Is "Reichstag-ing" an actual thing? I'm confused as to how the Nazi leadership burning down the national legislature's building works in this analogy...as they were political opponents, not really a gathering of "Untermensch." Although I'm sure the standard "the Jews are secretly in charge of everything" bit was in play.
If you're going to Godwin the conversation, at least use the right terminology, eh?
Is anybody likely to sell you a $20 insurance policy if all those numbers we're pulling out of our asses are accurate, though.
Now I'm just trying to figure out whether you were replying to the article itself or the person you actually replied to, and being sarcastic or not. Because if you're replying to the AC and being straight, it sounds like you're agreeing with the guy you're calling an idiot.
There is no need for insurance as the probability of collision is extremely small
A man who doesn't understand insurance. [...] Purchasing liability insurance with parameters as described above is a bad decision--even if you're unlucky, not purchasing it is usually a good decision
Or maybe we could just use the meaning that the damn word was intended for in the first place! If I meant "unusual," I'd just say "unusual!"
But let's continue muddying up the language until everyone can only communicate using the 200 most common words. Then we can have more fun articles like that time we spent 90% of the comments section arguing about abbreviating "Supreme Court of the United States" to "Supremes." We all want that, right?
A capital city or capital town (or simply capital) is the municipality enjoying primary status in a state, country, province, or other region as its seat of government. A capital is typically a city that physically encompasses the offices and meeting places of its respective government and is normally fixed by its law or constitution. In some jurisdictions, including several countries, the different branches of government are located in different settlements.
According to the Dutch constitution Amsterdam is the capital of the Netherlands, although the parliament and the Dutch government have been situated in The Hague since 1588, along with the Supreme Court and the Council of State. [...] Only once during its history was Amsterdam both "capital" and seat of government. Between 1808 and 1810
So it sounds like Amsterdam is the capital about as much as USS Constitution is considered an active ship in the U.S. navy.
I also am of the opinion that Canadians have very greatly exaggerated the role their militias played and while it isn't fair to say they did nothing, it's also not accurate at all to act, like you do, that they did almost all of the heavy lifting of the war in the US itself and the British were little more than interested spectators as you seem to imply.
The minutemen in the Revolutionary War are rather exaggerated too, apparently. Which is really saying something because the Continental Army got its ass kicked for a long time as well.
Technically that 37% includes Deleware, Maryland, and West Virginia, too, which were actually Union states. Somewhat humorously, even D.C. is included in the South.
South Africa actually tested a nuclear device once and then gave up on further development.
*Some* people think the Vela Incident was a nuclear test, and the island is between South Africa and Antarctica, but Wikipedia hardly makes it sound definite. Other than that, there was one "cold test" (no nuclear material involved) that France et. al strongarmed them into cancelling.
The Vela Incident — sometimes referred to as the South Atlantic Flash — was an unidentified "double flash" of light detected by an American Vela Hotel satellite on September 22, 1979, near the Prince Edward Islands off Antarctica, which many believe was of nuclear origin. The most widespread theory among those who believe the flash was of nuclear origin is that it resulted from a joint South African and Israeli nuclear test.[1][2][3] The topic remains highly disputed today.
While a "double flash" signal is characteristic of a nuclear weapons test, the signal could also have been a spurious electronic signal generated by an aging detector in an old satellite, or a meteoroid hitting the Vela satellite. No corroboration of an explosion, such as the presence of nuclear byproducts in the air, was ever publicly acknowledged, even though there were numerous passes in the area by U.S. Air Force planes specifically designed to detect airborne radioactive dust. Other examiners of the data, including the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), the U.S. Naval Research Laboratory (NRL), and defense contractors, have come to the conclusion that the flash was not a result of a nuclear detonation.[4][5][6] Much information about the event remains classified.
South Africa did actually have 6 nukes, and 1 more under construction. They dismantled them in 1989.
Are we talking about "fully understanding" the *history* of the piece of art, or the artwork itself? Because I can know who painted something, what materials they used, where and when they painted it, but still know nothing about the meaning of the art.
Plus, if you just *ask* the creator what his art means, maybe they'll tell you. In which case, how can we really be said to be "studying" anything? If we had an oracle that just told us how quantum physics works, we wouldn't really need to study that either.
But maybe it's just because I don't understand the idea of e.g. close reading, as an engineerish person. If we have to ask the artist what their art means, that seems to kind of defeat the whole point. And you'll get teachers who interpret books to mean things that the author never meant, based on the prevailing social trends of the time.
