Certainly this must be a joke. Your not an alcoholic or any degree of an alcoholic just because have more than a single drink, especially if you're eating or hanging out with people for awhile. What you're probably looking for is that alcoholics *can't* have "just one" drink.
It's all a matter of what you want to do in life as to whether it's relevant. For any sort of engineering or science work it's extremely relevant. I've found a teenager's view of what's relevant is based on what helps them right that second and since they don't do much other than go to school try to pick up girls then yea, nothing's relevant to getting you a date Friday night other then maybe your weightlifting or humanities class.
If you're honestly interested in engineering type stuff and you're teachers weren't able to explain how the ability to calculate force on different sections of a structure using trig, or how being able to take the derivative of an objects position in respect to time in order to find instantaneous velocity might possibly be useful then your teachers were just dumb or lazy.
I use eclipse about 90% of the time and Visual Studio only 10% but I'm 100% sure you shouldn't have immediately mentioned Eclipse as a better alternative if you're going to go with the "bloat" argument. I'm often tempted to put off critical OS security updates just because I know I'll have to wait for eclipse to open again after the restart.
I don't doubt that for a second. But I also don't think it's unreasonable that some members of their society might want that to happen so they can stand on their own without foreign military in their borders, and I wouldn't call them ingrates for feeling that way.
At the end of the day it's about using the money to make the best difference. If paying 100k a year to put someone in that position organizing charities across the globe where a single decision could waste or make hundreds of thousands of dollars it might be worth it to have a high enough salary for that position that you attract someone who is extremely competent at making those organizational decisions and actions and thus gives you a net gain in efficiency. anyways, there's a lot of watchdog sites that show the overhead factor for different charities and they are usually fairly low. While the top person might be making a good bit you have to understand the breadth and scale of the responsibility they have and how terribly it could effect every level of the organization if they don't perform.
You do realize we're there because we whipped em in war, nuked em twice, and then disallowed them from having a real standing army for years right? I'm not saying what we did was wrong, but calling them ingrates and expecting them to be all gushy in love with our presence might be a tad unreasonable too;)
You're close, but he didn't have the DVD in his hand. It's more like a fast food restaurant, where you came in, made your order and paid. The food was made for you, ready, and put on the counter, but you were so busy picking fights with other customers that you didn't manage to pick it up before you got thrown out for causing disturbances. Now that you're standing outside in the cold you suddenly remember "HEY, my food is in there!", and start bitching. It's not that they want to keep you from eating, it's that they don't want you on their property and the fact that you caused a disturbance before you picked up your food is your own fault.
If getting in a fight in that small window between paying for your big mac and picking it up from the counter seems ridiculous remember downloads are available instantly so he was SUPER more concerned with being a douche then he was about playing/downloading. Unless he pre-ordered? in which case it's even dumber idea. I'm pretty sure if you started tipping over displays in Gamestop after pre-ordering something they're not going to give you your money back before you get thrown out and banned.
I thought the new low-sulfur fuel came due to the new particulate emissions level mandates which are part of the problem. They added a particulate filter to the exhaust that has to periodically burn up the matter collected there. Most new diesel engines (post 2007) do this by injecting fuel into the cylinder right after the cylinder fires and exhaust valve opens so that it vaporizes and travels to the exhaust where it can heat up the particulate filter and burn off the collected matter. Since bio-diesel is denser and doesn't vaporize as easily it ends up getting stuck to the piston walls and getting into the engine oil where it dilutes it and then damages the engine.
Not all new diesels have this problem, some companies decided to put an injector in the exhaust itself in order to deal with this, but most went the other route because it's cheaper so you shouldn't just assume post-2007 cars will run on even small mixtures of biodiesel anymore.
Here's a guy who had a 2009 TDI that didn't end up running so well on B100: 09 TDI
I guess I can see it in that context, but I feel that's like saying the automobile was a giant step backwards because now when people had a bad accident between two cars it was a much worse accident then when horses were involved when clearly the benefits to society far outweighed the "step back" of increased danger when things went wrong.
