes of data storage (note this is a rough estimation and costs of servers with redundancy will add a hell of alot more to the price tag)

Yeah and now add server clusters to adress all this storage capacity, then add power costs and your price per gig of data storage goes boom

You took my words and added validity. Bravo, sir.

Pic kinda fits?

I agree with you 100% though

You don't understand computers do you?

According to recently released information all major ISPs have been reporting this informations for quite some time to the NSA.
So assuming he transmitted his data unencrypted it definitely could be recorded.

So... the government knows about my horse fetish?

Fuck.

or you are an avid equestrian.

Yes... Who just happens to find an extreme interest in their genetalia when in the presence of horny sluts. Lol

Just to make things clear, I don't actually have a horse fetish... Though I am paranoid about the government catching onto me visiting russian porn sites. They have a lot of CP mixed in with the regular stuff.

Really they don't care about any of that, but it still could be excused by enthusiastic equestrial Hoi polloi.

You lost me at hoi polloi. That sounds like a Vietnamese noodle dish.

"Yes, I would like the #64 Hoi Polloi beef."

Definition of HOI POLLOI
: the general populace : masses

yeh i know...but the us so much more public about it

No, you just live here.

No the U.S. population is just more whiny.

a) Talking to someone on my facebook, mother. Just like I'm sure you were doing something for the past 7 minutes it took to make this post.

b) Yes they could, I'm simply more qualified to say this than you so don't even reply to this.

c) If I wanted to argue against phone tapping I wouldn't take it up with "traelos" on FunnyJunk.

a) Doesn't that mean you were in front of your computer?

b) If you're such an expert, do it. Detail the above post in as few words as possible, with the assumption that the person reading it is not aware of the content of the verizon deal.

c) What does that have to do with debating?

You cannot graps the true form of peggle!

PEGGLE IS GREAT.

Peggle is fucking amazing you fagbag

More Peggle?

But...but...I give up.

pikachu god dammit

Peggle 2...

But...but...who cares?

Why was he so fucking excited for peggle 2?

why? Why? WHY DAMN YOU, WHY!?!?!?!?!

You cannot graps the true form of peggle!

PEGGLE IS GREAT.

Peggle is fucking amazing you fagbag

More Peggle?

But...but...I give up.

The time lapse of my posts? You do realize some people don't live on their computers, right?

And ask any writer, detailing the picture above can be done in 20 words, not "1013".

And speak for yourself, I've never said a word on phone-tapping. You can't just formulate someone else's opinion with your own mind, you'll just be arguing with yourself.

a) So then, tell me, what were you doing for exactly 5 minutes away from your computer to which you suddenly returned from to make that post? I don't live in front of my computer either, but I usually spend more than 4 minutes in front of it in one sitting.

b) No they couldn't, not if they had to explain the context.

c) About 90% of the skill of a good debater is their ability to formulate the opponent's thought process. I may not be a world class debater, but only a bumbling idiot doesn't at least try. If you're not arguing against the thoughts of the counter-party, who exactly are you arguing against?

a) Talking to someone on my facebook, mother. Just like I'm sure you were doing something for the past 7 minutes it took to make this post.

b) Yes they could, I'm simply more qualified to say this than you so don't even reply to this.

c) If I wanted to argue against phone tapping I wouldn't take it up with "traelos" on FunnyJunk.

a) Doesn't that mean you were in front of your computer?

b) If you're such an expert, do it. Detail the above post in as few words as possible, with the assumption that the person reading it is not aware of the content of the verizon deal.

c) What does that have to do with debating?

It takes 1 minute to frame, the fastest typist in the world can't do 219:1.

Also pictures aren't worth 1000 words, that's a saying. You seem to have serious issue with taking things literally.

No, but it's difficult to represent the amount context a picture can add in terms of a word count.

On top of that, this content had the added bonus of context from the literally thousands of related posts in the past week, whereas I had to explain myself fully and provide my own context.

You may also want to note that I haven't been particularly serious since my first comment here, which i've alluded to in the subscript of comment #25.

If you want my actual opinion, you're just being a whiny bitch because someone put a bit of thought and effort into derailing your Orwellian fantasy.

also, according to the time lapse between posts it took you 6 minutes to make that comment which is 5.5 longer than your previous average, which only comes out to 40 words per minute, which is something most 8th graders can do

The time lapse of my posts? You do realize some people don't live on their computers, right?

And ask any writer, detailing the picture above can be done in 20 words, not "1013".

