Now consider what the atmosphere is made of and the mass of CO2 and He compared with it. It should be clear it will end up at the "top" so to speak.
Then consider the temperature at any point is reasonably constant - the O2 isn't hotter than the CO2, for example. And that temperature is a measure of the kinetic energy of the molecules that make up the gas. KE = 1/2 mv^2, since He has less mass it must have a higher velocity that the heavier gas molecules. Do some number crunching and you'll see that a pretty sizable chunk of the He atoms (by the maxwell distribution which applies in this case) will be moving above escape velocity. Hence some of them don't collide with other atoms/molecules and escape into space.
H2 is even lighter, but unlike He it reacts with just about everything and hence gets trapped out of the atmosphere (as the oceans, for example) and in heavier molecules in the atmosphere so we aren't going to too much of it...
Different countries have different outlooks and rules.
Some countries have a tradition and legal history of thinking that employers have power over employees and that changing jobs and so on isn't always possible/practical for people. So they have legal frameworks to try and reduce that power by placing restrictions on employers.
Other countries have a tradition and legal history of thinking that employees have power over employers because they are free to change jobs whenever they feel like it. So they see no reason to restrict what employers do too much because the workers will just leave if the employer goes too far - and market forces will ensure there is another employer offering better conditions.
The real great thing is, migration isn't too difficult if you are reasonably young and well educated and haven't got in legal trouble in the past. So you can choose which from the large spectrum of outlooks you prefer and live there. If you aren't so well educated or got arrested for smoking a joint once then hopefully you like the system you happened to be born into... Or if you live in North Korea or somewhere else that restrict emmigration, then just ignore everything you weren't allowed to read above.
That DRM was the only reason I didn't pre-order the game and was not buying it.
If they dropped that I'll buy it as soon as it's confirmed to work just fine offline.
Of course no one else cares about that, but it was annoying to really like a game and also not be able to play it because the DRM was retarded enough to make buying it not an option. Steam I can live with.
it were up to me you'd have to pass an incredibly tough civics test before being permitted to vote. You'd have to pass it each election during which you vote. Particularly emphasized would be what the Constitution does and does not say, the notion that the federal government has no powers at all (AT ALL!) except those granted to it by the Constitution, the difference between a republic and a democracy, the difference between interstate and intrastate affairs, the separation of powers, the correct role of the executive, legislative, and judicial branches and the checks/balances available to each. That would make for a good start.
Surely you know that restricting voting rights is outside the enumerated powers of the Federal Government in that consitution you claim so much knowledge of. So the Federal Government can't do that.
So you want the states to limit their own pools of voters to exclude the ones that the politicians can manipulate the best. And for it to survive challenge and not result in a 15th 19th, and 21st style amendment?
He's a soldier. He directly profits from war, since if there were fewer of them then there would be fewer soldiers and hence he would be unemployed or on lower pay.
And yes that's a stupid argument, but not that much more stupid than his claim.
If the video game wasn't the US vs the Taliban, it would instead be the US vs the Nazis, or the US vs the Russians, or the Terrans vs the Zerg, or the Persians vs the Greeks. I guess the nightly news is profiteering from the war too since they dare report on it and run ads.
It isn't ignorance. It's just word usage. How can it be ignorance to use a word as defined by almost all dictionaries. Words are tools of communication, that the word once meant something else is irrelevant for communication now.
Is it ignorant to use "nice" to mean pleasant/agreeable instead of foolish/ignorant?
Merriam-Webster: 1 a : government by the people; especially : rule of the majority b : a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections
Oxford (on-line anyway): a system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state , typically through elected representatives:
Collins: 1. government by the people or their elected representatives
Because when someone does do something in that two week period (take client data, etc), then the company is going to be seen as more to blame since they knew the person was leaving and should have stopped them.
If the person took it when the company was unaware they were planning to leave, then the company has a greater chance of sticking the consequences all on that one person.
It's simple CYA. It's also ass covering for the leaver - if something happens in that two weeks they are going to be the prime suspect so it's better for them if they can show they have no access anymore and it couldn't have been them.
Furthermore, the United States is not a "free democracy". It's not even a democracy. It's a representative republic.
The rest of us will keep using English words with their common defined by usage meanings. You can restrict yourself to older more precise definitions, though it makes communications more difficult between you and most other people.
It's got to with legality and not wanting to offend people unecessarily. For sociopaths and assholes the first should matter, for the rest of us the second does.
I don't yell loudly on the train. I turn my phone ringer off at the cinema. I don't talk on my phone in the cinema. I leave the table to answer my phone at a group meal. I turn the television volume down when other people are sleeping in the house. And I don't look at pornography at work. These are all the same class of thing - I don't want to annoy others unnecessarily.
I do look at slashdot at work - that does not annoy others unnecessarily.
