And how expensive do you think that would be? Having a wider color selection is not going to break the bank. Either they do not sell, and then you do not even have to manufacture them, or they are popular and you have just improved sales. It seems to me owning all rights to manufacture multimeters would be worth quite a bit.
For blue, red, green, purple, white, black, tan, clear, brown, striped, poka dotted, etc. multimeters, and de-facto own all the rights to create all multimeters?
I wonder if that is when actually taking into account the additional problems being drunk will cause when you are injured, bleeding out, and a surgeon is trying to save your life.
I am not sure what effect alcohol will have with blood loss and what effect it has on medication.
At least third parties have stepped up, and I would say are doing a far better job at Government transparency. And who cares about transparency? Great, now I can see in minute detail the human rights abuses, and constitutionally illegal practices of the government on a constant and institutional level. Yay, that totally fixes the problem.
Yes which is why it is good for poor people, but there is no such thing as a billionaire losing everything because he had an unlikely accident and required a hospital stay, he just pays the 100K and moves on.
... To buy insurance. Buying insurance is a guaranteed loss of money. A significant loss, because not only does the insurance company have to cover the expense of running an entire company, but they need to make their own owners rich. Insurance can make sense for poor people, but for a rich people, no way.
Instead of giving the insurance company money, which they probably invest in some high interest thing, take 30 percent off of the top and then use the rest to pay off the life insurance at death, just invest it yourself and when you die have a 400 million dollar account for your relatives to use.
narrow and conservative, aka it is possible by some mechanism that I do not understand the argument might be wrong, at least it is not statistically impossible.
Most torrents are probably added to watch right away, so if more emphasis on getting the first part first, and watching while it is downloaded, how is this not simply a good thing.
While it is very fun, reading 700 wpm with it is rather reminiscent of a roller-coaster ride, it does have its areas of weakness.
Obviously, you cannot use it for reading complex, information filled articles. Even set at an extremely slow setting it simply would not work. It would also be horrible for pleasure reading, novels, short stories, and the like.
It is a great tool for reading empty, information and emotion devoid, text though.
Depends. A lot of cultures put homosexuals into Shamen/Preists roles. The entire driving evolutionary force behind homosexuality I believe is to have free, unattached, men who could help the community instead of just their own families.
Yes, people without children were poor; Though I strongly disagree that they disliked each other, but homosexual males were meant to fill other societal roles.
If they are a donor or not should not matter. People who edit Wikipedia a lot are likely far more likely donate. And simply being an expert in Quantum Mechanics makes you biased in any opinion you have relating to this field, but at the same time Wikipedia needs QM experts to write in the QM sections. Most editing in Wikipedia is done by people who are highly biased, but the theory is that you get enough biased people together and include everything they do agree on, and it will work out as a decent article in the end.
This. In fact, I think it is accepted that people with potential bias do and should edit/create articles when they are needed. They should not take a good article and edit it to be more positive for them or their employers, but if something is missing they should add it.
Forests naturally restore their own nutrients, slash and burn washes 99% of the nutrients away.
It has been done for millennia by the native population for the most part in small enough amounts to not be completely unsustainable, but yes international corporations are 900 times worse that small scale native SaB.
In general this is how natives have farmed in recent years in tropical forests, though there has been some success is getting then to stop. Interesting though is that there is archaeological evidence that at least some of these cultures used to understand how to sustainable and stably farm in the distant past.
Modern Western Intensive Agriculture is really just agriculture, taken to its logical conclusion in post industrial society. Agriculture, as it has been for millennia, is monoculture, you can grow plants in a non monoculture way but that is not farming/agriculture as it has ever been done. Yes there are a lot of stupid blind things that agriculture has done (and modern agriculture has only added to these), but for the most part after you take the premise of monoculture the vast majority of modern agriculture is reasonable and necessary additions to that. Pesticides are necessary when you have an entire state painted in a single strain or a single species of plant. Yes in the past they did it smaller and they had some great tricks that we have forgotten to make it work better, and in cases it can even work very very good. And modern post industrial agriculture does exasperate the problems with 1000 acres fields, but the problem really is in the initial premise of monoculture/fields in the first place. There were entire agriculturally created ecosystem collapses thousands of years ago.
Slashdot Mirror
And how expensive do you think that would be? Having a wider color selection is not going to break the bank. Either they do not sell, and then you do not even have to manufacture them, or they are popular and you have just improved sales. It seems to me owning all rights to manufacture multimeters would be worth quite a bit.
For blue, red, green, purple, white, black, tan, clear, brown, striped, poka dotted, etc. multimeters, and de-facto own all the rights to create all multimeters?
