|Join Nairaland / LOGIN! / Trending / Recent / New|
Stats: 2,758,268 members, 6,556,053 topics. Date: Monday, 25 October 2021 at 08:48 PM
|Webmasters / Re: 9 Most In-demand Programming Languages by okeyxyz(m): 7:02am On Mar 24, 2017|
SQL is a programming language as well as a query language. Do some reading about database stored procedures & stored functions, there you'd see the programming aspects of SQL
|Culture / Re: Yoruba Name Not For Your Daughter - Brazilian Officials Tell Couple by okeyxyz(m): 4:00pm On Mar 29, 2016|
Really?? Wow! You see your inferiority complex?? Always willing to suppress your identity in order to be more accepted by your oppressors
|Programming / Re: Nigeria Sucks On Programming. by okeyxyz(m): 9:01pm On Feb 26, 2016|
Nobody is saying PHP alone can take you to your career heights. I just have a problem with your attempt to knock down PHP on the premise that it's not very valuable in the Nigerian market. I still maintain this is due to ignorance in the market. People generally don't respect much a tool that is easy to learn, which is what PHP is to any newbie. No fancy nor complex installations & setups. Just install your LAMP or WAMP, type simple instructions in notepad++ and point your browser to the domain, and that's it. Easy!! But in terms of functionality, libraries, documentation & support, usability & flexibility, PHP does it's job as perfectly as any other tool out there.
I understand your rating based on commercial value IN NIGERIA, but that's not a technical assessment. It does not demonstrate that PHP has any functional, performance nor securiity drawbacks when compared to other tools.
|Programming / Re: Nigeria Sucks On Programming. by okeyxyz(m): 10:09am On Feb 26, 2016|
Not so. There's nothing wrong with PHP except for the ignorant perception by the Nigerian market which is still an infant industry. PHP does the job as well as any other server side programming language. And PHP is getting more powerful and much faster by the day.
1 Like 2 Shares
|Programming / Re: Nigeria Sucks On Programming. by okeyxyz(m): 12:50am On Feb 25, 2016|
What are you talking about? What's wrong with PHP?
|Romance / Re: My Funny Experience With Black Girls In Uk Club by okeyxyz(m): 10:43am On Jan 12, 2016|
Wow!! Beautifully put. These inferiority complex laden guys will go out to hustle a relationship with Oyibo so they can feel good about themsleves or for papers, but they turn and attack a fellow sista for hustling as well. And the idiot would never have come here to tell us that a White girl insulted him, but he feels it's the right & moral thing to do to report a black sista who has insulted him. INFERIORITY COMPLEX in capital letters
9 Likes 2 Shares
|Education / Re: What's The English Name Of Moimoi? by okeyxyz(m): 11:08am On Jan 04, 2016|
Wrong & Right. Going by the descriptions of how beans is prepared, the best approximations for the names of the dishes are as follows:
Moi moi = Bean pudding
Akara = bean balls or fried bean-balls, or bean-fries
It's common for Nigerians to describe Akara as "bean cake" but this is totally wrong. For anything to qualify as cake, it must be BAKED. Akara is fried, not baked. Moi moi is cooked, not baked.
|Nairaland / General / Re: My Experience With Racists. by okeyxyz(m): 6:34pm On Nov 30, 2014|
Well spoken my sista.
|Nairaland / General / Re: My Experience With Racists. by okeyxyz(m): 6:33pm On Nov 30, 2014|
First of all, everybody don't have a duty to like you. If these persons don't wanna be your friend you don't have to force yourself upon them. You should not chase and shame people for not taking a fancy to you. It is just natural that people have different likes & dislikes without owing you an explanation for their preferences.
As long as such persons do not go out of their way to deny you of your rights then there should be no problem. It's a secular world with room enough to accommodate everybody, whether you like them or not.
