I'm pretty sure that at least some of the troops coming in from Canada were Canadians, but of course from the British Army's perspective they were all British. No argument on it being self-defense.
Well, no, there WAS enough time. They just forgot to factor in that they had a conspirator who tipped off his brother/cousin/neighbor/I forget which the MP that 5 November was going to be a Good Day to Call in Sick.
Don't try to fool us.. if it has any "cult" status with the geeks its for the lesbians and/or POONTANG;)
I'm sure thats part of it, but if thats all it was i doubt anyone would like it.
That's not true. Someone would like it, but it would be the someones who have to catch every episode of Baywatch - not remotely the same crowd that follows Buffy.
IIRC, the Movement of the Forest bit was in the Abomination of Ralph Bakshi, and it didn't work there, *at all*. Now, that's partly because nothing really worked in that one, and partly because it ended before anyone could say "Hey, that must've been the Ents and the Forest that passed us in the night", but it seemed to be one of the worst bits of a really poor interpretation, so it probably would have felt god-awful in the midst of a mostly well-executed version.
WHICH religions are practiced; WHAT KIND of food is cooked; etc. Any reasonable metric of cultural similarity should make Boston, Los Angeles, and yes, southern Louisiana, not indistinguishable, but much, much closer together than any of them are to Delhi.
Absolutely. But the first post I was replying to wasn't asking "Which religion? What kind of food is cooked?", but "Is there a religion? Is food cooked instead of consumed raw?"
Obviously Boston is more different from Delhi than it is from LA (assuming we're meaning Los Angeles - parts of south Louisiana, I think it might be a tossup). That's not the point. The point is that the original list of attributes (practices a religion, cooks food, speaks English), by which we were determining that Boston and LA are culturally indistinguishable, is sufficiently imprecise as to make Boston and Delhi appear culturally indistinguishable, as well.
And if we're speaking anthropologically (rather than quality-of-ingredients type issues), then yes, I think that Indian food consumed in Boston IS more along the lines of Delhian Indian food than Bostonian American food. But as you say, I've never been to Delhi (or Asia at all, for that matter).
I don't think any of the Bostonians I've known would understand the life or diet of a Louisianan at all (or vice versa). Language, food, and recreation are certainly all VASTLY different between those two locales. I'd wager that most people from Boston would have an easier time understanding the speech of a visitor from India than that of a Cajun.
On your post to which I originally replied, the only category in which Americans (of whatever region) are likely to be more distinguishable from Indians (who I am singling out somewhat unfairly as being, from a middle-American perspective, pretty much the exotic end of the English-speaking world), is in diet. And since most of the Americans I know eat Indian cuisine at least occasionally, and most of the Indians I know eat American "cuisine" at least occasionally, even that is a questionable difference.
So by your broad definition of cultural equivalence, there are no significant differences between life in LA, or Boston, or Delhi, or Shanghai? They do all of those things in those places, too (though maybe they don't have grass to cut in Shanghai)? I think your brushstrokes may be just a LITTLE too broad.
It's rare to see someone so selflessly promote the parent's argument. I'm a bit behind on my British television (just discovered Jeeves and Wooster yesterday), but I really can't imagine them producing anything nearly so soul-destroying as either of the bits of trash you cite. "Vastly popular" in no way indicates quality; McDonald's sells more hamburgers than anyone else, but no one over the age of 10 things they make the best.
The wording on the form looks pretty specific, but the loophole is that YOU decide what mail is offensive to YOU.
I've used it to stop getting AOL CDs, and to stop getting loan offers from CitiFinancial after they wouldn't take a phoned-in "Stop sending this shit to my wife, as I don't have one, and if I wouldn't marry anyone stupid enough to take a loan at 18.99% interest" for an answer. Got moderately confused looks from the postal clerk, but they processed both forms without complaint, and both problems have stopped completely for six months and counting.