A truly attentive close reading of a two-hundred-word poem might be thousands of words long without exhausting the possibilities for observation and insight. To take an even more extreme example, Jacques Derrida's essay Ulysses Gramophone, which J. Hillis Miller describes as a "hyperbolic, extravagant... explosion" of the technique of close reading, devotes more than eighty pages to an interpretation of the word "yes" in James Joyce's modernist novel Ulysses.
Why would an "opposing party" give up their only remaining leverage (Congress's job is to manage spending) on terms that essentially renders their offices moot? Why would such a party give their "opponents" unlimited spending capability a year prior to the next major election? Why?
In a world where politics actually made sense, I would say "to keep the economy from crashing." But then again, the whole confrontation probably wouldn't have happened in the first place either if that were the case.
It's so surprising that big business owners subscribe to a philosophy that can be succinctly summarized as, "Fuck everyone else; I got mine!", isn't it?
Your uneducated opinion of art is as bad as an art historian's knowledge of quantum physics, which is somewhere between "very little" and "absolutely none".
Except for the tiny fact that art is wholly subjective and quantum physics is wholly objective, sure.
Well, that's kind of the point. Everybody says they want a free market but then enact legislation and such to do the exact opposite. Not that there aren't reasons to do that a lot of the time.
So you stay within the letter of the law and get crushed by the established megacorps...or you find a loophole and the political cronies of said megacorps cut your balls off anyway.
Slashdot Mirror
If you're intentionally walking in a bad part of town, alone and drunk in the middle of the night, yes.
Is "Reichstag-ing" an actual thing? I'm confused as to how the Nazi leadership burning down the national legislature's building works in this analogy...as they were political opponents, not really a gathering of "Untermensch." Although I'm sure the standard "the Jews are secretly in charge of everything" bit was in play.
If you're going to Godwin the conversation, at least use the right terminology, eh?
That is not dead which can eternal lie
Yet with stranger eons, even death may die
Okay, thanks for the explanation.
Is anybody likely to sell you a $20 insurance policy if all those numbers we're pulling out of our asses are accurate, though.
Now I'm just trying to figure out whether you were replying to the article itself or the person you actually replied to, and being sarcastic or not. Because if you're replying to the AC and being straight, it sounds like you're agreeing with the guy you're calling an idiot.
There is no need for insurance as the probability of collision is extremely small
A man who doesn't understand insurance. [...] Purchasing liability insurance with parameters as described above is a bad decision--even if you're unlucky, not purchasing it is usually a good decision
—><—
I suppose if we really wanted to, we could have Congress pass a law declaring that red is blue. That wouldn't make it any more true.
http://www.w3schools.com/sql/s...
CREATE TABLE Persons
(
P_Id int NOT NULL UNIQUE,
LastName varchar(255) NOT NULL,
FirstName varchar(255),
Address varchar(255),
City varchar(255)
)
Or maybe we could just use the meaning that the damn word was intended for in the first place! If I meant "unusual," I'd just say "unusual!"
But let's continue muddying up the language until everyone can only communicate using the 200 most common words. Then we can have more fun articles like that time we spent 90% of the comments section arguing about abbreviating "Supreme Court of the United States" to "Supremes." We all want that, right?
So maybe you snarky bastards could explain where we're going wrong instead of just heckling us?
Well, obviously he *could* care less because otherwise he wouldn't be posting...
A capital city or capital town (or simply capital) is the municipality enjoying primary status in a state, country, province, or other region as its seat of government. A capital is typically a city that physically encompasses the offices and meeting places of its respective government and is normally fixed by its law or constitution. In some jurisdictions, including several countries, the different branches of government are located in different settlements.
According to the Dutch constitution Amsterdam is the capital of the Netherlands, although the parliament and the Dutch government have been situated in The Hague since 1588, along with the Supreme Court and the Council of State. [...] Only once during its history was Amsterdam both "capital" and seat of government. Between 1808 and 1810
So it sounds like Amsterdam is the capital about as much as USS Constitution is considered an active ship in the U.S. navy.
I also am of the opinion that Canadians have very greatly exaggerated the role their militias played and while it isn't fair to say they did nothing, it's also not accurate at all to act, like you do, that they did almost all of the heavy lifting of the war in the US itself and the British were little more than interested spectators as you seem to imply.
The minutemen in the Revolutionary War are rather exaggerated too, apparently. Which is really saying something because the Continental Army got its ass kicked for a long time as well.