Note that it has nothing to do with the morality or pornography or the threat of sexual harassment lawsuits, it's just not being an asshole.
Some people are assholes though, and hence we have things like sexual harassment rules. And yes they go overboard, thank the assholes for that - without them there wouldn't be any such rules in the first place.
Seriously, what is the difference between hardware and software. How is "growing a new connection between neurons" any different from changing the software on a computer?
And you know for a fact that the human brain can calculate things that are non-Turing-Computable? Where do you keep your Fields Medal?
Yes sure, if you commit a crime while engaging in sexual harrassment that crime is still a crime. Amazing.
Wearing jeans might be a criminal matter too. If you rob a bank with a gun while in them you may find yourself being charged with armed robbery. Equally amazing.
Because non-sociopaths actually consider other people occasionaly.
The chances of someone being offended by seeing slashdot on your computer screen is pretty small, small enough to take the chance. And society as a whole would consider them to be the problem if they are offended.
The chances of someone being offended by seeing pornography on your computer screen is a bit larger, large enough to try and avoid the situation. And society as a whole would consider you to be the problem when someone is offended.
In the workplace there's the added joys of getting sued for sexual harassment because of the "hostile environment" created by having pornography on your screen for all your fellow workers to see.
Sure if your screen is completely private that isn't a problem though I'm sure that fact that someone shouldn't have been on that side of the desk in your office isn't going to save you from losing a sexual harrassment case. And if someone does find out about it they risk having any sexual harrassment liabilities be for the entire company and not just you if they don't try and do something about it.
Slacking off for a minute or 10 isn't something most companies care that much about (particularly amongst salaried productive staff - an assembly line worker is a different situation), putting the company at risk in a multi-million dollar sexual harassment lawsuit and even more damage in public image is something most companies care about.
diabetics and low card dieters should just stay in jail from the conviction that having this installed is part of the probation for or take the probation and the device and just not drive if they don't want to be stranded somewhere.
You're a fucking retard if you see that as muslim koolaid.
"We are kicking their asses and raining death on them from the sky at will and the only way they'll survive is if we go home of our own volition" is anti-American mulsim kool aid???
Slashdot Mirror
Well I got 19 wrong!
as well as English.
Please look at a periodic table.
Now consider what the atmosphere is made of and the mass of CO2 and He compared with it. It should be clear it will end up at the "top" so to speak.
Then consider the temperature at any point is reasonably constant - the O2 isn't hotter than the CO2, for example. And that temperature is a measure of the kinetic energy of the molecules that make up the gas. KE = 1/2 mv^2, since He has less mass it must have a higher velocity that the heavier gas molecules. Do some number crunching and you'll see that a pretty sizable chunk of the He atoms (by the maxwell distribution which applies in this case) will be moving above escape velocity. Hence some of them don't collide with other atoms/molecules and escape into space.
H2 is even lighter, but unlike He it reacts with just about everything and hence gets trapped out of the atmosphere (as the oceans, for example) and in heavier molecules in the atmosphere so we aren't going to too much of it...
Different countries have different outlooks and rules.
Some countries have a tradition and legal history of thinking that employers have power over employees and that changing jobs and so on isn't always possible/practical for people. So they have legal frameworks to try and reduce that power by placing restrictions on employers.
Other countries have a tradition and legal history of thinking that employees have power over employers because they are free to change jobs whenever they feel like it. So they see no reason to restrict what employers do too much because the workers will just leave if the employer goes too far - and market forces will ensure there is another employer offering better conditions.
The real great thing is, migration isn't too difficult if you are reasonably young and well educated and haven't got in legal trouble in the past. So you can choose which from the large spectrum of outlooks you prefer and live there. If you aren't so well educated or got arrested for smoking a joint once then hopefully you like the system you happened to be born into... Or if you live in North Korea or somewhere else that restrict emmigration, then just ignore everything you weren't allowed to read above.
It's GNU/Linux you heathen scum!
I loved Ruse in the open beta.
That DRM was the only reason I didn't pre-order the game and was not buying it.
If they dropped that I'll buy it as soon as it's confirmed to work just fine offline.
Of course no one else cares about that, but it was annoying to really like a game and also not be able to play it because the DRM was retarded enough to make buying it not an option. Steam I can live with.
Surely you know that restricting voting rights is outside the enumerated powers of the Federal Government in that consitution you claim so much knowledge of. So the Federal Government can't do that.
So you want the states to limit their own pools of voters to exclude the ones that the politicians can manipulate the best. And for it to survive challenge and not result in a 15th 19th, and 21st style amendment?
He's a soldier. He directly profits from war, since if there were fewer of them then there would be fewer soldiers and hence he would be unemployed or on lower pay.
And yes that's a stupid argument, but not that much more stupid than his claim.
