Is there anything about CO2 that would make it pollution outside of the scope of AGW? If so, what is the impact of CO2? If there's no other area where CO2 is a pollutant, then why should we support restricting emissions when there's no harm coming from it? Why should we be increasing energy prices, which would impact the lower classes more, when there's no gain from it if CO2 doesn't affect AGW?
You just aren't using your imagination. More unfounded speculation follows: 1. The size of the labor pool could be reduced by increasing the number of years we spend in education, which is now necessary because unskilled labor is in low demand.
Meanwhile the size of the labor pool is being increased due to longevity.
Additionally, there is more profit with older deaths due to add on services. Old and violent deaths in open casket funerals lets you make awesome additional charges on making the body presentable.
This is pretty much identical to the "hooking a scanner to a network and sending an email with an attached PDF" infringment.
It works off the fact that Cisco's equipment doesn't infringe but when Cisco's equipment is used with X, Y, Z it creates an infringement of a patented process.
Do you put/s or say "Sarcasticly speaking" when talking to people face to face? Deadpan is a neutral vocal inflection and a restriction of body language that would indicate that you aren't serious.
Based on the announcement, either you must be online when sharing to validate that the lendee cannot play the game or your accounts titles are no longer lended when you go into offline mode. Any other solution would likely make it possible to have to copies of the game playing simultaneously, which would be a violation.
There's also a functional difference in your setup. You need to stop playing, somehow transfer any save data, then start playing again. This device allegedly lets you pause the game and pick it up on the TV the little box is connected to.
The argument is mouse & keyboard vs controller and not PC vs console. You need to look at what various inputs provide and what they're superior. The quantity of buttons on a keyboard is a non-issue. One could always, if one wanted to, add more buttons to a controller and in fact some controllers have featured keyboard addons. I, for example, own a Gamecube controller with an ASCII keyboard included on it. SquareEnix, in fact, recommends you get a USB keyboard for use with communication. These game consoles support keyboards and there are games for them that support keyboards. That leaves us with the differences in input as the platform itself really doesn't matter.
The mouse & keyboards principle advantage is in precision pointing from the mouse. The controller's principle advantage is derived from the control stick which provides a huge advantage in precision movement. The best that a PC has match is attempting to use the mouse point as a movement guide with distance from center of the screen indicating speed or you use the mouse to govern camera movement and whatever your controlling is just constantly barrelling forward. That's a terrible method because the natural resting state is wherever you left the mouse pointer or it wrecks the ability to independently move the camera while still moving in the direction you want. The joystick provides an advantage here as it naturally rests at neutral and provides a much smoother control of movement. Flight sims and driving games, for example, are vastly superior on a controller compared to the binary input mode for steering that's provided by the keyboard.
They have the same logistics issue with when/what to produce and how to distribute it. Until they can tool their production and logistics to be able to reasonably deliver mass produced cars to customers within 14 days at the top end (from placing the order) they will never get rid of the dealership relationship.
Now, the manufacturers do sell direct to the end customer but it's never individuals. It's always companies with large fleets of vehicles like Union Pacific or Service Master. They will place orders for 50-100 or even more vehicles at one time. These orders are large enough that they can constitute their own batch of vehicles and the plant managers can schedule production around them. For individual customers, the customers would likely wait until there was a a large enough batch of orders that can justify putting them into the schedule.
At the end of the day, the production managers are going to try to ensure there's enough hours for the employees to work. If you can produce 50 vehicles a shift and if that batch of individual orders doesn't yet amount to close to 50 trucks, you're not going to schedule them and instead go for the fleet or dealerships that do create that 50 vehicle batch.
BTO is awesome, don't get me wrong, but the technology just isn't there for large vehicle manufacturers to be able to do it reliably.
The automakers wouldn't ditch dealers. They're too large to sell direct with how their production runs. It would require vastly more advantage robotic assembly lines (which the unions would fight tooth and nail against) and a more savvy logistics chain.
On the other hand, the rebels could have pilfered chemical weapons when they took over a Syrian base in Sep 2012 then used the weapons in an attempt to provoke a western response in order to give them an advantage.