Technically that 37% includes Deleware, Maryland, and West Virginia, too, which were actually Union states. Somewhat humorously, even D.C. is included in the South.
most do know they lost the war between the States. 1861-65.
37% is not "most." (population of the U.S. by region)
Unless you mean that since we were both sides, there was much higher losses than if we had been fighting someone else, then yeah.
I thought the objectives of the British were to reconquer the colonies. They didn't achieve that.
The U.S. declared the war. I'd say the objective of the other side was "don't lose." Anything above that was an added bonus.
However... the US respects the law and the treaties they sign.
Probably the reason why the U.S. refuses to sign most of the treaties that they hold the rest of the world to.
Pretty sure that if you're not allowed to eat pigs under Islam, you sure as heck aren't allowed to fuck them... ;-)
South Africa actually tested a nuclear device once and then gave up on further development.
*Some* people think the Vela Incident was a nuclear test, and the island is between South Africa and Antarctica, but Wikipedia hardly makes it sound definite. Other than that, there was one "cold test" (no nuclear material involved) that France et. al strongarmed them into cancelling.
The Vela Incident — sometimes referred to as the South Atlantic Flash — was an unidentified "double flash" of light detected by an American Vela Hotel satellite on September 22, 1979, near the Prince Edward Islands off Antarctica, which many believe was of nuclear origin. The most widespread theory among those who believe the flash was of nuclear origin is that it resulted from a joint South African and Israeli nuclear test.[1][2][3] The topic remains highly disputed today.
While a "double flash" signal is characteristic of a nuclear weapons test, the signal could also have been a spurious electronic signal generated by an aging detector in an old satellite, or a meteoroid hitting the Vela satellite. No corroboration of an explosion, such as the presence of nuclear byproducts in the air, was ever publicly acknowledged, even though there were numerous passes in the area by U.S. Air Force planes specifically designed to detect airborne radioactive dust. Other examiners of the data, including the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), the U.S. Naval Research Laboratory (NRL), and defense contractors, have come to the conclusion that the flash was not a result of a nuclear detonation.[4][5][6] Much information about the event remains classified.
South Africa did actually have 6 nukes, and 1 more under construction. They dismantled them in 1989.
Are we talking about "fully understanding" the *history* of the piece of art, or the artwork itself? Because I can know who painted something, what materials they used, where and when they painted it, but still know nothing about the meaning of the art.
Plus, if you just *ask* the creator what his art means, maybe they'll tell you. In which case, how can we really be said to be "studying" anything? If we had an oracle that just told us how quantum physics works, we wouldn't really need to study that either.
But maybe it's just because I don't understand the idea of e.g. close reading, as an engineerish person. If we have to ask the artist what their art means, that seems to kind of defeat the whole point. And you'll get teachers who interpret books to mean things that the author never meant, based on the prevailing social trends of the time.
A truly attentive close reading of a two-hundred-word poem might be thousands of words long without exhausting the possibilities for observation and insight. To take an even more extreme example, Jacques Derrida's essay Ulysses Gramophone, which J. Hillis Miller describes as a "hyperbolic, extravagant... explosion" of the technique of close reading, devotes more than eighty pages to an interpretation of the word "yes" in James Joyce's modernist novel Ulysses.
the Kock (pronounced COCK) brothers?
Wrong on both accounts...
Why would an "opposing party" give up their only remaining leverage (Congress's job is to manage spending) on terms that essentially renders their offices moot? Why would such a party give their "opponents" unlimited spending capability a year prior to the next major election? Why?
In a world where politics actually made sense, I would say "to keep the economy from crashing." But then again, the whole confrontation probably wouldn't have happened in the first place either if that were the case.
3 choices is still better than 2.
(for what it's worth, I plan to vote third party for the significant future, but I expect it to have little to no impact for a long time)
It's so surprising that big business owners subscribe to a philosophy that can be succinctly summarized as, "Fuck everyone else; I got mine!", isn't it?
Encryption is explicitly excluded in the regs.
Why?
Your uneducated opinion of art is as bad as an art historian's knowledge of quantum physics, which is somewhere between "very little" and "absolutely none".
Except for the tiny fact that art is wholly subjective and quantum physics is wholly objective, sure.
Well, that's kind of the point. Everybody says they want a free market but then enact legislation and such to do the exact opposite. Not that there aren't reasons to do that a lot of the time.
So you stay within the letter of the law and get crushed by the established megacorps...or you find a loophole and the political cronies of said megacorps cut your balls off anyway.
Free market! 'MURICA!!