You're an idiot. The ambiguity comes not from the use of an apostrophe to form possessives on pronouns, but from the use of contractions in formal languages.
"Solving" the ambiguity for a small subset of nouns (pronouns) is pointless.
The correct response is to deal with it (because it is possible to resolve the ambiguity by looking at the grammatical structure of the sentence and the context of previous sentences) or to bitch about contractions.
If you were educated in the 50s and 60s, then you certainly had many teachers shitting on you for using contractions.
I'm going to have to cite reputable authorities? Sir, I have cited as many as you, and I have a logical argument with regards to how best to use a language and grammar to achieve their fucking purpose - communication. Your argument is "No, I was never told that!".
And whatever you're trying to say about "his", "him's", and "hi's" is completely wrong and retarded. I'll say it again: "Hers" should be "her's". "His" should be "him's". I have no idea why you're trying to create "hi's", or what you want it to mean.
It was framed for 2.35:1 - it was intended, when shot, to be shown in 2.35:1. Like I stated, it may seem snobby, but it isn't, if I can get a bigger image I would prefer that. I have the 16:9 version and I enjoy it, and it looks great, but it feels much more (to me) like you've got a real theater when the aspect is 2.35:1 or 2.4:1.
I hope some overhyped director makes a fucking movie intended for five 1:1 screens in a + arrangement.
If you don't fucking watch it in that configuration, as it was intended, you're a pathetic plebe, and I'll look down my nose at you.
Would you spend (a million dollars per life saved) per year? Well, yeah, probably. (I think the statistic is something like that for mamograms for women over 40 years old.) But what if the number's a lot more?
Would you fear monger to encourage people to cough up (a million dollars per life saved)? Well, yeah, probably. (I think the statistic is something like that for mammograms for women over 40 years old, for routine pap smears, a series of vaccines for a small subset of HPV that may be one cause of some types of cervical caners, etc.)
But what if the number's a lot more?
Even better!
Diseases and conditions are fucking marketable now. Telling people they're depressed and that your drug will fix it, to race for the cure, to send in pink yogurt lids, to get their kids shot up with needless, ineffective vaccines so they can skip rope and be "one less, one less"*, modern medicine (from the pharmaceuticals to the hospitals and doctor's offices) is a sick joke.
Have you seen the fucking commercials that say "2/3rds of people taking antidepressants are still depressed. So take our new antidepressant. We think it works by doing something in the brain. Maybe."? Fucking pathetic.
Modern medicine has become as corrupt as modern academia or politics. The only difference is that modern medicine is still useful.
*I'm not saying vaccines are useless. I'm talking specifically about the HPV vaccine, which won't do shit to prevent cervical cancer, or even HPV, in the long term. It's complete marketing bullshit. They designed the fucking marketing campaign before the fucking vaccine. It has similar benefits in men (with regards to certain colon and rectal cancers), but since those aren't marketable diseases, they can't be bothered to fucking get the drug approved for use in males. And fewer men with said strains of HPV would contribute to the same "protection" of women with regards to cervical cancer. This is slightly marketable with a guilt campaign "I didn't even know I had it, and now she's dead. Do your part.", but overall, not worth the trials when you can just scare women with ads about kids skipping rope, hoping to not become a statistic (right as you try to get schools to make the vaccine mandatory).
But those pictures are designed for people with normal vision to get an idea of colour blindness, not for colour blind people to get an idea of colour blindness. To accurately portray colour blindness to you, they just need to show a normal chromatic scale..
You're not tied to a single phone or carrier with a regular number, either.
And there's nothing wrong with "it's".
"Slashdot has Slashdot's downsides - it has it's downsides."
The "rule" about possessive pronouns is baseless. It is an attempt to avoid ambiguity, though the rule only applies to pronouns, not nouns in general. The rule is only able to exist because pronouns take different forms based on being singular or plural or being an object or a subject ("it" vs "they", "her" vs "their"). Regular nouns do not do this, and thus, there is no way to shoehorn a half-assed rule in to cover all nouns. The ambiguity only exists because people have accepted contractions into the formal language. If you abhor ambiguity, you should fight against the contractions, not against using an apostrophe to indicate possessiveness in a small subset of nouns (the pronouns).
Too dumb to use a mirror. Too dumb to use a proper bike that allows you to comfortably turn around. Too old to bike in the city.