But you by choosing to insist that a complete stranger acknowledges your presence and importance, you demonstrate the same intolerance that you purportedly trying to banish. Tolerance does not mean forcing everybody to think and behave in a particular way, in this case: To like a black people (you & your friend). It is perfectly within everybody'e right to like whoever they want to & dislike whoever they want to without fear of persecution, as long as they do not infringe on anybody's rights or freedoms. But what you are doing is pointing, shaming an persecution people because you perceive that they'd not acknowledged you because you are black. What exactly have they deprived you If they are not depriving you of anything that you are entitled to, then let them be. They'd done nothing wrong.
|Religion / Re: Premarital Sex Is Not A Sin Against God by okeyxyz(m): 10:37am On Aug 06, 2014|
Nice!! A beautiful article, though with some understandable errors, but mostly correct interpretation of s.exual values/attitudes in bible context. Well done OP.
It is true that fornication does not mean pre-marital sex. This inclusion of pre-marital sex is not even a christian definition but one brought in by the catholic church when they began to substitute pagan values for christian doctrine. Celibacy itself has nothing to do with christianity, it is 100 percent pagan. It is from celibacy that they made the extension that pre-marital sex was fornication, and this attitude has carried on in today's mainstream christianity.
Fornication(porneia) simply means "immoral(inappropriate) sex", which include a variety of practices like be.stiality, homose.xuality, adultery, rape, idolatrous prostitution, etc, but no way does it include consensual sex between an unmarried male and an unmarried female.
|Programming / Re: How Do I Read Through Huge PHP Code Samples? by okeyxyz(m): 11:28pm On Jul 20, 2014|
The best (and I think only way) to master PHP is to build an app first. Build with raw PHP codes that you write yourself(don't use a framework), that way you get to experience & understand how webapp components work because your build them yourself & from scratch. Components such as: Menus & links, sessions, cookies, emails, SQL data input & output, user registration & logon management, pagination, templates, etc .
After this, then reading/using huge libraries of major open source applications/frameworks/CMS becomes easier to understand and to implement. You are able to use them in a flexible manner, choosing what parts of such libraries to use for your project rather than just following instructions without knowing what's happening "under the hood".
|Programming / Re: Nairaland Programmers That Share Language And City In Common by okeyxyz(m): 7:39pm On Jul 15, 2014|
CMS/Framework: Drupal, Zend
Tools: Composer, Pear, Eclipse, Git,
|Programming / Re: There Are 11 Million Nigerians On Facebook But 1.2 Million On NairaLand, WHY? by okeyxyz(m): 7:35pm On Jul 15, 2014|
You guys are comparing "apples and oranges". Nairaland and facebook have little in common. They are absolutely different kinds of applications, for absolutely different purposes.
Nairaland is a web forum, where viewing of content in the threads is open to everybody and contribution/sharing of content is open to all registered users.
facebook on the other hand is strictly a social network. Contribution/sharing of content is based on connection between registered users as a minimum requirement.
|Religion / Re: What Is Predestination? by okeyxyz(m): 10:52pm On Jul 13, 2014|
Predestination simply means that some people have been pre-selected(before they were even born) to come into the knowledge, belief and judgment by the doctrine of grace(And I am one of these people ). This is strictly a grace christianity matter/calling. Every other person will be subject to the law of moses, whether they be christians, moslems, jews, atheist, etc
|Programming / Re: 10 Programming Languages You Should Learn In 2014 by okeyxyz(m): 8:15pm On Jul 10, 2014|
sanny18: what is phpopp and what is it used for.
You mean PHP OOP??
PHP Object Oriented Programming
|Religion / Re: New Rule For 2014 by okeyxyz(m): 8:31pm On Jan 08, 2014|
Sorry for my long absence guys. I'd address your questions and responses most likely before tomorrow, though I think most of them are quite shallow and without intellectual exercise, but let see...
|Religion / Re: New Rule For 2014 by okeyxyz(m): 9:15am On Jan 06, 2014|
Original!!!! insight LWTMB. Fallacy upon fallacy.... Plaetton don catch you for im trap.
