Natural Gas is only halfway green. It burns clean, but you're still taking stored CO2 and putting it in the air. It's good for things like mercury, but it doesn't do squat for global warming.
Sure, because the electricity that comes out your walls just appears by magic, and released no CO2 into the air during production, and especially not mercury or radioactive ash.
Good luck. I think this is a good idea... but then again I would call myself a critical thinker.
What they haven't taken into account is that most kids who play computer/console games are not critical thinkers in the sense they want them to be. I know plenty of people who, when we were young, thought the idea of making a game would be a dream job... then after a 10 week C++ class in high school they realized. "Hey, this is shit really hard.... and boring."
The fact is that most people play games because they are an easy escape from life, or a good way to socially interact. Your typical madden, or call of duty player doesn't give a shit about critical thinking, or programming.
The problem with this is that there is no way for a user to opt-out.
Cancel your account. When they ask their little "Why are you leaving?" survey, tell them this was the reason. If everyone did that, I'm sure they would think about including an opt-out feature.
If canceling your account is out of the question, then you value playing the game more than game-privacy.
I can't imagine long power outages not causing the same effect.
Other than those two situations being entirely different. Not seeing your significant for extended periods of time is hardly the same as being bored with your wife all day with no power. Also I would assume the average married couple has sex at least a few times a week* a power outage, even sparking some extra sex wouldn't necessarily create a noticeable trend.
I always thought rotary engines were cool. They struck me as the perfect engine for small compact and sporty vehicles. The engines themselves are physically small relative to your typical 4-stroke. So a light weight, high revving 2 seater or hatchback seems a perfect fit
Although I heard repairs on them are expensive and involved... this might just be because of their rarity and mechanical unfamiliarity.
If your argument is that internet porn is no worse than porn magazines, you are very wrong.
That was not my argument at all. I just meant to say "No shit," if you don't watch your kids they will expose themselves to everything possible. The internet is new, kids and parenting are not.
Surely seeing profane language and a few distended assholes is much worse than smoking cigarettes, sneaking booze from your parents liquor cabinet, hearing older kids use profane language, and looking at some stolen porno magizines...
Kids have, and will always be kids. They will hear and do things before their parents willingly expose them to it... all except the distended assholes. That is definitely an unfortunate consequence of the internet.
IANAL, but as far as I understand in the US, malls and department stores cannot physically restrain you or hold you against your will. They are not the police. If they have damning evidence that you were engaging in criminal activities they can get the police, but I don't think they can arrest you or even stop you from leaving. (I am assuming for things like shoplifting, or destruction of property... not fiddling a kid in aisle 3)
As far as being erroneously flagged as a criminal... well I hope they call the police to do the police work, and then I hope the police ask a few questions before they fire the taser barbs into your back... although I'm doubtful lately.
While I couldn't agree more with you on that... I think it is important to consider that his statements may have just been a disclaimer.
Basically the government expects Google (and any other corp with the ability) to track our search/document/email history... and a little request courtesy of the patriot act forces them to hand over all the info. So what they are saying is "if you're planning on doing something illegal then don't use google-search, because we'll be forced to hand over the info."
This doesn't change the fact that they store all your info for their own use... but they provide their services free of charge in return for your marketing information, this is fair by most people's standards.
Sounds like a reasonable and unsensational explanation... which is preciously why national geographic chose a more shocking reason. It looks like they are bringing themselves down to the level of the national enquirer
The key to slander and libel, as I understand it, is that you cannot intentionally spread lies as facts. So saying you saw some kid giving a public BJ (when you know it isn't true) is going to be borderline.
The ultimate defense against slander and libel charges is the truth. If you are correct or have a good faith belief something is true about someone even if it turns out to be false, you usually won't be convicted because there was no intent to cause defamation.
For the Glen Beck issue. They ruled that it was satire. As long as it is obvious that you are joking or mocking then you're usually safe as well.
You are half-right about opinion. In most jurisdictions they determine that opinion is not falsifiable, so you can't be convicted on matters of opinion... but some jurisdictions such as The United States Supreme Court, in particular, has ruled that the First Amendment does not require recognition of an opinion privilege.
I don't see how losing 100lbs in 4 months is impossible by your calculations. He replaced several large (probably high-fat) meals with smaller ones, and also one likely almost fat-free (veggies for dinner). For someone as large as him his resting metabolic rate was probably well over 3k calories a day. Add in normal activity (moving around as required) and some exercise... and I don't see why he couldn't put his calorie deficit close to what you calculate. Keep in mind that he probably didn't lose 100lbs of pure fat. Account for unused muscle mass, and water weight and it is possible.
I used to eat between 6k-9k calories per day. I had no problem losing 25lbs in about a month. This was also when I only weighed 224lbs (down to 199). I was already exercising heavily 6 days a week... so by cutting excess fat from my diet and eating vegetables I was literally losing ~1 pound per day. (lost 12 in the first week).