Bicycles are not meant for the road. (This offends a lot of people. I take great delight in this.)
Cars have mirrors for a reason. Motorcycles have mirrors for a reason. You need a license to drive either for a reason. Said vehicles need to conform to rigorous safety testing and must meet high standards (again, for a reason).
Bicycles need to get the fuck off of the road. They're a hazard to themselves and others. If you want to be green / save money in a crowded urban center, ride a train or take a bus or walk. If you want to play / exercise, drive your bike to a location where it is safe to bike. If you want to be a pretentious, trendy asshole who makes the roads more dangerous for everyone, by all means ride bikes in the street, bitch at the city to create bike lanes where they are infeasible, ignore all traffic laws, and ride a fucking racing bike in the street - in full pointy helmet and colored condom suit.
Adding an apostrophe followed by an ess form's either the possessive version of the noun, or forms a contraction with the noun and a word such as "is" or "has".
This is a simple rule that can and should be applied. There is potential ambiguity, but changing the rule for pronouns does not remove the ambiguity for nouns in general. (And any potential ambiguity can be resolved by looking at the grammatical structure of the rest of the sentence, or looking at the prior context.)
Creating 2 separate rules creates confusion. Creating 1 universal rule is a much better choice.
The apostrophe for possessives only exists to resolve ambiguity between "nouns" (plural) and "nouns" (possessive).
The use of contractions (which many people still fight against) is what caused the ambiguity. The fact that English singular pronouns take different forms based on whether they are the subject or object, and based on whether they are singular or plural ("it" vs "they", "him" vs "them") is what allows the "its for possessive" rule to exist at all.
You must not base a grammatical rule on lexicon. That is fucking backwards, and if your lexicon changes your shit will be impossible to parse without ambiguity.
As far as inflammable goes, you're completely wrong. Inflammable is from the Latin "inflammare". Flammable is from the Latin "flammare". Inflammable was widely-used in English in the 1500s. Flammable was shoehorned in in the 1800s, and nobody liked it. It wasn't until the 1900s that "flammable" made a reappearance, based on morons doing shit wrong and blaming others. It's the same reason we have the fucking IEEE trying to force "kibi" bullshit down our throats, despite being completely wrong.
So how exactly has the planet lost half it's resources?
Seems there's no shortage of apostrophes...
There's nothing wrong with using an apostrophe on a pronoun to indicate possession. You were schooled in the 1980s or later, and thus, you have the world's shittiest grasp of grammar.
Yes, there is ambiguity between contractions and the use of an apostrophe to form possessives. But the same ambiguity exists with proper nouns. The little "rule" about "its" vs "it's" is completely baseless.
Other things that may shock and disturb you:
The possessive female human pronoun "hers" is a bastardization of "her's". The male version, "his", is a further-molested version of "him's".
And did I mention that it's perfectly fine to start a sentence with "and" or "because"?
"I'd" can mean "I would" or "I had".
"Non-Flammable" is not a word, and neither is "flammable". "Inflammable" and "Non-inflammable" are both words.
"Wouldn't've" is as valid a word as "wouldn't" or "would've".
The blind have no problems hearing electric cars. They aren't deaf, like the rest of the retarded populace, and they don't have shitty white earbuds jammed into their ears 24/7, like the rest of the retarded populace.
Electric cars driving down a street are not quiet. They are simply quieter than a regular car.
It's not like trying to listen to a cat sneaking up behind you on a carpeted floor.
A processor (or core) can only execute one instruction at a time, hyperthreading or not.
Uh, no. That hasn't been true for years.
Nehalem, I believe, can execute up to five instructions per clock per core; though you'll rarely be able to reach that limit.
Hey, dipshit "at a time" does not mean "per full clock cycle". IPC doesn't come into play - Hyperthreading is shit, and always has been. It was a bandaid approach to fix the shitty P4 architecture (which had no out-of-order execution). It is now a shitty marketing ploy to advertise a higher number of cores.
Anyone who actually uses hungry applications turns hyperthreading OFF because it actually HURTS performance in all scenarios but "I'm a retard and have 80 firefox tabs open" or "I'm a shitty synthetic benchmark app, please game me.".
It has been tested billions of times over. Coin flips are very fucking fair.