And speak for yourself, I've never said a word on phone-tapping. You can't just formulate someone else's opinion with your own mind, you'll just be arguing with yourself.

a) So then, tell me, what were you doing for exactly 5 minutes away from your computer to which you suddenly returned from to make that post? I don't live in front of my computer either, but I usually spend more than 4 minutes in front of it in one sitting.

b) No they couldn't, not if they had to explain the context.

c) About 90% of the skill of a good debater is their ability to formulate the opponent's thought process. I may not be a world class debater, but only a bumbling idiot doesn't at least try. If you're not arguing against the thoughts of the counter-party, who exactly are you arguing against?

a) Talking to someone on my facebook, mother. Just like I'm sure you were doing something for the past 7 minutes it took to make this post.

b) Yes they could, I'm simply more qualified to say this than you so don't even reply to this.

c) If I wanted to argue against phone tapping I wouldn't take it up with "traelos" on FunnyJunk.

a) Doesn't that mean you were in front of your computer?

b) If you're such an expert, do it. Detail the above post in as few words as possible, with the assumption that the person reading it is not aware of the content of the verizon deal.

c) What does that have to do with debating?

Oh, look.

Also, I forgot to mention.

Very nice framework, it makes that comment look classy as fuck.

So

Content: 3013 words

My comment: 219 words

Your comment bitching about my comment: 1002 words

Who here is writing a novel buddy?

Also, it took me less time to write comment #15 than it did for you to frame that picture, so in all seriousness your point is moot

It takes 1 minute to frame, the fastest typist in the world can't do 219:1.

Also pictures aren't worth 1000 words, that's a saying. You seem to have serious issue with taking things literally.

No, but it's difficult to represent the amount context a picture can add in terms of a word count.

On top of that, this content had the added bonus of context from the literally thousands of related posts in the past week, whereas I had to explain myself fully and provide my own context.

You may also want to note that I haven't been particularly serious since my first comment here, which i've alluded to in the subscript of comment #25.

If you want my actual opinion, you're just being a whiny bitch because someone put a bit of thought and effort into derailing your Orwellian fantasy.

also, according to the time lapse between posts it took you 6 minutes to make that comment which is 5.5 longer than your previous average, which only comes out to 40 words per minute, which is something most 8th graders can do

The time lapse of my posts? You do realize some people don't live on their computers, right?

And ask any writer, detailing the picture above can be done in 20 words, not "1013".

And speak for yourself, I've never said a word on phone-tapping. You can't just formulate someone else's opinion with your own mind, you'll just be arguing with yourself.

a) So then, tell me, what were you doing for exactly 5 minutes away from your computer to which you suddenly returned from to make that post? I don't live in front of my computer either, but I usually spend more than 4 minutes in front of it in one sitting.

b) No they couldn't, not if they had to explain the context.

c) About 90% of the skill of a good debater is their ability to formulate the opponent's thought process. I may not be a world class debater, but only a bumbling idiot doesn't at least try. If you're not arguing against the thoughts of the counter-party, who exactly are you arguing against?

a) Talking to someone on my facebook, mother. Just like I'm sure you were doing something for the past 7 minutes it took to make this post.

b) Yes they could, I'm simply more qualified to say this than you so don't even reply to this.

c) If I wanted to argue against phone tapping I wouldn't take it up with "traelos" on FunnyJunk.

a) Doesn't that mean you were in front of your computer?

b) If you're such an expert, do it. Detail the above post in as few words as possible, with the assumption that the person reading it is not aware of the content of the verizon deal.

c) What does that have to do with debating?

Content: 13 words

Your rant: 219 words

A picture is worth 1000 words.

So actually:

Content: 3013 words

My Comment: 219 words.

Oh, look.

Also, I forgot to mention.

Very nice framework, it makes that comment look classy as fuck.

So

Content: 3013 words

My comment: 219 words

Your comment bitching about my comment: 1002 words

Who here is writing a novel buddy?

Also, it took me less time to write comment #15 than it did for you to frame that picture, so in all seriousness your point is moot

It takes 1 minute to frame, the fastest typist in the world can't do 219:1.

Also pictures aren't worth 1000 words, that's a saying. You seem to have serious issue with taking things literally.

No, but it's difficult to represent the amount context a picture can add in terms of a word count.

On top of that, this content had the added bonus of context from the literally thousands of related posts in the past week, whereas I had to explain myself fully and provide my own context.

You may also want to note that I haven't been particularly serious since my first comment here, which i've alluded to in the subscript of comment #25.

If you want my actual opinion, you're just being a whiny bitch because someone put a bit of thought and effort into derailing your Orwellian fantasy.

also, according to the time lapse between posts it took you 6 minutes to make that comment which is 5.5 longer than your previous average, which only comes out to 40 words per minute, which is something most 8th graders can do

The time lapse of my posts? You do realize some people don't live on their computers, right?