What specifically do you think I missed? I don't disagree with his larger claims, just the one that agriculture was a step backward and people got shorter because agriculture led to society being malnourished rather then shorter/frailer people having more survivability.
The development of agriculture was a giant leap backwards for humans, and they were better off as hunters and gatherers
He typed on his computer from the comfort of his house using the electricity produced by society;)
and it was only overpopulation that forced them to grow their own food and suffer for it. Did you know humans lost a full foot in height when they changed to agriculture, due to poor nutrition?
Are you completely sure it wasn't because without agriculture the short and frail people were more likely to fail at hunting and die of starvation before being able to pass their genes on?
I'm not exactly sure what part of history is supposed to teach me where, for example, my old engineering professors gained their knowledge from. I remember them telling me about paying for university where they too were taught by private individuals, reading books they bought, and their life experiences applying their trade but they never mentioned how or when they stole knowledge from the public for free so that they could charge me for it. History is a very broad subject and if you could point me in a more specific direction to figure this out it would be great.
Interesting. So I learned nothing from the public, just private individuals or organizations then. But if I didn't learn from the public, then how do you know those private individuals and organizations learned what they taught me from this "public" you speak of and did not in fact trade, barter or cooperate with other private individuals for the gaining of their knowledge and so on and son on since the beginning of time? What exactly has the "public" invented or discovered that wasn't in fact invented or discovered by private individuals who then willingly traded their knowledge to others?
see, you take freely from public - anything - then put something on top of it, and then demand stuff from the public for your addition.
I seem to remember the public charging me for my education, books I read gaining said other knowledge from, and even a percentage of any sales of my own "crap" I added on top of the "public's" knowledge. In fact, the public seems to be charging me for a lot of people's education. The only way you can believe there was a time when public knowledge was completely free with no trade-offs of even sex or membership duties owed to a hunter-gatherer tribe is if you believe it grew on a tree in the form of an apple.
How does one adjust their prices to the local economy level if that would result selling the product at a loss? I assume you simply can't do it and that's why the void is then filled by piracy?
How did you get from me saying white people's slavery of African Americans kept them from gaining a better education for years to claiming I said African Americans should thank white people for being able to run fast? I can't imagine the convoluted logic necessary in order to twist my words into that statement. Is my statement uninformed? Did the rich white slave owners actually send their slaves to institutions of higher learning along with their children and I somehow missed that section of the history books?
Because it's generally wrong. It's not that white people are smarter it's the the culture that white people have grown up in over the last 300 years has put far more importance on becoming educated then say, not getting hung by white people.
Lets assume for a moment that all work output scales linearly with the amount of workers you throw at a task as you suggest and that there's no industries where you can't simply get all the work done in 4 days instead of 5 or 7. Companies still have a fixed budget, so to hire that 5th worker and since everyone is working 20% less that means everyone across the board would have to take a 20% pay cut. I think you'll find most people would rather work 5 days and make 20% more.
And if you have a worker shortage that means all kinds of production that's being lost making it harder to be profitable. Shortage of workers sounds great from a workers perspective until their companies start going under because they aren't producing enough to be profitable in economies of scale.
I'm not sure I follow. Why would working one less day result in more employment? Why would more going on in back-office departments (I assume HR/CBO?) be good for the economy? It sounds like you're suggesting we produce less and spend more resources on management rather than producing useful goods/services or am I missing something?
You can't selectively pick arbitrary geological positions, times of day or topics of teaching to do this - it would undermine the entire process by cultivating a mentality of indifference.
Indeed, the schools official geological positions should be limited to where there's majority consensus in the current state of research in the field. As soon as schools start just randomly picking positions on geology put out by any crackpot the entire process of education is undermined.
Slashdot Mirror
Certainly this must be a joke. Your not an alcoholic or any degree of an alcoholic just because have more than a single drink, especially if you're eating or hanging out with people for awhile. What you're probably looking for is that alcoholics *can't* have "just one" drink.