There's nothing insightful about these atheist campaigners. These are simply recitations and slogans they latch onto from their heroes(ala richard dawkins, christopher Hitchens, etc). You know they are not insightful but rather playing to agendas. They pretend to be defenders of liberty but actually their real motive is the dismantling of traditional institutions and redefining values to suit their depraved lusts. Truly, they seem to be everything "anti-family". These people will support anything, no matter how depraved and immoral, as long as it is in opposition to a christian standpoint. Sometime ago, I watched richard dawkins confidently assert that it is better to be continuously se.xually abused as a child than to be raised in a religious home, and shockingly atheists in the audience were gleefully applauding him. These people will attack perfect logic/morals as long as such attack opposes christianity also. A few days ago, I made a perfectly scientifically sound argument, accepted in the scientific community that whatever caused the big-bang that created the universe, then such entity must be timeless, spaceless and immaterial, precisely how the bible describes God as being unobservable\untestable by physical means. This is a sound and accepted opinion in the scientific community, but alas, the atheist @mazaje was spewing fire and brimstone, claiming that this is a lie and that there is no such opinion in the scientific community. Obviously, either he does not understand the big-bang theory or he is deliberately attacking science because it seems to agree with a christian doctrine . Again, Christopher Hitchens was asked a hypothetical question, say: "What if God truly exists for a fact and you know he exists, would you follow him??" and his answer was a blatant "No!!!". Really?? No?? You see how these people will oppose any sound reason as long as they also oppose christianity in doing so.., He would deliberately fight truth and fact just to spite christianity. And these are the people that @plaetton worships SMH
Bros, to know their true natures and intents, just challenge with any true logic but present it under the banner of christianity and you'd see how shockingly they rabidly attack this sound reason. Why?? because it comes from a christian!!. How dare it come from a christain!! SMH...
How can this person assume to opine what christianity(I speak as a christian) should and should not do when he has demonstrated that he knows absolutely nothing of the christian doctrine. He simply takes secular values(which are good and commendable values themselves, and which christianity extols too, but ultimately they are not the main thrust of doctrine, but an addition to doctrine) and sets them up as what christian doctrine should be. He seeks to force christians to believe in certain ideas and force them to behave in certain ways, yet he turns around to say "There must be freedom of and from religion...". If he truly believes in such freedoms, then why does he seek to dictate what christians should be allowed to believe and practice?? Why does he take issue with doctrines that have nothing to do with him?? He claims falsely that christianity preaches hate of homose.xuals, whereas there is no such mandate/command in christian doctrine. Christianity is actually the true secular philosophy in that it states a mandate for believing christians to follow, and absolute nowhere does it command the same disciplines for non-christians. So it is either plaetton is genuinely ignorant of these truths or he is deliberately dishonest is spreading false allegations. He hides behind the cloak of abuses and crimes committed by people who identify as christian, yet he refuses to acknowledge the fact that non of these abuses/crimes is stipulated by the christian doctrines these people purport to follow. It's just people doing bad things in disregard to doctrinal commands.
|Art, Graphics & Video / Re: My Drone Flight Over Nigeria "Grand Canyon" by okeyxyz(m): 8:20pm On Jan 05, 2014|
Why don't you do a proper description of the LOCALITY? Like: What location in what village? To say "Nigeria grand canyon" means nothing...
|Religion / Re: New Rule For 2014 by okeyxyz(m): 8:09pm On Jan 05, 2014|
^^^^ This is typical symptom of people who are unable to face proper debate, they resort to humor-shots rather than point-shots. I sabi your type well, well
You have so far failed to demonstrate that any of the issues you shoot at with your rants has any basis in christian doctrine.
|Religion / Re: New Rule For 2014 by okeyxyz(m): 7:52pm On Jan 05, 2014|
it seems @plaetton has shut up, after I expose his aimless shooting at issues that has nothing to do with christian doctrine, yet he deliberately attributes them to be christian. Such smelly dishonesty!!
He says Jesus never existed, I push back with logic, he shuts up
He says christianity is a rehash of ancient religions, I push back by challenging him to proof, he shuts up
He says christian doctrine preaches hate for homose.xuals, I push back with doctrine to the contrary, he shuts up.
He says christianity rejects natural laws, I push back with scriptural evidence, he shuts up.