I wonder if that is when actually taking into account the additional problems being drunk will cause when you are injured, bleeding out, and a surgeon is trying to save your life.
I am not sure what effect alcohol will have with blood loss and what effect it has on medication.
So you are claiming that drunk driving is saver than sober driving?
So because you did not die because of your bad genes, you have decided that evolution must not exist?
You think we could at least get summaries written by people who understand basic tech terms.
Her title of largest object in her neighbourhood was reclaimed by Pluto.
At least third parties have stepped up, and I would say are doing a far better job at Government transparency.
And who cares about transparency? Great, now I can see in minute detail the human rights abuses, and constitutionally illegal practices of the government on a constant and institutional level. Yay, that totally fixes the problem.
Yes which is why it is good for poor people, but there is no such thing as a billionaire losing everything because he had an unlikely accident and required a hospital stay, he just pays the 100K and moves on.
That is what they are.
You pay property taxes on a yearly basis, and death taxes when you die. And estate taxes as a title is just misleading.
Death tax/death duties have been a legitimate term since these tax's introduction in Britain.
... To buy insurance. Buying insurance is a guaranteed loss of money. A significant loss, because not only does the insurance company have to cover the expense of running an entire company, but they need to make their own owners rich. Insurance can make sense for poor people, but for a rich people, no way.
Instead of giving the insurance company money, which they probably invest in some high interest thing, take 30 percent off of the top and then use the rest to pay off the life insurance at death, just invest it yourself and when you die have a 400 million dollar account for your relatives to use.
What a tool.
narrow and conservative, aka it is possible by some mechanism that I do not understand the argument might be wrong, at least it is not statistically impossible.
That is a great argument you have there.
Most torrents are probably added to watch right away, so if more emphasis on getting the first part first, and watching while it is downloaded, how is this not simply a good thing.
While it is very fun, reading 700 wpm with it is rather reminiscent of a roller-coaster ride, it does have its areas of weakness.
Obviously, you cannot use it for reading complex, information filled articles. Even set at an extremely slow setting it simply would not work.
It would also be horrible for pleasure reading, novels, short stories, and the like.
It is a great tool for reading empty, information and emotion devoid, text though.
Depends. A lot of cultures put homosexuals into Shamen/Preists roles. The entire driving evolutionary force behind homosexuality I believe is to have free, unattached, men who could help the community instead of just their own families.
Yes, people without children were poor; Though I strongly disagree that they disliked each other, but homosexual males were meant to fill other societal roles.
Implying that he could still father a child? I know he was chemically castrated, but did not think the method was relevant, was I wrong?
15 million of them.
He was gay, which is one obstacle.
Then they castrated him for being gay.
Is this a huge find, will this make these scientists big names? Or was the reason it took so long to validate because no one really cared?
Was this expected, has everyone assumed he was right for a long time, or was their a lot of controversy?
Father a child?
If they are a donor or not should not matter. People who edit Wikipedia a lot are likely far more likely donate. And simply being an expert in Quantum Mechanics makes you biased in any opinion you have relating to this field, but at the same time Wikipedia needs QM experts to write in the QM sections. Most editing in Wikipedia is done by people who are highly biased, but the theory is that you get enough biased people together and include everything they do agree on, and it will work out as a decent article in the end.
This. In fact, I think it is accepted that people with potential bias do and should edit/create articles when they are needed. They should not take a good article and edit it to be more positive for them or their employers, but if something is missing they should add it.
Forests naturally restore their own nutrients, slash and burn washes 99% of the nutrients away.
It has been done for millennia by the native population for the most part in small enough amounts to not be completely unsustainable, but yes international corporations are 900 times worse that small scale native SaB.
In general this is how natives have farmed in recent years in tropical forests, though there has been some success is getting then to stop. Interesting though is that there is archaeological evidence that at least some of these cultures used to understand how to sustainable and stably farm in the distant past.
Modern Western Intensive Agriculture is really just agriculture, taken to its logical conclusion in post industrial society. Agriculture, as it has been for millennia, is monoculture, you can grow plants in a non monoculture way but that is not farming/agriculture as it has ever been done. Yes there are a lot of stupid blind things that agriculture has done (and modern agriculture has only added to these), but for the most part after you take the premise of monoculture the vast majority of modern agriculture is reasonable and necessary additions to that. Pesticides are necessary when you have an entire state painted in a single strain or a single species of plant. Yes in the past they did it smaller and they had some great tricks that we have forgotten to make it work better, and in cases it can even work very very good. And modern post industrial agriculture does exasperate the problems with 1000 acres fields, but the problem really is in the initial premise of monoculture/fields in the first place. There were entire agriculturally created ecosystem collapses thousands of years ago.