Manslaughter requires that the decision of the part who causes the death has was reasonable to forsee that a death would occur from the actions. The only choice which had a reasonable possibly foreseeable death was when Martin decided to assault Zimmerman.
Correct, SYG couldn't apply because at the point at which Zimmerman used self defense had not avenue of retreat. Meaning that in a duty to retreat state, Zimmerman still would have had justified self defense.
The US has a legal definition of stalking. Nothing about Zimmerman's behavior suggests that any stalking occurred. Everything Zimmerman did, that we know, was perfectly legal behavior if perhaps stupid. However stupidity is not a crime.
All tragedies are usually a series of bad decisions each of which the person who made that decision could have chosen the other and the tragedy would not have occurred.
Zimmerman could have chosen to stay in his car. But he didn't. Martin could have just gone to his father's house instead of turning around and heading back for Zimmerman as his friend suggested. But he didn't. Martin could have chosen not to assault Zimmerman. But he didn't.
I'm sure there others that might have played a part but ultimately what matters is the decision from which it is possible to reasonable determine that bodily harm or death could have occurred.
Was there anything about getting out of the car and looking for Martin that was inherently dangerous? No Was there anything about turning back from his father's house to confront Zimmerman that was inherently dangerous? No Was there anything about choosing to assault Zimmerman that was inherently dangerous? Yes
Ultimately, Martin sealed his own fate when he made the choice to assault Zimmerman. Had he not made that decision and instead chose to talk to Zimmerman, what would have happened? Well, Martin would most likely still be alive. Had he just gone home he would still be alive and the incident would have been written off by the police.
Slashdot Mirror
Once you go Row you never go Auto.
Is there anything about CO2 that would make it pollution outside of the scope of AGW? If so, what is the impact of CO2? If there's no other area where CO2 is a pollutant, then why should we support restricting emissions when there's no harm coming from it? Why should we be increasing energy prices, which would impact the lower classes more, when there's no gain from it if CO2 doesn't affect AGW?
You just aren't using your imagination. More unfounded speculation follows:
1. The size of the labor pool could be reduced by increasing the number of years we spend in education, which is now necessary because unskilled labor is in low demand.
Meanwhile the size of the labor pool is being increased due to longevity.
Big yes moments are only big YESSS because you ridiculously devalued your own time with that pointless grinding.
It has that room. It's usually a room immediately following a boss.
Additionally, there is more profit with older deaths due to add on services. Old and violent deaths in open casket funerals lets you make awesome additional charges on making the body presentable.
This is pretty much identical to the "hooking a scanner to a network and sending an email with an attached PDF" infringment.
It works off the fact that Cisco's equipment doesn't infringe but when Cisco's equipment is used with X, Y, Z it creates an infringement of a patented process.
It boils down to "Dead people don't make you money."
You're very welcome, my most gracious student.
Do you put /s or say "Sarcasticly speaking" when talking to people face to face? Deadpan is a neutral vocal inflection and a restriction of body language that would indicate that you aren't serious.
I would like to introduce you to a form of humor called deadpan. Much humor delivered across the Internet is essentially delivered as deadpan.
Apparently Linus.
Based on the announcement, either you must be online when sharing to validate that the lendee cannot play the game or your accounts titles are no longer lended when you go into offline mode. Any other solution would likely make it possible to have to copies of the game playing simultaneously, which would be a violation.
There's also a functional difference in your setup. You need to stop playing, somehow transfer any save data, then start playing again. This device allegedly lets you pause the game and pick it up on the TV the little box is connected to.
You're blaming Sony for your inability to adequately police your guests and what they do.
The argument is mouse & keyboard vs controller and not PC vs console. You need to look at what various inputs provide and what they're superior. The quantity of buttons on a keyboard is a non-issue. One could always, if one wanted to, add more buttons to a controller and in fact some controllers have featured keyboard addons. I, for example, own a Gamecube controller with an ASCII keyboard included on it. SquareEnix, in fact, recommends you get a USB keyboard for use with communication. These game consoles support keyboards and there are games for them that support keyboards. That leaves us with the differences in input as the platform itself really doesn't matter.
