Alumina is an aluminum oxide (just as water is a.hydrogen oxide). Which is what I think the was being said, but calling sapphire "transparent aluminum" is like calling water "liquid hydrogen", which was what I was trying to express.
I'm pretty sure you've never used the wind in your "Football" game to have the hit a target sheided under an overhang by shooting into the wind so that that shot turns 180 degrees.
Having a swiss bank account (with over $10,000 in it) and not reporting it to the IRS is against the law. Well assuming you are a US citizen or resident.
And note that it's google's overseas earning that they've managed to pay just 2.4% on, so it's foreign governments who are missing out on most of that tax revenue not the IRS.
You always want additional evidence to go with a confession that the defense claims was "said when my client was confused".
Insane != criminally insane.
As I said they aren't trying to prove if he did or didn't shoot a bunch of people - they have enough evidence of that already. But that doesn't mean it's for "the blame game", it's just standard collect everything you possibly can because you aren't just taking the crazy guys word for it.
It's not pointless, they are going to be looking for and at everything he has written or said for as far back as they can be bothered.
For all they know he wasn't a loan gunman and was just the action guy of a larger plot involving other people (the probability of this is essentially 0 but you never know).
If they find evidence of planning that makes for better chance of them getting the outcome they want in court.
It's investigating his state of mind and whether he planed it or just went on a random shooting spree.
The FBI (well the prosecutor) wants to be able to counter the insanity claim the defense will make. Or if you have a friendlier view of law enforcement actually want to determine if he is legally sane...
But yes, if he's been playing GTA/whatever then the media circus is warming up.
I played my first play of New Vegas without making a save except for when finishing the game session (and the autosaves). The only times I loaded a save other than at the start of a session was when the game crashed (which happened a fair bit nearer the end so I played shorter sessions). If I died I was going to start all over (without such a limit on myself most likely) but didn't need to.
It did make for some "oh shit" moments though fewer than I was hoping (Boone getting himself killed was the biggest one).
I'd be annoyed with a game that forced me to do that though, sometimes you want to see the results of two late choice paths without having to play through the entire start of the game again...
No "required investment" that I have ever heard of reauires you to buy 100% of your holding at one point in time and then sell them all at once.
They usually have you buying every month or every two weeks depending on how often you get paid. And have you selling in a slowly increasing rate after you retire. But of course since you don't have such a system you know the system I've worked under and my parents have retired under much better than me.
How buying small amounts every month for 50 years, and selling small amounts every month for 30 years could possibly be thought of as all at onec I'll never understand.
Yes "government pension" means something else to Americans, that's why I tried to point out the difference between it and social security, which you ignored.
But as I said, you win. I'm not interested in arhguing about definitions.
Those of us in more enlightened countries will just continue with our moderate combination system that actually works. You can keep your wierd "pay billionares more than you pay the penniless" system.
No, because for every pair of which a positron escapes and a electron doesn't, there's another pair for which an electron escapes but the positron does not. On average it will make no difference.
"It's 20 times closer to the Sun than Mercury is, compared to what?" you reworded the statement to remove one item in the comparison and then complained they didn't include that item. The actual statement is "it is more than 20 times closer to its star than Mercury is to our sun."
Note there's an additional object in their statement and hence "compared to what" is well defined.
Or is it that you don't like "20 times closer to" and would prefer "20 times further away than" (and the order swapped)?
I point to the actual change in value: 2009: 11722.98, 2010: 11585.38.
Why not point to the actual change of 2009: 6,547.05, 2010: 11585.38?
yes the stock market is a stupid place to invest if you buy 100% of your holding at one random point in time, and sell it all at one other random point in time.
And you're wrong. The pathological worse time period would be from 2000-2009.
You just don't read. Pathalogical refered to the buying strategy not the time frame.
Government 'pensions' in other places, from what I understand, are essentially an account that people pay into through taxes and collect later. This is what social security is. We just do not call it a 'pension'. We call it 'insurance' for some utterly inexplicably reason.
You have the completely wrong understanding. I already described how they actually work. But again you don't read.
I'm done. You win. And all you had to do was not read anything I wrote.
Judging expected performance based on past performance is perfectly reasonable. At least until you get new information on the new stuff.
I liked Angel, I liked Buffy, I liked Firefly. Hence I watched Doll House with expectations of it not sucking. (And yes, I have crappy taste).
I didn't really enjoy Transformers, Transformers 2 was even worse. I don't plan on seeing Transformers 3 at the cinema (I'd probably watch it when it makes it to TV if I was in the mood for some explosions though).
I'm completely judging new products based upon the old ones. Of course if people whose movie tastes I happen to share tell me Transformers 3 is the best movie ever made I might change my mind...
Slashdot Mirror
Alumina is an aluminum oxide (just as water is a .hydrogen oxide). Which is what I think the was being said, but calling sapphire "transparent aluminum" is like calling water "liquid hydrogen", which was what I was trying to express.
I'm pretty sure you've never used the wind in your "Football" game to have the hit a target sheided under an overhang by shooting into the wind so that that shot turns 180 degrees.
Because hydrogen and water are the same.