No be to make noise be the matter, But when dem challenge you, are you able to deliver. Now we know you are just empty, hence the much noise.
|Religion / Re: New Rule For 2014 by okeyxyz(m): 10:29pm On Jan 04, 2014|
Bros, you are either genuinely schizophrenic or you are willfully ignorant. Did I not explicitly say that you(anybody) are absolutely free to choose whatever you think is right for yourself?? Let me help you recall:
Yet you go off on a rant, completely disregarding the respect and freedom that I'd accorded to everyman as If I never made such concessions. You see how dishonest(or incapable of reason) you are?? I deliberately made it known to you that I have no issues with your homose.xuality(should you or anybody choose to be one..), yet you are the one choosing to have issues with my rejection of the same homose.xuality for myself. Tell me, where is it written in christian doctrine that christianity should be forced upon non-christians? What exactly are you ranting about?? This is the problem with you anti-christians, you take up arms against christianity for thing that are not christian stipulations. You see why I say you are ignorant?? Everything you allege above have nothing to do with christianity. You are simply dancing to the tune of the ignorant majority. I have explicitly made that clear on more than one occasion but somehow you turned blind when reading those parts of my writing , God is watching you ooo.
Now allow me to spell it out to you as if you are a 5-year old: Christianity is a discipline(religion) strictly for people who choose to identify with it's truths. If you don't agree with these truths then you are not required to subject yourself to it's disciplines. shikena!!! Yet here you are huffing and puffing over truths and disciplines I choose to subject myself to. With every passage you write you simply expose yourself for bigot that you truly are, pretending to be an advocate of freedom, yet you reject the same freedom I offered you just because I offer it under the banner of christianity. SMDH
|Religion / Re: New Rule For 2014 by okeyxyz(m): 8:41pm On Jan 04, 2014|
This is one of those slogans that anti-christianity champions like to throw about. It sounds catchy and cool but really there is no sound logic to back it up. It's like me saying that "You have an obsession with food simply because you eat everyday" or that "The police have an obsession with crime because they are always out to enforce law...". This slogan is just stu.pid when challenged to critical logic, unfortunately the unthinking embrace it, thinking it's a weapon to defeat christianity with
Bros, If you were smart, you'd know that homose.xuality can can only be challenged from a religious POV and not from a secular one. Why? because secularity is an all encompassing philosophy that does not distinguish between right or wrong for the self(which is what religion seeks to protect. The self). Secularity is all about: "do whatever you want as long as you don't force another". This is also the POV of true christianity, but christianity goes further to say "as long as you do not harm yourself..., not just another person"
Okay, do you hate and discriminate against poison?
This is precisely what homose.xuality is to the true christian doctrine. I'm not against you being gay, you have the liberty to choose whatever you consider good for yourself. But for me/myself, homose.xuality is a no-go area. It is absolutely unacceptable. You'd understand and respect this if you are truly a secular minded person as you purport to be.
|Religion / Re: New Rule For 2014 by okeyxyz(m): 8:15pm On Jan 04, 2014|
Chai!!! Ignorance gone wild. You simply demonstrate that you know absolutely nothing about this christianity that you assume to judge. Anybody who knows the truth of Christianity(like moi of-course ) knows that It acknowledges and embraces all that is natural, and in addition transcends nature. But the ignorants think that transcend means to be against. Partial knowledge is dangerous. How can christianity be against nature with doctrines like these:
To the pure, all things are pure, but to those who are corrupted and do not believe, nothing is pure. In fact, both their minds and consciences are corrupted---(Titus 1:15).
All things are lawful, but not all things are profitable. All things are lawful, but not all things edify---(1 Corinthians 10:23)
For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse---(Romans 1:20).
I could go on and on, but if you are smart you'd get the gist, else I'm casting my pearls before swine---(Matthew 7:6)
|Religion / Re: New Rule For 2014 by okeyxyz(m): 7:53pm On Jan 04, 2014|
Okay, so does the fact that there are many conflicting claims to the truth about God(or any subject for that matter) preclude the existence of God? or does these conflicts nullify all claims because they don't agree? Of course truth remains one and unshakable, regardless of it's misunderstandings. The flaw in your logic is to hold an absolute conclusion that there cannot be a God simply because of these disagreements. It's wiser to say that none that you'd heard so far has satisfied your enquiries about God rather than to say "God cannot exist".