No one who claims to have shown it to be unfair has actually demonstrated a non-retarded method of testing their theory. All of their claims hinge on a faked flip - they toss the coin into the air and intentionally try to get it to flip an odd or even number of times. A regular coin toss looks like this http://www.metacafe.com/watch/1700843/coin_flipped_in_slow_motion/ . You can both see and hear it flip in the air. The morons who claim coin flips are unfair are intentionally throwing (instead of flipping) the coin in the air - the coin doesn't actually flip quickly, it mostly wobbles and gets a few flips, which you can control fairly reliably with your toss strength.
Maybe next time you'll shut up instead of spewing bullshit you know nothing about. (I doubt it.)
You, as an observer, are NOT guessing about the outcome of events. BB BG GB GG does not apply.
BB(1), BB(2), BG(1), GB(2) applies. BB(1) = There are 2 boys and he revealed the first one.
You MUST consider the possible premutations of children AND the various options of revealing information.
The above 4 cases are the only cases which could be true in the given situation. BG(2), GB(1), GG(1), and GG(2) are not possible.
Count them up. 2 out of 4 cases involve 2 boys. 50%, as expected.
Information is being revealed to you - you may or may not be predicting genders of future children. You may or may have been told the gender of existing children. All you know is the possible permutations of 2 children and the piece of information given to you.
This case is NOT equivalent to "Given 2 children, given at least one is a boy, what are the odds both are boys?". The revealing of information about a set is NOT the same as stating given conditions. It does NOT matter if the revealed information and given conditions both result in the same exact subset of possibilities.
They like to trot out shitty arguments about the coin not really flipping in the air, just wobbling (bullshit - it flips), or how the two faces aren't the same weight and (bullshit - they're nearly identical, and a coin falls pretty much straight down, as opposed to a weighted die which relies on sliding vs tumbling), etc. (also bullshit).
Coin flips are really fucking fair. Try it yourself if you don't believe it. Go flip a coin a few thousand times.
Anyone suggesting otherwise is a lying asshat looking for attention.
You wouldn't have to be powered on during the flight. Newton's law and all that. Just wait for enough solar energy to trip a threshold and then start unpacking.
So, the resolution and frame rate will be comparable to what high end displays had over a decade ago, yet the image quality, color accuracy, black levels, etc. will still be shit?
And I'll still have to deal with dead pixels? And I'll still have to deal with shitty shitty shitty processing delays? And I'll still be unable to physically drive my display at various resolutions?
That's a shitty idea - how many people have a flat black wall behind their TV?
The bezel is very fucking useful to anyone who wants to view the screen. There's a reason we put pictures in frames. A solid border around an image makes it much more viewable.
A 5 year loan is fine. 30 years is fine if you plan to WORK for 30 years, at your CURRENT salary, pay it off ON TIME, and STILL have enough money over the years to handle the $XX,XXX in expenses you WILL incur to cover medical expenses, car expenses, etc.
Every single person under the water right now bit off more than they could chew, and it's their own fault for being haphazard, ignorant, or plain fucking stupid.
Gradual deflation would NOT have a terrible impact on anyone in the middle of a 30 year lease. That's the whole fucking point of GRADUAL.
You, and the rest of the STUPID FUCKS in the country who think perpetual debt is acceptable are the reason we're in this shithole.
And I might be able to afford a McMansion. The bank is willing to loan me the money, and I'm sure to get that promotion, and my wife's on the pill so no more kids, and my parents are nice and healthy, and I'm nearly done paying off my car...
There are around 50 million mortgages in the United States. If everyone followed that philosophy, a lot fewer people would be able to own houses... or own cars, or start businesses and expand them, etc.
Protip: Those people are NOT able to own the houses or cars they bought. That's why they're in debt. That's why we're fucked.
Slashdot Mirror
You're an idiot.
The ambiguity comes not from the use of an apostrophe to form possessives on pronouns, but from the use of contractions in formal languages.
"Solving" the ambiguity for a small subset of nouns (pronouns) is pointless.
The correct response is to deal with it (because it is possible to resolve the ambiguity by looking at the grammatical structure of the sentence and the context of previous sentences) or to bitch about contractions.
If you were educated in the 50s and 60s, then you certainly had many teachers shitting on you for using contractions.
I'm going to have to cite reputable authorities? Sir, I have cited as many as you, and I have a logical argument with regards to how best to use a language and grammar to achieve their fucking purpose - communication. Your argument is "No, I was never told that!".