Re:The Tucker store stinks
on
Worst Buy
·
· Score: 0
I've got a chargeback going through the system with one of the Memphis locations right now. On 17 March, I tried to sign the register receipt on paper instead of on their we-have-your-signature-available-forever box, as recommended by privacy activists everywhere and as I had done multiple times at multiple Best Buys including the one in question. Untrained register person claimed an inability to clear the transaction without "something" in the box. I argued over this for a good five minutes, but register person was adamant in her incompetence and store management was nowhere to be found, so I eventually consented to write "VOID". Made it clear that I was doing this under protest, and most distinctly not purchasing the item in question. This appeared to have gotten through register person's thick skull, as she left the security plastic on the item and suggested I talk to Customer Service if I still wanted to make a purchase. Customer Service refused to understand what part of the transaction was the least bit objectionable, so I left, believing myself to have wasted nothing but time. However, my bank statement clearly showed a charge for that item. The bank and Visa are being polite but noncommital so far, but given that the only signature Best Buy has - and which they should be able to call up fairly quickly in their accursed system - is the word "VOID", I would think that my case is pretty solid. It's only $55, so I'm willing to wait a while for Visa to set things right.
One of my close friends was one of the people 'eliminated' by Gore's 'streamlining' of the federal government, around '95. They made him (and about 30% of his department) an independent contractor, at a considerably higher salary. Technically reduced the number of federal employees, yes, but only technically. This is one of the more disingenuous of Gore's MANY disingenuous claims about the current administration's record.
Here in Tennessee, we have a binding opt-out list maintained by the state. It's great, I've only gotten four calls since they started it in July, and three of those were just messages on my machine begging me to renew my home warranty (which, since that's expired, I think puts them in a gray area as regards 'established business relationship').
On the one hand, we're LONG overdue for some divine ass-kicking, and I'll be pretty surprised if it hasn't come within the next 50 years; in which case, the question will be moot; after the Horsemen of the Apocalypse ride, there will be more pressing terrestrial concerns.
On the other hand... the problem with Babel was that man was trying specifically to "build a tower to Heaven". There's a large bit of hubris there that I don't think is inherent in trying to get out to space as space; or if there is hubris involved, it's really no worse than that involved in ISS, so I don't think there's anything to worry about with the space elevator specifically.
This was the first post that had anything to do with the article. It'd be awfully hard to be redundant in that position. If you don't know what one of the moderation terms means, look it up before using it against people.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm pretty sure that at least some of the troops coming in from Canada were Canadians, but of course from the British Army's perspective they were all British. No argument on it being self-defense.
War of 1812. We invaded them first, though, in our second and last attempt to force them to join us in leaving the British Empire.
Well, no, there WAS enough time. They just forgot to factor in that they had a conspirator who tipped off his brother/cousin/neighbor/I forget which the MP that 5 November was going to be a Good Day to Call in Sick.
Don't try to fool us.. if it has any "cult" status with the geeks its for the lesbians and/or POONTANG ;)
I'm sure thats part of it, but if thats all it was i doubt anyone would like it.
That's not true. Someone would like it, but it would be the someones who have to catch every episode of Baywatch - not remotely the same crowd that follows Buffy.
opus -> opera
But... Emacs is free.
Although, given how inconceivably terrible a President Grant actually WAS, we'd probably be a great deal better off if he HAD said it.
Not that LBJ was a prize turnip either, mind you.
IIRC, the Movement of the Forest bit was in the Abomination of Ralph Bakshi, and it didn't work there, *at all*. Now, that's partly because nothing really worked in that one, and partly because it ended before anyone could say "Hey, that must've been the Ents and the Forest that passed us in the night", but it seemed to be one of the worst bits of a really poor interpretation, so it probably would have felt god-awful in the midst of a mostly well-executed version.
WHICH religions are practiced; WHAT KIND of food is cooked; etc. Any reasonable metric of cultural similarity should make Boston, Los Angeles, and yes, southern Louisiana, not indistinguishable, but much, much closer together than any of them are to Delhi.
Absolutely. But the first post I was replying to wasn't asking "Which religion? What kind of food is cooked?", but "Is there a religion? Is food cooked instead of consumed raw?"
Obviously Boston is more different from Delhi than it is from LA (assuming we're meaning Los Angeles - parts of south Louisiana, I think it might be a tossup). That's not the point. The point is that the original list of attributes (practices a religion, cooks food, speaks English), by which we were determining that Boston and LA are culturally indistinguishable, is sufficiently imprecise as to make Boston and Delhi appear culturally indistinguishable, as well.
And if we're speaking anthropologically (rather than quality-of-ingredients type issues), then yes, I think that Indian food consumed in Boston IS more along the lines of Delhian Indian food than Bostonian American food. But as you say, I've never been to Delhi (or Asia at all, for that matter).