Therein lies your ignorance. You use patterns and co-incidences to decide facts and history. If I challenged you to name these pagan roots of christianity, you'd simply reel out a list of catholic beliefs and practices which themselves has no basis in christian doctrines that are laid out in the new-testament. Or you point me to relationships to krishna, bhudda, Horus, Amun, etc, which relationships have been thoroughly investigated and proven to be falsehood peddled by christian antagonist like Asharia-S, Jordan Maxwell, Gerald Massey, etc. If you truly think these claims are true, then here is your opportunity to win $1000. No body has yet been able to provide authoritative proofs/texts of these claims that christianity is simply a rehash of ancient religions, the antagonist who started these myths have fled at every opportunity offered them to defend their publications. Also, consider the uncanny co-incidences between the lives of Abraham Lincoln and John. F. Kennedy(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lincoln–Kennedy_coincidences_urban_legend) , If not that we have recent documents establishing that these are infact two different individuals, people like you will come here claiming that John. F. Kennedy never existed(Just as you claim Jesus never existed) and that he's just a rehash of Abraham Lincoln.
Sorry Bros, all your beliefs and arguments against christianity are the real myths, not christianity itself.
|Religion / Re: New Rule For 2014 by okeyxyz(m): 6:20pm On Jan 04, 2014|
^^^^ Just ask yourself one question: According to the bible, is it possible that popular doctrine could be right with God?? Answer: NO!!! There's only one reason that you condemn me and that is because my ideas go against convention of both the religious and secular institutions.
|Religion / Re: New Rule For 2014 by okeyxyz(m): 6:03pm On Jan 04, 2014|
^^^ To start with, the true ideas of God are definitely christian(ie: based on christ, but not the christianity that you are used to). True christianity embraces all things in nature, not forbidding to eat, drink, wear, learn, practice, etc. True christianity stipulates that all things(created by God) are lawful/permissible and therefore cannot defile your holiness/righteousness. There's only one thing that defiles and that is homos.exuality and from which all manner of misbehaviors derive, all complexes, all bitterness, all possessiveness, all fears, etc.
|Religion / Re: New Rule For 2014 by okeyxyz(m): 5:47pm On Jan 04, 2014|
It's simple. The ideas and practices of religions that you are familiar with are simply false. They are so false that secular institutions now recommend what religions are true and worthy of a following. The Pope is voted as Man Of The Year by secular institutions, why?? Because the catholic institution is more interested in appealing to numbers rather than to truth. Most Religions today are nothing but political institutions, they boast of numbers, of who has the biggest cathedrals, of who commands the biggest crowds, of who is more in turn with popular cultures, etc. What you have is religion pursuing secular values, hence they rely on the secular world to approve or condemn right and wrong. These are definitely not true religions.
|Religion / Re: New Rule For 2014 by okeyxyz(m): 5:31pm On Jan 04, 2014|
Well done @theBolded.
What plaetton, logicboy, AManFromMars, etc do is simply to highlight the Abuse of religion and using them to conclude that God cannot exist. This is certainly warped logic rather than an objective logic. I don't blame them though, the christian scripture stipulate that the fake religions and concepts of God will be in the majority, while the true concepts of god would be scorned, persecuted, labeled as cults, and even secular institutions will unite with religious institutions to condemn the true ideas and practices of God.
|Religion / Re: Separate Truth From Fact by okeyxyz(m): 9:13am On Jan 02, 2014|
Wisdom: To know Truth is to perceive that which underlies facts. Gbam!!!