And whatever you're trying to say about "his", "him's", and "hi's" is completely wrong and retarded. I'll say it again: "Hers" should be "her's". "His" should be "him's". I have no idea why you're trying to create "hi's", or what you want it to mean.
It was framed for 2.35:1 - it was intended, when shot, to be shown in 2.35:1. Like I stated, it may seem snobby, but it isn't, if I can get a bigger image I would prefer that. I have the 16:9 version and I enjoy it, and it looks great, but it feels much more (to me) like you've got a real theater when the aspect is 2.35:1 or 2.4:1.
I hope some overhyped director makes a fucking movie intended for five 1:1 screens in a + arrangement.
If you don't fucking watch it in that configuration, as it was intended, you're a pathetic plebe, and I'll look down my nose at you.
Would you spend (a million dollars per life saved) per year? Well, yeah, probably. (I think the statistic is something like that for mamograms for women over 40 years old.) But what if the number's a lot more?
Would you fear monger to encourage people to cough up (a million dollars per life saved)? Well, yeah, probably. (I think the statistic is something like that for mammograms for women over 40 years old, for routine pap smears, a series of vaccines for a small subset of HPV that may be one cause of some types of cervical caners, etc.)
But what if the number's a lot more?
Even better!
Diseases and conditions are fucking marketable now. Telling people they're depressed and that your drug will fix it, to race for the cure, to send in pink yogurt lids, to get their kids shot up with needless, ineffective vaccines so they can skip rope and be "one less, one less"*, modern medicine (from the pharmaceuticals to the hospitals and doctor's offices) is a sick joke.
Have you seen the fucking commercials that say "2/3rds of people taking antidepressants are still depressed. So take our new antidepressant. We think it works by doing something in the brain. Maybe."? Fucking pathetic.
Modern medicine has become as corrupt as modern academia or politics. The only difference is that modern medicine is still useful.
*I'm not saying vaccines are useless. I'm talking specifically about the HPV vaccine, which won't do shit to prevent cervical cancer, or even HPV, in the long term. It's complete marketing bullshit. They designed the fucking marketing campaign before the fucking vaccine. It has similar benefits in men (with regards to certain colon and rectal cancers), but since those aren't marketable diseases, they can't be bothered to fucking get the drug approved for use in males.
And fewer men with said strains of HPV would contribute to the same "protection" of women with regards to cervical cancer. This is slightly marketable with a guilt campaign "I didn't even know I had it, and now she's dead. Do your part.", but overall, not worth the trials when you can just scare women with ads about kids skipping rope, hoping to not become a statistic (right as you try to get schools to make the vaccine mandatory).
But those pictures are designed for people with normal vision to get an idea of colour blindness, not for colour blind people to get an idea of colour blindness. To accurately portray colour blindness to you, they just need to show a normal chromatic scale..
I see you take your logic from http://multifamilyinvestor.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/calvin-hobbes-world-black-white-color.jpg
Go ahead and force them to use different tubes.
I'll make a fortune selling adapters!
Does every external link from slashdot HAVE to be to wikipedia?
Nope.
Try this one.
http://goat.cc/
You're not tied to a single phone or carrier with a regular number, either.
And there's nothing wrong with "it's".
"Slashdot has Slashdot's downsides - it has it's downsides."
The "rule" about possessive pronouns is baseless. It is an attempt to avoid ambiguity, though the rule only applies to pronouns, not nouns in general. The rule is only able to exist because pronouns take different forms based on being singular or plural or being an object or a subject ("it" vs "they", "her" vs "their"). Regular nouns do not do this, and thus, there is no way to shoehorn a half-assed rule in to cover all nouns. The ambiguity only exists because people have accepted contractions into the formal language. If you abhor ambiguity, you should fight against the contractions, not against using an apostrophe to indicate possessiveness in a small subset of nouns (the pronouns).
Sounds to me like you're:
Too dumb to use a mirror.
Too dumb to use a proper bike that allows you to comfortably turn around.
Too old to bike in the city.
Bicycles are not meant for the road.
(This offends a lot of people. I take great delight in this.)
Cars have mirrors for a reason.
Motorcycles have mirrors for a reason.
You need a license to drive either for a reason.
Said vehicles need to conform to rigorous safety testing and must meet high standards (again, for a reason).