I also doubt your 1k calorie ceiling being near death heatstroke. During hockey season (I played college hockey) I would probably burn 2-3k (or more) calories in one 1.5 hour practice. Granted this is taking place in ambient temperature of ~40-45 degrees F, but even an average person should be able to do 1k calories an hour.
...I think the scientists involved already know whether or not a terrorist is more scared than the average person,
I don't have scientific links to back it up, but I'm pretty sure....
As far as medications, well I think you'd have to take enough meds to kill a horse in order not to be scared that there is a bomb under your nut sack, or that you will be discovered and plugged with 9mm slugs. Hey, worse case, they make it, study it's effective and it doesn't work and they toss it in the trash, I think it should at least be tried...
"Think, Think, Don't have any science to back it up..."
Nope. I'm not convinced. Your first mistake is trying to imagine that a radical terrorist would be scared of the same things as you or I, and would think logically about failure and repercussions of getting caught. These people plan to die... keep that little tidbit in mind.
Second, you don't have any evidence... for anything. Yet, you still think "it's worth a try" as if this is initiative would be free. It would be a colossal waste of resources and logically it doesn't even make sense. So it isn't even worth a second thought, let alone a try.
That was really interesting. I wish I would have taken some geology classes when I went to school around there. (Marquette, MI; which lies on the southern shore of Lake Superior).
I'm only allowed to use 70% of the bandwidth that I pay for... for less than 15 minutes? Otherwise I can use as much as I want as long as I stay below half?
Nobody would be able to pass that exam, so it's pointless.
I hope by now you had the epiphany. Maybe everyone failing the exam would make them realize the danger of their distractions.
Better yet during the exam (I presume simulator) you smash something they love every time they make a mistake. This might not solve anything, but at least we could smash a whole bunch of sentimental shit.
Slashdot Mirror
Natural Gas is only halfway green. It burns clean, but you're still taking stored CO2 and putting it in the air. It's good for things like mercury, but it doesn't do squat for global warming.
Sure, because the electricity that comes out your walls just appears by magic, and released no CO2 into the air during production, and especially not mercury or radioactive ash.
DHS is the umbrella of many agencies that take part in the security theater games, as well as violate our privacy without warrant.
Picture DHS as the conductor, and TSA the train... which is about to drive straight up your ass, or just take away your shampoo and nail clippers.
Excellent rant.
I would say that we've all jumped the shark by misusing the phrase "jumped the shark."
Good luck. I think this is a good idea... but then again I would call myself a critical thinker.
What they haven't taken into account is that most kids who play computer/console games are not critical thinkers in the sense they want them to be. I know plenty of people who, when we were young, thought the idea of making a game would be a dream job... then after a 10 week C++ class in high school they realized. "Hey, this is shit really hard.... and boring."
The fact is that most people play games because they are an easy escape from life, or a good way to socially interact. Your typical madden, or call of duty player doesn't give a shit about critical thinking, or programming.
The problem with this is that there is no way for a user to opt-out.
Cancel your account. When they ask their little "Why are you leaving?" survey, tell them this was the reason. If everyone did that, I'm sure they would think about including an opt-out feature.
If canceling your account is out of the question, then you value playing the game more than game-privacy.
Other than those two situations being entirely different. Not seeing your significant for extended periods of time is hardly the same as being bored with your wife all day with no power. Also I would assume the average married couple has sex at least a few times a week* a power outage, even sparking some extra sex wouldn't necessarily create a noticeable trend.
*Full disclosure: I am not married.
Here in the US.
Fees for going to war? That's what we've been paying taxes for.
We could have everything you list there and probably pay less tax, but we'd rather blow things up.
I always thought rotary engines were cool. They struck me as the perfect engine for small compact and sporty vehicles. The engines themselves are physically small relative to your typical 4-stroke. So a light weight, high revving 2 seater or hatchback seems a perfect fit
Although I heard repairs on them are expensive and involved... this might just be because of their rarity and mechanical unfamiliarity.
If your argument is that internet porn is no worse than porn magazines, you are very wrong.
That was not my argument at all. I just meant to say "No shit," if you don't watch your kids they will expose themselves to everything possible. The internet is new, kids and parenting are not.
Surely seeing profane language and a few distended assholes is much worse than smoking cigarettes, sneaking booze from your parents liquor cabinet, hearing older kids use profane language, and looking at some stolen porno magizines...
Kids have, and will always be kids. They will hear and do things before their parents willingly expose them to it... all except the distended assholes. That is definitely an unfortunate consequence of the internet.
IANAL, but as far as I understand in the US, malls and department stores cannot physically restrain you or hold you against your will. They are not the police. If they have damning evidence that you were engaging in criminal activities they can get the police, but I don't think they can arrest you or even stop you from leaving. (I am assuming for things like shoplifting, or destruction of property... not fiddling a kid in aisle 3)
As far as being erroneously flagged as a criminal... well I hope they call the police to do the police work, and then I hope the police ask a few questions before they fire the taser barbs into your back... although I'm doubtful lately.