And ask any writer, detailing the picture above can be done in 20 words, not "1013".

And speak for yourself, I've never said a word on phone-tapping. You can't just formulate someone else's opinion with your own mind, you'll just be arguing with yourself.

a) So then, tell me, what were you doing for exactly 5 minutes away from your computer to which you suddenly returned from to make that post? I don't live in front of my computer either, but I usually spend more than 4 minutes in front of it in one sitting.

b) No they couldn't, not if they had to explain the context.

c) About 90% of the skill of a good debater is their ability to formulate the opponent's thought process. I may not be a world class debater, but only a bumbling idiot doesn't at least try. If you're not arguing against the thoughts of the counter-party, who exactly are you arguing against?

a) Talking to someone on my facebook, mother. Just like I'm sure you were doing something for the past 7 minutes it took to make this post.

b) Yes they could, I'm simply more qualified to say this than you so don't even reply to this.

c) If I wanted to argue against phone tapping I wouldn't take it up with "traelos" on FunnyJunk.

a) Doesn't that mean you were in front of your computer?

b) If you're such an expert, do it. Detail the above post in as few words as possible, with the assumption that the person reading it is not aware of the content of the verizon deal.

c) What does that have to do with debating?

Oh my god than fine, the joke isn't particularly witty. Get over it you don't need to write up a novel on it.

That's not much of a novel...

Content: 13 words

Your rant: 219 words

A picture is worth 1000 words.

So actually:

Content: 3013 words

My Comment: 219 words.

Oh, look.

Also, I forgot to mention.

Very nice framework, it makes that comment look classy as fuck.

So

Content: 3013 words

My comment: 219 words

Your comment bitching about my comment: 1002 words

Who here is writing a novel buddy?

Also, it took me less time to write comment #15 than it did for you to frame that picture, so in all seriousness your point is moot

It takes 1 minute to frame, the fastest typist in the world can't do 219:1.

Also pictures aren't worth 1000 words, that's a saying. You seem to have serious issue with taking things literally.

No, but it's difficult to represent the amount context a picture can add in terms of a word count.

On top of that, this content had the added bonus of context from the literally thousands of related posts in the past week, whereas I had to explain myself fully and provide my own context.

You may also want to note that I haven't been particularly serious since my first comment here, which i've alluded to in the subscript of comment #25.

If you want my actual opinion, you're just being a whiny bitch because someone put a bit of thought and effort into derailing your Orwellian fantasy.

also, according to the time lapse between posts it took you 6 minutes to make that comment which is 5.5 longer than your previous average, which only comes out to 40 words per minute, which is something most 8th graders can do

The time lapse of my posts? You do realize some people don't live on their computers, right?

And ask any writer, detailing the picture above can be done in 20 words, not "1013".

And speak for yourself, I've never said a word on phone-tapping. You can't just formulate someone else's opinion with your own mind, you'll just be arguing with yourself.

a) So then, tell me, what were you doing for exactly 5 minutes away from your computer to which you suddenly returned from to make that post? I don't live in front of my computer either, but I usually spend more than 4 minutes in front of it in one sitting.

b) No they couldn't, not if they had to explain the context.

c) About 90% of the skill of a good debater is their ability to formulate the opponent's thought process. I may not be a world class debater, but only a bumbling idiot doesn't at least try. If you're not arguing against the thoughts of the counter-party, who exactly are you arguing against?

a) Talking to someone on my facebook, mother. Just like I'm sure you were doing something for the past 7 minutes it took to make this post.

b) Yes they could, I'm simply more qualified to say this than you so don't even reply to this.

c) If I wanted to argue against phone tapping I wouldn't take it up with "traelos" on FunnyJunk.

a) Doesn't that mean you were in front of your computer?

b) If you're such an expert, do it. Detail the above post in as few words as possible, with the assumption that the person reading it is not aware of the content of the verizon deal.

c) What does that have to do with debating?

You make a valid point.

Or on no post sunday..

It's a joke.

Humor is the only test of gravity, and gravity of humor; for a subject which will not bear raillery is suspicious, and a jest which will not bear serious examination is false wit.

Oh my god than fine, the joke isn't particularly witty. Get over it you don't need to write up a novel on it.

That's not much of a novel...

Content: 13 words

Your rant: 219 words

A picture is worth 1000 words.

So actually:

Content: 3013 words

My Comment: 219 words.

Oh, look.

Also, I forgot to mention.

Very nice framework, it makes that comment look classy as fuck.