Yes, truth and fact are totally different entities. They may agree, but definitely separate.
|Religion / Re: The Coniah Problem by okeyxyz(m): 10:16am On Jan 01, 2014|
Because if you say Mary is "The Woman", meaning: the ultimate woman, just like Eve was "The Woman", then you now elevate her to divine status just like Jesus, which means that all the catholic doctrines about Mary are true; doctrines like: that she's was born without sin, she never had s.ex before and after Jesus, she was carried off straight to heaven and was never buried, etc. You really don't understand the significance of what you are trying to establish here.
|Religion / Re: The Coniah Problem by okeyxyz(m): 10:10am On Jan 01, 2014|
You err, not knowing scriptures. The passage above was not intended to certify genealogy through the feminine gender. It has never been so and it will never be so. It is unnatural. When that passage said "seed of the woman", it meant that the Saviour of mankind was going to be human, not an angel or whatever else. So being born through a woman was the ONLY way of certifying that God was gonna come as human, this does not in any way authorize the woman to be the path for tracing genealogy.
|Religion / Re: Do You Accept Science Or Religion? by okeyxyz(m): 2:51am On Dec 31, 2013|
Finally!!! I knew you were gonna expose yourself as lacking the (proper) understanding of the scientific documents. Because if you did, you wouldn't be opposing me, you'd know that I'd merely interpreted the document to be as clear as possible, even to a non-scientist. But people like you go about insisting that one gives a presentation to reflect the jargons and verbosities in the technical document, meanwhile you don't even understand them yourself. The bible describes people like this(like you) as following the letters(jargons, literalness) of the law rather than the spirit(principles, understanding) of the law, for the letter kills(is hard, misleads) but the spirit gives life(makes clear, liberates)... Now let me break it down for you:
Every observable aspect of the known universe, ie: space, time and matter was created by the big-bang, correct?? So what does that mean? It means that before the big-bang, there was no space, no time, and no matter, There was ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!! correct?? It then follows that whatever it is that caused the big-bang, it must be spaceless, timeless and immaterial, since space, time and matter did not exist before big-bang.
So bros, while you may have demonstrated that you'd seen the scientific document, I on the other hand has shown that I understood it so well that I'm able to break it down so that a five year old would understand it. GBAM!!! Oya! clap for me.
Just like in the Big-bang above, you don't understand what you talk about. You are misled(through no fault of yours). I tell you now that those people in the old testament thought they saw God but in reality they were witnessing the operations/manifestations of angels. This was so because it was the era of THE LAW, and in that era(while the law was still standing) it is impossible to see/know/understand God. I know you don't understand what I'm saying because you don't even understand the christian principle but I'm just putting it out just in case you'd want to investigate more, else I'm merely casting pearls before swine(matthew 7:6) choi!!!
Again, you(and most people) are misled. The proposition that we came about through Darwinian evolution is an interpretation rather than a demonstration. There is no scientific data anywhere demonstrating this. Just like the proposition that we came about through creation is also an interpretation and the data does not demonstrate this. The scientific data simply shows evidence of relationships/similarities. Now the proponents of Darwinian evolution interpret these relationships as proof of common ancestry while people like me interpret the same data as proof of common design/designer. The raw data itself does not have an opinion, simples!! The process of Darwinian evolution has never been observed/documented anywhere, whether in the wild, in the lab or outerspace. Not one observation, yet you want to push it as scientific fact. How can it be scientific fact if it cannot be tested?? At best, it is a hypothesis, not a theory.
You may claim that you need millions of years to demonstrate Darwinian evolution. Again this is fallacy, I don't need you to demonstrate how monkeys turned to man, but what we require of you to demonstrate Darwinian evolution is to show us where this process has ever occurred in DNA which is the most basic unit of life. You don't need years to demonstrate this. Nowhere has any scientist been able to generate DNA from non-living material. Nowhere has has it ever been observed that a dog DNA has evolved into a non-dog DNA. Mind you, I'm not talking about mutation, because mutation is clearly no evolution.
|Sections: politics (1) business autos (1) jobs (1) career education (1) romance computers phones travel sports fashion health |
religion celebs tv-movies music-radio literature webmasters programming techmarket
Nairaland - Copyright © 2005 - 2021 Oluwaseun Osewa. All rights reserved. See How To Advertise. 366