The real Islamic people are not bothered by words, because their education level is higher than the fifth grade. If anything should be learned from this it is that education is key to maturity.
Heh, is this like Palin's "real America."
Here's a clue, all 19 of the 9/11 hijackers were college educated.
Perhaps the Islamists not bothered by mere words are the ones who, regardless of education, don't take that religion so seriously. Because any cursory reading of the Quran has it repeated to you how all apostates are evil and doomed forever by Allah, and that lying and killing them is no big deal.
"College educated" does NOT mean "smart" or "Intelligent".
Current body armor (and I'm talking about the Interceptor vest, MTV (Modular Tactical Vest) and the Plate Carrier) don't have anything to do with the word "flexibility". The armor plates (Small Arms Protective Inserts, or SAPI) are stiff; they're slightly contoured, the front being the same contour as the back, which makes sense if you're disfigured I suppose...I digress...
Since current vests don't provide flexibility at all, then the CNC being stiffer won't have much of an effect. It will, however, be wonderful to save on weight, those vests get cumbersome fast. But those are ceramic. Replacing those would be much more effective than replacing the Kevlar, I would think, in terms of weight-saving.
The Kevlar itself is light enough (disclaimer: I was an infantry machine gunner), it's the SAPI plates that were/are horrible to deal with.
Also - it wouldn't be such an obvious scam if you could purchase only the access code and acquire your book from the secondary market. In all instances that I've seen, the access codes come only with new books.
In all instances I've seen the online access codes are sold bundled with the new book, and separately alongside, so we the students are able to buy the book used, and buy an access code. Interesting that you haven't seen this.
I'm always tempted to blame the professors for choosing course materials like this; however, on more than one occasion I've heard professors complaining about pressure to switch to the latest edition. Pressure from whom? I have no idea...
All professors I've had share the sentiments of yours; they're apologetic about the book prices. But I'm at WSU Tri-Cities, the main Pullman campus makes the book decisions, so it's not up to the campus here which books to use; so posters above are likely correct in that the professors making the decision to use these materials are jerks.
Also, a note on the effectiveness of these systems. SOOOO much easier to cheat on homework. One book I have (http://www.wwnorton.com/college/chemistry/chemistry3/) is ridiculously easy. If you guess or use hints it lets you try again with no penalty (even the Mastering (http://masteringphysics.com and http://masteringchemistry.com/ series gives a penalty for guessing or using hints). I can even type the question into Google verbatim and most times (read: every time so far) get the exact answer. For Mastering Physics, I can pull the answer straight out of the solutions manual, with only slight changes in figures (so I just recalculate, plugging in the new figures).
And it's way easier for the teachers to grade, because the system does all the work for them, all they're responsible for are lectures, questions, quizzes, and exams.
Oh, and on top of all these extra costs for online access kits, tuition just took another hike up. $5700 for 12 credits for me, after all fees. (Including a "Spcl Crs Fee" for EVERY course. What's special about it if every course has it?)
I didn't say that management was so great either. They had gold faucets, new cars every month (IIRC) and free fuel. Their benefits were as lavish as the Unions.
The entire thing was fucked up. I wasn't trying to condemn any single party (though I do dislike unions), as I stated at the beginning: "for an intriguing read..." That's all it's supposed to be, interesting, not some deep analysis of who screwed over who or o a comparison of one party being better than the other (apologies if it came out that way).
For an intriguing read, if you're interested at all, check out A Savage Factory
It's about a section manager's time working in a Ford plant during unspecified years (though it's not hard to figure out) and how the Union was
The kind of union you describe I could support; the kind of union we actually have I can't. The UAW is (I think) one of the reasons we should have let our auto industry fail; even with companies going into the red, the UAW still demanded 100% of all their benefits (Crash Course
Of course, these are empirical examples of only one union, and I'm sure there's a bit of bias, but in my experience it's a fairly accurate picture of labor unions in the US. They used to be good, but now they're over-powerful and corrupt.
You failed to qualify your statement of "You can't buy a car exceeding 54mpg highway in the U.S." Apparently what you meant was: "You can't buy a car exceeding 54mpg highway as rated by the EPA in the U.S."
Everybody knows EPA ratings are a basis for comparison, that is all. Actual mileage may, and in fact does, vary.