But the risk of being caught for the first is much higher. So the average penalty per crime would be lower for the second.
What google does is in compliance with the law.
Having a swiss bank account (with over $10,000 in it) and not reporting it to the IRS is against the law. Well assuming you are a US citizen or resident.
And note that it's google's overseas earning that they've managed to pay just 2.4% on, so it's foreign governments who are missing out on most of that tax revenue not the IRS.
The US has an estate tax, which is a tax on wealth - though sure it's not a yearly occurance...
Yes, because I'm sure they'd do that. Possibly it'd be more likely they'd set the price at $1,000,000 and you'd make $0 on 0 sales.
And you can't see it anywhere else for $1,000,000 so you really make $0. I hope you didn't spend much tiem writing it.
And of course you know that none of them were placed in locations that would cause them to measure a lower temperature.
You always want additional evidence to go with a confession that the defense claims was "said when my client was confused".
Insane != criminally insane.
As I said they aren't trying to prove if he did or didn't shoot a bunch of people - they have enough evidence of that already. But that doesn't mean it's for "the blame game", it's just standard collect everything you possibly can because you aren't just taking the crazy guys word for it.
It's not pointless, they are going to be looking for and at everything he has written or said for as far back as they can be bothered.
For all they know he wasn't a loan gunman and was just the action guy of a larger plot involving other people (the probability of this is essentially 0 but you never know).
If they find evidence of planning that makes for better chance of them getting the outcome they want in court.
It's investigating his state of mind and whether he planed it or just went on a random shooting spree.
The FBI (well the prosecutor) wants to be able to counter the insanity claim the defense will make. Or if you have a friendlier view of law enforcement actually want to determine if he is legally sane...
But yes, if he's been playing GTA/whatever then the media circus is warming up.
How is what he said any different than what said?
I played my first play of New Vegas without making a save except for when finishing the game session (and the autosaves). The only times I loaded a save other than at the start of a session was when the game crashed (which happened a fair bit nearer the end so I played shorter sessions). If I died I was going to start all over (without such a limit on myself most likely) but didn't need to.
It did make for some "oh shit" moments though fewer than I was hoping (Boone getting himself killed was the biggest one).
I'd be annoyed with a game that forced me to do that though, sometimes you want to see the results of two late choice paths without having to play through the entire start of the game again...
Amputations are a matter of national security!
If you're playing a FPS on a console, then everytime you get shot you are the victim of an aimbot.
No "required investment" that I have ever heard of reauires you to buy 100% of your holding at one point in time and then sell them all at once.
They usually have you buying every month or every two weeks depending on how often you get paid. And have you selling in a slowly increasing rate after you retire. But of course since you don't have such a system you know the system I've worked under and my parents have retired under much better than me.
How buying small amounts every month for 50 years, and selling small amounts every month for 30 years could possibly be thought of as all at onec I'll never understand.
Yes "government pension" means something else to Americans, that's why I tried to point out the difference between it and social security, which you ignored.
But as I said, you win. I'm not interested in arhguing about definitions.
Those of us in more enlightened countries will just continue with our moderate combination system that actually works. You can keep your wierd "pay billionares more than you pay the penniless" system.
Yes, Geoffrey Robertson isn't proper representation, what does he know about the legal system!
Yes, I'm sure about it.
The positrons are coming from gamma rays via pair production. I'll let you work out why it is called pair production.
Charge conservation has something to say about pairs. And evidence of a violation of that would be in the headline...
No, because for every pair of which a positron escapes and a electron doesn't, there's another pair for which an electron escapes but the positron does not. On average it will make no difference.
When referring to planets it always means "where liquid water could exist".
Because we have an ever so slight bias towards life as we see it on Earth.
Of course it means 1/20th.
Yes people who know mathematics hate that, but it's very common English usage.
"It's 20 times closer to the Sun than Mercury is, compared to what?" you reworded the statement to remove one item in the comparison and then complained they didn't include that item. The actual statement is "it is more than 20 times closer to its star than Mercury is to our sun."
Note there's an additional object in their statement and hence "compared to what" is well defined.
Or is it that you don't like "20 times closer to" and would prefer "20 times further away than" (and the order swapped)?
Why not point to the actual change of 2009: 6,547.05, 2010: 11585.38?
yes the stock market is a stupid place to invest if you buy 100% of your holding at one random point in time, and sell it all at one other random point in time.
You just don't read. Pathalogical refered to the buying strategy not the time frame.
You have the completely wrong understanding. I already described how they actually work. But again you don't read.
I'm done. You win. And all you had to do was not read anything I wrote.
Judging expected performance based on past performance is perfectly reasonable. At least until you get new information on the new stuff.
I liked Angel, I liked Buffy, I liked Firefly. Hence I watched Doll House with expectations of it not sucking. (And yes, I have crappy taste).
I didn't really enjoy Transformers, Transformers 2 was even worse. I don't plan on seeing Transformers 3 at the cinema (I'd probably watch it when it makes it to TV if I was in the mood for some explosions though).
I'm completely judging new products based upon the old ones. Of course if people whose movie tastes I happen to share tell me Transformers 3 is the best movie ever made I might change my mind...