Privacy isn't about hiding a wrong.
While I couldn't agree more with you on that... I think it is important to consider that his statements may have just been a disclaimer.
Basically the government expects Google (and any other corp with the ability) to track our search/document/email history... and a little request courtesy of the patriot act forces them to hand over all the info. So what they are saying is "if you're planning on doing something illegal then don't use google-search, because we'll be forced to hand over the info."
This doesn't change the fact that they store all your info for their own use... but they provide their services free of charge in return for your marketing information, this is fair by most people's standards.
Sounds like a reasonable and unsensational explanation... which is preciously why national geographic chose a more shocking reason. It looks like they are bringing themselves down to the level of the national enquirer
If you destroy evidence, make sure you destroy the backups, too.
Also, make sure you destroy evidence of your destruction of evidence and backups.
And don't forget to destroy evidence of your destruction of your destruction of evidence and backups.
My problem would be with
Guy/Girl: "Hey Verizon, can you block my data service so I don't accidentally use it?"
Verizon: "Sure we can. (click)"
Guy/Girl: "Uh, Why is my bill showing charges for data, that I have disabled?"
Verizon: "Because silly.... we have to send you data to tell you that you can't use the data plan!"
It also worked well in "The Fast and Furious" with the truck drivers.
But lets just hope the pirates aren't as tough as Vin Diesel... I mean, his last name is a fucking fuel, it doesn't get more hardcore than that.
The key to slander and libel, as I understand it, is that you cannot intentionally spread lies as facts. So saying you saw some kid giving a public BJ (when you know it isn't true) is going to be borderline.
The ultimate defense against slander and libel charges is the truth. If you are correct or have a good faith belief something is true about someone even if it turns out to be false, you usually won't be convicted because there was no intent to cause defamation.
For the Glen Beck issue. They ruled that it was satire. As long as it is obvious that you are joking or mocking then you're usually safe as well.
You are half-right about opinion. In most jurisdictions they determine that opinion is not falsifiable, so you can't be convicted on matters of opinion... but some jurisdictions such as The United States Supreme Court, in particular, has ruled that the First Amendment does not require recognition of an opinion privilege.
I don't see how losing 100lbs in 4 months is impossible by your calculations. He replaced several large (probably high-fat) meals with smaller ones, and also one likely almost fat-free (veggies for dinner). For someone as large as him his resting metabolic rate was probably well over 3k calories a day. Add in normal activity (moving around as required) and some exercise... and I don't see why he couldn't put his calorie deficit close to what you calculate. Keep in mind that he probably didn't lose 100lbs of pure fat. Account for unused muscle mass, and water weight and it is possible.
I used to eat between 6k-9k calories per day. I had no problem losing 25lbs in about a month. This was also when I only weighed 224lbs (down to 199). I was already exercising heavily 6 days a week... so by cutting excess fat from my diet and eating vegetables I was literally losing ~1 pound per day. (lost 12 in the first week).
I also doubt your 1k calorie ceiling being near death heatstroke. During hockey season (I played college hockey) I would probably burn 2-3k (or more) calories in one 1.5 hour practice. Granted this is taking place in ambient temperature of ~40-45 degrees F, but even an average person should be able to do 1k calories an hour.
...I think the scientists involved already know whether or not a terrorist is more scared than the average person, I don't have scientific links to back it up, but I'm pretty sure....
As far as medications, well I think you'd have to take enough meds to kill a horse in order not to be scared that there is a bomb under your nut sack, or that you will be discovered and plugged with 9mm slugs. Hey, worse case, they make it, study it's effective and it doesn't work and they toss it in the trash, I think it should at least be tried...
"Think, Think, Don't have any science to back it up..."
Nope. I'm not convinced. Your first mistake is trying to imagine that a radical terrorist would be scared of the same things as you or I, and would think logically about failure and repercussions of getting caught. These people plan to die... keep that little tidbit in mind.
Second, you don't have any evidence... for anything. Yet, you still think "it's worth a try" as if this is initiative would be free. It would be a colossal waste of resources and logically it doesn't even make sense. So it isn't even worth a second thought, let alone a try.
That was really interesting. I wish I would have taken some geology classes when I went to school around there. (Marquette, MI; which lies on the southern shore of Lake Superior).
I agree 100%. I was going to make a similar point but it's been a long day.
How unfortunate that we are forced to even think of these measures.
I'm only allowed to use 70% of the bandwidth that I pay for... for less than 15 minutes? Otherwise I can use as much as I want as long as I stay below half?
Nobody would be able to pass that exam, so it's pointless.
I hope by now you had the epiphany. Maybe everyone failing the exam would make them realize the danger of their distractions.
Better yet during the exam (I presume simulator) you smash something they love every time they make a mistake. This might not solve anything, but at least we could smash a whole bunch of sentimental shit.