Bicycles need to get the fuck off of the road. They're a hazard to themselves and others.
If you want to be green / save money in a crowded urban center, ride a train or take a bus or walk. If you want to play / exercise, drive your bike to a location where it is safe to bike.
If you want to be a pretentious, trendy asshole who makes the roads more dangerous for everyone, by all means ride bikes in the street, bitch at the city to create bike lanes where they are infeasible, ignore all traffic laws, and ride a fucking racing bike in the street - in full pointy helmet and colored condom suit.
Adding an apostrophe followed by an ess form's either the possessive version of the noun, or forms a contraction with the noun and a word such as "is" or "has".
This is a simple rule that can and should be applied. There is potential ambiguity, but changing the rule for pronouns does not remove the ambiguity for nouns in general. (And any potential ambiguity can be resolved by looking at the grammatical structure of the rest of the sentence, or looking at the prior context.)
Creating 2 separate rules creates confusion.
Creating 1 universal rule is a much better choice.
The apostrophe for possessives only exists to resolve ambiguity between "nouns" (plural) and "nouns" (possessive).
The use of contractions (which many people still fight against) is what caused the ambiguity. The fact that English singular pronouns take different forms based on whether they are the subject or object, and based on whether they are singular or plural ("it" vs "they", "him" vs "them") is what allows the "its for possessive" rule to exist at all.
You must not base a grammatical rule on lexicon.
That is fucking backwards, and if your lexicon changes your shit will be impossible to parse without ambiguity.
As far as inflammable goes, you're completely wrong. Inflammable is from the Latin "inflammare". Flammable is from the Latin "flammare". Inflammable was widely-used in English in the 1500s. Flammable was shoehorned in in the 1800s, and nobody liked it. It wasn't until the 1900s that "flammable" made a reappearance, based on morons doing shit wrong and blaming others. It's the same reason we have the fucking IEEE trying to force "kibi" bullshit down our throats, despite being completely wrong.
If there's a street full of cars and you can't distinguish one from the other audibly, you'll be looking both ways. Potential Prius or not.
Portal 2 ARG
Seems there's no shortage of apostrophes...
There's nothing wrong with using an apostrophe on a pronoun to indicate possession.
You were schooled in the 1980s or later, and thus, you have the world's shittiest grasp of grammar.
Yes, there is ambiguity between contractions and the use of an apostrophe to form possessives. But the same ambiguity exists with proper nouns. The little "rule" about "its" vs "it's" is completely baseless.
Other things that may shock and disturb you:
The possessive female human pronoun "hers" is a bastardization of "her's". The male version, "his", is a further-molested version of "him's".
And did I mention that it's perfectly fine to start a sentence with "and" or "because"?
"I'd" can mean "I would" or "I had".
"Non-Flammable" is not a word, and neither is "flammable". "Inflammable" and "Non-inflammable" are both words.
"Wouldn't've" is as valid a word as "wouldn't" or "would've".
The blind have no problems hearing electric cars.
They aren't deaf, like the rest of the retarded populace, and they don't have shitty white earbuds jammed into their ears 24/7, like the rest of the retarded populace.
Electric cars driving down a street are not quiet.
They are simply quieter than a regular car.
It's not like trying to listen to a cat sneaking up behind you on a carpeted floor.
A processor (or core) can only execute one instruction at a time, hyperthreading or not.
Uh, no. That hasn't been true for years.
Nehalem, I believe, can execute up to five instructions per clock per core; though you'll rarely be able to reach that limit.
Hey, dipshit "at a time" does not mean "per full clock cycle". IPC doesn't come into play - Hyperthreading is shit, and always has been. It was a bandaid approach to fix the shitty P4 architecture (which had no out-of-order execution). It is now a shitty marketing ploy to advertise a higher number of cores.
Anyone who actually uses hungry applications turns hyperthreading OFF because it actually HURTS performance in all scenarios but "I'm a retard and have 80 firefox tabs open" or "I'm a shitty synthetic benchmark app, please game me.".
Again, wrong, and you're lying.
It has been tested billions of times over.
Coin flips are very fucking fair.