So

Content: 3013 words

My comment: 219 words

Your comment bitching about my comment: 1002 words

Who here is writing a novel buddy?

Also, it took me less time to write comment #15 than it did for you to frame that picture, so in all seriousness your point is moot

It takes 1 minute to frame, the fastest typist in the world can't do 219:1.

Also pictures aren't worth 1000 words, that's a saying. You seem to have serious issue with taking things literally.

No, but it's difficult to represent the amount context a picture can add in terms of a word count.

On top of that, this content had the added bonus of context from the literally thousands of related posts in the past week, whereas I had to explain myself fully and provide my own context.

You may also want to note that I haven't been particularly serious since my first comment here, which i've alluded to in the subscript of comment #25.

If you want my actual opinion, you're just being a whiny bitch because someone put a bit of thought and effort into derailing your Orwellian fantasy.

also, according to the time lapse between posts it took you 6 minutes to make that comment which is 5.5 longer than your previous average, which only comes out to 40 words per minute, which is something most 8th graders can do

The time lapse of my posts? You do realize some people don't live on their computers, right?

And ask any writer, detailing the picture above can be done in 20 words, not "1013".

And speak for yourself, I've never said a word on phone-tapping. You can't just formulate someone else's opinion with your own mind, you'll just be arguing with yourself.

a) So then, tell me, what were you doing for exactly 5 minutes away from your computer to which you suddenly returned from to make that post? I don't live in front of my computer either, but I usually spend more than 4 minutes in front of it in one sitting.

b) No they couldn't, not if they had to explain the context.

c) About 90% of the skill of a good debater is their ability to formulate the opponent's thought process. I may not be a world class debater, but only a bumbling idiot doesn't at least try. If you're not arguing against the thoughts of the counter-party, who exactly are you arguing against?

a) Talking to someone on my facebook, mother. Just like I'm sure you were doing something for the past 7 minutes it took to make this post.

b) Yes they could, I'm simply more qualified to say this than you so don't even reply to this.

c) If I wanted to argue against phone tapping I wouldn't take it up with "traelos" on FunnyJunk.

a) Doesn't that mean you were in front of your computer?

b) If you're such an expert, do it. Detail the above post in as few words as possible, with the assumption that the person reading it is not aware of the content of the verizon deal.

c) What does that have to do with debating?

That doesn't make the stuff any better.
"According to your X Box One record, you lost your hands masturbating. Is it true?"

It doesn't record either, that would take up way too much processing power.

But still, clever.

*North Korean citizen

Beside this... it's still can know when I masturbate!
For the other stuff I won't say anything because I'm not well informed and I don't really care.

Actually, as long as you don't show it your profile it would have a great deal telling when you were masturbating, it doesn't really have any decent depth perception so once your hand passes within the bounds of your torso it assumes its been lost forever.

That doesn't make the stuff any better.
"According to your X Box One record, you lost your hands masturbating. Is it true?"

It doesn't record either, that would take up way too much processing power.

But still, clever.

What would actually be useful, is if the Xbox One could remember your fetishes and keep a constant stream of porn coming for the time required. It should also start buffering the next video on the background to eliminate that problem.

only mormons go to heaven, everyone else goes to hell.

too bad god doesnt love fudge packers

and contrary to popular belief, the bible specifies that you must believe only these things: 1 that Jesus was God's Son, 2 He lived a perfect life to become a perfect sacrifice. 3 He died on the cross for our sins. 4 He rose again on the 3rd day. to go to heaven

as far as any other theological or belief is based, those are not salvation issues. so as far as homosexuality, i don't know what the bible says explicitly on it. what i do know is that 1 nothing i have read says they are going straight to hell whether they believe or not 2 that i am not the one to judge because that would be like me judging people for being human. i have no right to do so.

tl:dr if this is true i believe he will be in Heaven.

I was raised in a Christian family, and from what I've come to understand: Jesus died for everyone's sins, so that everyone would have a chance at Heaven. So, despite what you do, if you're repentant, your soul is given a chance. So it's never really made sense to me why people say things like "if you're gay, you're going to Hell" if they're Christian. The entire religion is supposed to be about forgiveness. You're considered a sinner at birth.

that's what i was trying to say. thank you for making it a bit more concise... i have a tendency to overexplain things...

After some quick research, I discover that noblexfenrir is in fact correct and Mercury practiced Zoroastrianism.

oh well. i wasn't sure one way or the other. just clearing up some issues.

Unless I'm grossly misinformed, he was also a bisexual, so I'm pretty sure that in the Christian theology that's a one way ticket to the Pit.

read my comment

Actually he was Zoroastrian.