It's all a matter of what you want to do in life as to whether it's relevant. For any sort of engineering or science work it's extremely relevant. I've found a teenager's view of what's relevant is based on what helps them right that second and since they don't do much other than go to school try to pick up girls then yea, nothing's relevant to getting you a date Friday night other then maybe your weightlifting or humanities class.
If you're honestly interested in engineering type stuff and you're teachers weren't able to explain how the ability to calculate force on different sections of a structure using trig, or how being able to take the derivative of an objects position in respect to time in order to find instantaneous velocity might possibly be useful then your teachers were just dumb or lazy.
I use eclipse about 90% of the time and Visual Studio only 10% but I'm 100% sure you shouldn't have immediately mentioned Eclipse as a better alternative if you're going to go with the "bloat" argument. I'm often tempted to put off critical OS security updates just because I know I'll have to wait for eclipse to open again after the restart.
I don't doubt that for a second. But I also don't think it's unreasonable that some members of their society might want that to happen so they can stand on their own without foreign military in their borders, and I wouldn't call them ingrates for feeling that way.
At the end of the day it's about using the money to make the best difference. If paying 100k a year to put someone in that position organizing charities across the globe where a single decision could waste or make hundreds of thousands of dollars it might be worth it to have a high enough salary for that position that you attract someone who is extremely competent at making those organizational decisions and actions and thus gives you a net gain in efficiency. anyways, there's a lot of watchdog sites that show the overhead factor for different charities and they are usually fairly low. While the top person might be making a good bit you have to understand the breadth and scale of the responsibility they have and how terribly it could effect every level of the organization if they don't perform.
You do realize we're there because we whipped em in war, nuked em twice, and then disallowed them from having a real standing army for years right? I'm not saying what we did was wrong, but calling them ingrates and expecting them to be all gushy in love with our presence might be a tad unreasonable too ;)
There's a huge difference between an organization not holding a religious stance and being atheist.
You're close, but he didn't have the DVD in his hand. It's more like a fast food restaurant, where you came in, made your order and paid. The food was made for you, ready, and put on the counter, but you were so busy picking fights with other customers that you didn't manage to pick it up before you got thrown out for causing disturbances. Now that you're standing outside in the cold you suddenly remember "HEY, my food is in there!", and start bitching. It's not that they want to keep you from eating, it's that they don't want you on their property and the fact that you caused a disturbance before you picked up your food is your own fault.
If getting in a fight in that small window between paying for your big mac and picking it up from the counter seems ridiculous remember downloads are available instantly so he was SUPER more concerned with being a douche then he was about playing/downloading. Unless he pre-ordered? in which case it's even dumber idea. I'm pretty sure if you started tipping over displays in Gamestop after pre-ordering something they're not going to give you your money back before you get thrown out and banned.
I thought the new low-sulfur fuel came due to the new particulate emissions level mandates which are part of the problem. They added a particulate filter to the exhaust that has to periodically burn up the matter collected there. Most new diesel engines (post 2007) do this by injecting fuel into the cylinder right after the cylinder fires and exhaust valve opens so that it vaporizes and travels to the exhaust where it can heat up the particulate filter and burn off the collected matter. Since bio-diesel is denser and doesn't vaporize as easily it ends up getting stuck to the piston walls and getting into the engine oil where it dilutes it and then damages the engine.
Not all new diesels have this problem, some companies decided to put an injector in the exhaust itself in order to deal with this, but most went the other route because it's cheaper so you shouldn't just assume post-2007 cars will run on even small mixtures of biodiesel anymore.
Here's a guy who had a 2009 TDI that didn't end up running so well on B100: 09 TDI
I guess I can see it in that context, but I feel that's like saying the automobile was a giant step backwards because now when people had a bad accident between two cars it was a much worse accident then when horses were involved when clearly the benefits to society far outweighed the "step back" of increased danger when things went wrong.
What specifically do you think I missed? I don't disagree with his larger claims, just the one that agriculture was a step backward and people got shorter because agriculture led to society being malnourished rather then shorter/frailer people having more survivability.