No one who claims to have shown it to be unfair has actually demonstrated a non-retarded method of testing their theory. All of their claims hinge on a faked flip - they toss the coin into the air and intentionally try to get it to flip an odd or even number of times. A regular coin toss looks like this http://www.metacafe.com/watch/1700843/coin_flipped_in_slow_motion/ . You can both see and hear it flip in the air. The morons who claim coin flips are unfair are intentionally throwing (instead of flipping) the coin in the air - the coin doesn't actually flip quickly, it mostly wobbles and gets a few flips, which you can control fairly reliably with your toss strength.
Maybe next time you'll shut up instead of spewing bullshit you know nothing about. (I doubt it.)
Do we have to go over this again, retards?
I have two kids.
One is a boy.
What is the probability the other is a boy?
You, as an observer, are NOT guessing about the outcome of events. BB BG GB GG does not apply.
BB(1), BB(2), BG(1), GB(2) applies.
BB(1) = There are 2 boys and he revealed the first one.
You MUST consider the possible premutations of children AND the various options of revealing information.
The above 4 cases are the only cases which could be true in the given situation. BG(2), GB(1), GG(1), and GG(2) are not possible.
Count them up. 2 out of 4 cases involve 2 boys. 50%, as expected.
Information is being revealed to you - you may or may not be predicting genders of future children. You may or may have been told the gender of existing children. All you know is the possible permutations of 2 children and the piece of information given to you.
This case is NOT equivalent to "Given 2 children, given at least one is a boy, what are the odds both are boys?". The revealing of information about a set is NOT the same as stating given conditions. It does NOT matter if the revealed information and given conditions both result in the same exact subset of possibilities.
And that article is bunk.
They like to trot out shitty arguments about the coin not really flipping in the air, just wobbling (bullshit - it flips), or how the two faces aren't the same weight and (bullshit - they're nearly identical, and a coin falls pretty much straight down, as opposed to a weighted die which relies on sliding vs tumbling), etc. (also bullshit).
Coin flips are really fucking fair.
Try it yourself if you don't believe it.
Go flip a coin a few thousand times.
Anyone suggesting otherwise is a lying asshat looking for attention.
You wouldn't have to be powered on during the flight. Newton's law and all that. Just wait for enough solar energy to trip a threshold and then start unpacking.
Bah-weep-Graaaaag nah wheep ni ni bong.
Empty.
So, the resolution and frame rate will be comparable to what high end displays had over a decade ago, yet the image quality, color accuracy, black levels, etc. will still be shit?
And I'll still have to deal with dead pixels?
And I'll still have to deal with shitty shitty shitty processing delays?
And I'll still be unable to physically drive my display at various resolutions?
That's a shitty idea - how many people have a flat black wall behind their TV?
The bezel is very fucking useful to anyone who wants to view the screen. There's a reason we put pictures in frames. A solid border around an image makes it much more viewable.
Did you ever notice how each new generation of cell-phone tech gets branded '3G,'
No. Especially since this iPhone 4G thing came out. It was in the news, you might have heard about it.
I've got some news for you... ...and make sure you've got a black turtleneck to wipe your manboy fanboi tears with...
You might want to sit down...
The debacle with Vista was a unique situation. It's not representative of the general trend.
Uh, no.
The "debacle" with Vista was thus:
Vendors didn't write drivers.
When vendors DID write drivers, they sucked.
Video card drivers are shitttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttty. This is a fucking trend you can count on.
Protip: You're a moron.
A 5 year loan is fine.
30 years is fine if you plan to WORK for 30 years, at your CURRENT salary, pay it off ON TIME, and STILL have enough money over the years to handle the $XX,XXX in expenses you WILL incur to cover medical expenses, car expenses, etc.
Every single person under the water right now bit off more than they could chew, and it's their own fault for being haphazard, ignorant, or plain fucking stupid.
Gradual deflation would NOT have a terrible impact on anyone in the middle of a 30 year lease. That's the whole fucking point of GRADUAL.
You, and the rest of the STUPID FUCKS in the country who think perpetual debt is acceptable are the reason we're in this shithole.
And I might be able to afford a McMansion.
The bank is willing to loan me the money, and I'm sure to get that promotion, and my wife's on the pill so no more kids, and my parents are nice and healthy, and I'm nearly done paying off my car...
Retards, the lot of you.
There are around 50 million mortgages in the United States. If everyone followed that philosophy, a lot fewer people would be able to own houses... or own cars, or start businesses and expand them, etc.
Protip: Those people are NOT able to own the houses or cars they bought. That's why they're in debt. That's why we're fucked.