I don't think any of the Bostonians I've known would understand the life or diet of a Louisianan at all (or vice versa). Language, food, and recreation are certainly all VASTLY different between those two locales. I'd wager that most people from Boston would have an easier time understanding the speech of a visitor from India than that of a Cajun.
On your post to which I originally replied, the only category in which Americans (of whatever region) are likely to be more distinguishable from Indians (who I am singling out somewhat unfairly as being, from a middle-American perspective, pretty much the exotic end of the English-speaking world), is in diet. And since most of the Americans I know eat Indian cuisine at least occasionally, and most of the Indians I know eat American "cuisine" at least occasionally, even that is a questionable difference.
So by your broad definition of cultural equivalence, there are no significant differences between life in LA, or Boston, or Delhi, or Shanghai? They do all of those things in those places, too (though maybe they don't have grass to cut in Shanghai)? I think your brushstrokes may be just a LITTLE too broad.
Hey, I'm willing to do MY part to stress test it.
It's rare to see someone so selflessly promote the parent's argument. I'm a bit behind on my British television (just discovered Jeeves and Wooster yesterday), but I really can't imagine them producing anything nearly so soul-destroying as either of the bits of trash you cite. "Vastly popular" in no way indicates quality; McDonald's sells more hamburgers than anyone else, but no one over the age of 10 things they make the best.
And of course, if your binary *wasn't* compiled with tty support, that's easily fixed.
What happened to the principals? They're down at the high school, where they've always been.
I'm not so much a spelling nazi; it's just the principle of the thing.
The wording on the form looks pretty specific, but the loophole is that YOU decide what mail is offensive to YOU.
I've used it to stop getting AOL CDs, and to stop getting loan offers from CitiFinancial after they wouldn't take a phoned-in "Stop sending this shit to my wife, as I don't have one, and if I wouldn't marry anyone stupid enough to take a loan at 18.99% interest" for an answer. Got moderately confused looks from the postal clerk, but they processed both forms without complaint, and both problems have stopped completely for six months and counting.
I've got a chargeback going through the system with one of the Memphis locations right now. On 17 March, I tried to sign the register receipt on paper instead of on their we-have-your-signature-available-forever box, as recommended by privacy activists everywhere and as I had done multiple times at multiple Best Buys including the one in question. Untrained register person claimed an inability to clear the transaction without "something" in the box. I argued over this for a good five minutes, but register person was adamant in her incompetence and store management was nowhere to be found, so I eventually consented to write "VOID". Made it clear that I was doing this under protest, and most distinctly not purchasing the item in question. This appeared to have gotten through register person's thick skull, as she left the security plastic on the item and suggested I talk to Customer Service if I still wanted to make a purchase. Customer Service refused to understand what part of the transaction was the least bit objectionable, so I left, believing myself to have wasted nothing but time. However, my bank statement clearly showed a charge for that item. The bank and Visa are being polite but noncommital so far, but given that the only signature Best Buy has - and which they should be able to call up fairly quickly in their accursed system - is the word "VOID", I would think that my case is pretty solid. It's only $55, so I'm willing to wait a while for Visa to set things right.
4th-class mail.
Ben Franklin wanted it to be cheap to ship books, so there's an entire category of mail just for them.
No, if the aliens are evil, they'll make us KEEP Ellison and Gates.
One of my close friends was one of the people 'eliminated' by Gore's 'streamlining' of the federal government, around '95. They made him (and about 30% of his department) an independent contractor, at a considerably higher salary. Technically reduced the number of federal employees, yes, but only technically. This is one of the more disingenuous of Gore's MANY disingenuous claims about the current administration's record.
It's most assuredly illegal. Go after 'em!
On the one hand, we're LONG overdue for some divine ass-kicking, and I'll be pretty surprised if it hasn't come within the next 50 years; in which case, the question will be moot; after the Horsemen of the Apocalypse ride, there will be more pressing terrestrial concerns.
On the other hand... the problem with Babel was that man was trying specifically to "build a tower to Heaven". There's a large bit of hubris there that I don't think is inherent in trying to get out to space as space; or if there is hubris involved, it's really no worse than that involved in ISS, so I don't think there's anything to worry about with the space elevator specifically.
This was the first post that had anything to do with the article. It'd be awfully hard to be redundant in that position. If you don't know what one of the moderation terms means, look it up before using it against people.