If the video game wasn't the US vs the Taliban, it would instead be the US vs the Nazis, or the US vs the Russians, or the Terrans vs the Zerg, or the Persians vs the Greeks. I guess the nightly news is profiteering from the war too since they dare report on it and run ads.
Of course none of that is profiteering anyway...
Being dead does that automatically anyway.
No, your preferences go wherever you damn well assign them.
That you are too lazy to not follow a party's how-to card exactly, or too ignorant to know you don't change that.
It isn't ignorance. It's just word usage. How can it be ignorance to use a word as defined by almost all dictionaries. Words are tools of communication, that the word once meant something else is irrelevant for communication now.
Is it ignorant to use "nice" to mean pleasant/agreeable instead of foolish/ignorant?
Merriam-Webster:
1 a : government by the people; especially : rule of the majority b : a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections
Oxford (on-line anyway):
a system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state , typically through elected representatives:
Collins:
1. government by the people or their elected representatives
Because when someone does do something in that two week period (take client data, etc), then the company is going to be seen as more to blame since they knew the person was leaving and should have stopped them.
If the person took it when the company was unaware they were planning to leave, then the company has a greater chance of sticking the consequences all on that one person.
It's simple CYA. It's also ass covering for the leaver - if something happens in that two weeks they are going to be the prime suspect so it's better for them if they can show they have no access anymore and it couldn't have been them.
As I said that's fine. There's no need to bother with trying to communicate successfully with people you consider inferior after all.
The rest of us will keep using English words with their common defined by usage meanings. You can restrict yourself to older more precise definitions, though it makes communications more difficult between you and most other people.
It must be illegal for me to establish a religion. Consider that if it is not illegal, what can't the Federal Government do such a thing?
It's got nothing to do with morality.
It's got to with legality and not wanting to offend people unecessarily. For sociopaths and assholes the first should matter, for the rest of us the second does.
I don't yell loudly on the train. I turn my phone ringer off at the cinema. I don't talk on my phone in the cinema. I leave the table to answer my phone at a group meal. I turn the television volume down when other people are sleeping in the house. And I don't look at pornography at work. These are all the same class of thing - I don't want to annoy others unnecessarily.
I do look at slashdot at work - that does not annoy others unnecessarily.
Note that it has nothing to do with the morality or pornography or the threat of sexual harassment lawsuits, it's just not being an asshole.
Some people are assholes though, and hence we have things like sexual harassment rules. And yes they go overboard, thank the assholes for that - without them there wouldn't be any such rules in the first place.
Why not read the article and see which part is new.
No it isn't. Someone can stalk someone else without there being an element of sexual harrassment at all.
Sure stalking and be sexual harassment, but the stalking part is what is illegal not the sexual harassment.
Seriously, what is the difference between hardware and software. How is "growing a new connection between neurons" any different from changing the software on a computer?
And you know for a fact that the human brain can calculate things that are non-Turing-Computable? Where do you keep your Fields Medal?
The summary is only two sentenced. One of them answers your question.
Yes sure, if you commit a crime while engaging in sexual harrassment that crime is still a crime. Amazing.
Wearing jeans might be a criminal matter too. If you rob a bank with a gun while in them you may find yourself being charged with armed robbery. Equally amazing.
Because non-sociopaths actually consider other people occasionaly.
The chances of someone being offended by seeing slashdot on your computer screen is pretty small, small enough to take the chance. And society as a whole would consider them to be the problem if they are offended.
The chances of someone being offended by seeing pornography on your computer screen is a bit larger, large enough to try and avoid the situation. And society as a whole would consider you to be the problem when someone is offended.
In the workplace there's the added joys of getting sued for sexual harassment because of the "hostile environment" created by having pornography on your screen for all your fellow workers to see.
Sure if your screen is completely private that isn't a problem though I'm sure that fact that someone shouldn't have been on that side of the desk in your office isn't going to save you from losing a sexual harrassment case. And if someone does find out about it they risk having any sexual harrassment liabilities be for the entire company and not just you if they don't try and do something about it.
Slacking off for a minute or 10 isn't something most companies care that much about (particularly amongst salaried productive staff - an assembly line worker is a different situation), putting the company at risk in a multi-million dollar sexual harassment lawsuit and even more damage in public image is something most companies care about.
There are reasons the label is NSFW.
diabetics and low card dieters should just stay in jail from the conviction that having this installed is part of the probation for or take the probation and the device and just not drive if they don't want to be stranded somewhere.
"The best financial planning ends with bouncing the check to the undertaker." - Michael Bloomberg
You're a fucking retard if you see that as muslim koolaid.
"We are kicking their asses and raining death on them from the sky at will and the only way they'll survive is if we go home of our own volition" is anti-American mulsim kool aid???
Seriously, you're fucking retarded.