The mouse & keyboards principle advantage is in precision pointing from the mouse. The controller's principle advantage is derived from the control stick which provides a huge advantage in precision movement. The best that a PC has match is attempting to use the mouse point as a movement guide with distance from center of the screen indicating speed or you use the mouse to govern camera movement and whatever your controlling is just constantly barrelling forward. That's a terrible method because the natural resting state is wherever you left the mouse pointer or it wrecks the ability to independently move the camera while still moving in the direction you want. The joystick provides an advantage here as it naturally rests at neutral and provides a much smoother control of movement. Flight sims and driving games, for example, are vastly superior on a controller compared to the binary input mode for steering that's provided by the keyboard.
They have the same logistics issue with when/what to produce and how to distribute it. Until they can tool their production and logistics to be able to reasonably deliver mass produced cars to customers within 14 days at the top end (from placing the order) they will never get rid of the dealership relationship.
Now, the manufacturers do sell direct to the end customer but it's never individuals. It's always companies with large fleets of vehicles like Union Pacific or Service Master. They will place orders for 50-100 or even more vehicles at one time. These orders are large enough that they can constitute their own batch of vehicles and the plant managers can schedule production around them. For individual customers, the customers would likely wait until there was a a large enough batch of orders that can justify putting them into the schedule.
At the end of the day, the production managers are going to try to ensure there's enough hours for the employees to work. If you can produce 50 vehicles a shift and if that batch of individual orders doesn't yet amount to close to 50 trucks, you're not going to schedule them and instead go for the fleet or dealerships that do create that 50 vehicle batch.
BTO is awesome, don't get me wrong, but the technology just isn't there for large vehicle manufacturers to be able to do it reliably.
Brakes shouldn't need service since they're hardly used.
I'm curious as to how this one happens.
The automakers wouldn't ditch dealers. They're too large to sell direct with how their production runs. It would require vastly more advantage robotic assembly lines (which the unions would fight tooth and nail against) and a more savvy logistics chain.
I think these principles are quite open to interpretation, which is why many self described libertarians disagree on the specifics.
They are, somewhat. That's why you can find libertarians that can justify pro-abortion and anti-abortion simultaneously.
On the other hand, the rebels could have pilfered chemical weapons when they took over a Syrian base in Sep 2012 then used the weapons in an attempt to provoke a western response in order to give them an advantage.
Manslaughter requires that the decision of the part who causes the death has was reasonable to forsee that a death would occur from the actions. The only choice which had a reasonable possibly foreseeable death was when Martin decided to assault Zimmerman.
He just wants a blowjob.
Correct, SYG couldn't apply because at the point at which Zimmerman used self defense had not avenue of retreat. Meaning that in a duty to retreat state, Zimmerman still would have had justified self defense.
The US has a legal definition of stalking. Nothing about Zimmerman's behavior suggests that any stalking occurred. Everything Zimmerman did, that we know, was perfectly legal behavior if perhaps stupid. However stupidity is not a crime.
All tragedies are usually a series of bad decisions each of which the person who made that decision could have chosen the other and the tragedy would not have occurred.
Zimmerman could have chosen to stay in his car. But he didn't.
Martin could have just gone to his father's house instead of turning around and heading back for Zimmerman as his friend suggested. But he didn't.
Martin could have chosen not to assault Zimmerman. But he didn't.
I'm sure there others that might have played a part but ultimately what matters is the decision from which it is possible to reasonable determine that bodily harm or death could have occurred.
Was there anything about getting out of the car and looking for Martin that was inherently dangerous? No
Was there anything about turning back from his father's house to confront Zimmerman that was inherently dangerous? No
Was there anything about choosing to assault Zimmerman that was inherently dangerous? Yes
Ultimately, Martin sealed his own fate when he made the choice to assault Zimmerman. Had he not made that decision and instead chose to talk to Zimmerman, what would have happened? Well, Martin would most likely still be alive. Had he just gone home he would still be alive and the incident would have been written off by the police.