Wrong. What you're thinking of is direct democracy. Contrast that with, say, representative democracy.
With this issue settled, the Utah State legislature will now work on tackling the issue of legislating whether brunch is in fact breakfast, or lunch.
Not to mention the word "democrat" literally isn't in "democracy". Cleverness fail.
The development of agriculture was a giant leap backwards for humans, and they were better off as hunters and gatherers
He typed on his computer from the comfort of his house using the electricity produced by society ;)
and it was only overpopulation that forced them to grow their own food and suffer for it. Did you know humans lost a full foot in height when they changed to agriculture, due to poor nutrition?
Are you completely sure it wasn't because without agriculture the short and frail people were more likely to fail at hunting and die of starvation before being able to pass their genes on?
I'm not exactly sure what part of history is supposed to teach me where, for example, my old engineering professors gained their knowledge from. I remember them telling me about paying for university where they too were taught by private individuals, reading books they bought, and their life experiences applying their trade but they never mentioned how or when they stole knowledge from the public for free so that they could charge me for it. History is a very broad subject and if you could point me in a more specific direction to figure this out it would be great.
Interesting. So I learned nothing from the public, just private individuals or organizations then. But if I didn't learn from the public, then how do you know those private individuals and organizations learned what they taught me from this "public" you speak of and did not in fact trade, barter or cooperate with other private individuals for the gaining of their knowledge and so on and son on since the beginning of time? What exactly has the "public" invented or discovered that wasn't in fact invented or discovered by private individuals who then willingly traded their knowledge to others?
see, you take freely from public - anything - then put something on top of it, and then demand stuff from the public for your addition.
I seem to remember the public charging me for my education, books I read gaining said other knowledge from, and even a percentage of any sales of my own "crap" I added on top of the "public's" knowledge. In fact, the public seems to be charging me for a lot of people's education. The only way you can believe there was a time when public knowledge was completely free with no trade-offs of even sex or membership duties owed to a hunter-gatherer tribe is if you believe it grew on a tree in the form of an apple.
How does one adjust their prices to the local economy level if that would result selling the product at a loss? I assume you simply can't do it and that's why the void is then filled by piracy?
How did you get from me saying white people's slavery of African Americans kept them from gaining a better education for years to claiming I said African Americans should thank white people for being able to run fast? I can't imagine the convoluted logic necessary in order to twist my words into that statement. Is my statement uninformed? Did the rich white slave owners actually send their slaves to institutions of higher learning along with their children and I somehow missed that section of the history books?
Because it's generally wrong. It's not that white people are smarter it's the the culture that white people have grown up in over the last 300 years has put far more importance on becoming educated then say, not getting hung by white people.
Lets assume for a moment that all work output scales linearly with the amount of workers you throw at a task as you suggest and that there's no industries where you can't simply get all the work done in 4 days instead of 5 or 7. Companies still have a fixed budget, so to hire that 5th worker and since everyone is working 20% less that means everyone across the board would have to take a 20% pay cut. I think you'll find most people would rather work 5 days and make 20% more. And if you have a worker shortage that means all kinds of production that's being lost making it harder to be profitable. Shortage of workers sounds great from a workers perspective until their companies start going under because they aren't producing enough to be profitable in economies of scale.
I'm not sure I follow. Why would working one less day result in more employment? Why would more going on in back-office departments (I assume HR/CBO?) be good for the economy? It sounds like you're suggesting we produce less and spend more resources on management rather than producing useful goods/services or am I missing something?
those kind of accusations can ruin someone. I'd be beating my kid
Priceless
You can't selectively pick arbitrary geological positions, times of day or topics of teaching to do this - it would undermine the entire process by cultivating a mentality of indifference.
Indeed, the schools official geological positions should be limited to where there's majority consensus in the current state of research in the field. As soon as schools start just randomly picking positions on geology put out by any crackpot the entire process of education is undermined.
The last three should be obvious if you're not retarded or understand the google.