Next time try not to compare generalized ratings to empirically observed and well-documented phenomena, mmmmkay?
I know what the government is using to calculate CAFE, I follow that stuff. Your point that I think you are trying to make (no EPA-rated vehicles over 50mpg) is valid, and does in fact apply to the current CAFE standards, but that is not what you were originally saying. Things are usually better understood when you actually say what you are meaning to say.
Because motorcycles are ridiculously overpowered. Mine only gets about 37mpg if I'm nice to it. I've got a couple engine tweaks...but my 1800cc, 800lb (360kg) bike only does a mediocre 35mpg on average.
It simply has a ridiculously large engine for a bike (I'm ok with that, I ride it for fun, not the fuel savings). Look at Vespas, they get wonderful mileage, and have very small engines.
Your example is also why I think pickups and SUV's should get 30mpg or better, cars should get 80. This 54mpg standard is too little, and too far off in the future. Most cars/trucks/SUV's have engines much larger than they need (it's the American Way!). As such, they waste fuel most of the time. They're also incredibly inefficient internal combustion (only!) engines and do nothing to reclaim any wasted heat (exhaust, coolant) or other wasted energy (shock absorbers, check out GenShocks).
High-mileage cars aren't infeasible, and they aren't a thing of the future. They simply aren't here because the market hasn't demanded them. People keep buying low-mileage vehicles because they don't know any better, so the car manufacturers don't bother change. So the government has to step in and force weak legislation that only half-addresses the issue...
We needed to let GM and Chrysler die and be bought up by new players...
I'm pretty sure those are sold in America. While they don't ALWAYS get over 50, it's pretty damn common. My Dad's had over 55mpg for an entire tank of fuel several times. They aren't rated at over 50mpg by the EPA, but the EPA's test sucks.
And as much as I dislike gasoline/electric hybrids (for my own reasons) the Prius definitely can achieve over 50mpg. And there are NUMEROUS (valid) demonstrations of practical vehicles achieving over 80mpg, which I think would be much more acceptable for a passenger car.
Right, cause you can't possibly work on the computer between phone calls and working hours.
There's an inherent delay in the system in trying to do your 2-6; they can't be done immediately. And doing them immediately will just have you waiting on hold and impatiently working through the automated phone systems.
There's no reason the computer can't be worked on at the same time.
We took bright-eyed young people raised in an age of hope and peace and dropped them in to the middle of a secratarian human rights mess and forced them to watch the destruction of countless families and lives first hand.. And often by actions of their own hands.
No, we volunteered for it.
And a lot of troops did spend time overseas, but most of them weren't in infantry, nor were they in combat. I'm not sure how this country fails so miserably at taking care of a few (A few in this case being a small fraction of a percentage of the entire population).
In Washington, it is illegal to drive while talking on a cell phone (meaning holding the phone to your ear)...
UNLESS
You're hearing impaired and require hearing aid devices, OR
You're on speaker phone
So if you're old and can't year, you can drive while talking on your cell phone with it up to your ear. Or if it's on speaker phone you can hold it up to your ear. Otherwise you need a hands-free handset; as if using a hands-free set is somehow SO much better for you than holding the phone.
It's obviously a law designed to placate those demanding the law, while providing no real benefit to anybody.
My wife worked for a pediatrician in a well to do area a couple of years ago and if it looked like their kid was going to be under 6 foot, they would ask for a referral to an endocrinologist for hormones to get the kid to grow a bit more. The pediatrician didn't think it was necessary in most cases, but they are his patients so he complied. The parents wanted the best for their kids and wanted to insure that they could get any advantage that they could possibly get for them.
James Watson, co-discover of DNA, was on the National Press Club a few years ago, and this question was asked (can't find the archive right now - heard on NPR). Anyway to paraphrase,
90% of CEOs are over 6 foot. A 5 foot 2 inch tall man and a five foot tall woman may want to better the opportunities for their child.
Of course, what he meant was that up to a point, height matters in all sorts of endeavors and not only sports: politics, finding a mate, work, etc... There is a strong correlation between height and success. Yes, I know - queue up all the exceptions but keep in mind, many of those were extraordinary people; such as Einstein - 5' 5".
Malcolm Gladwell pointed out this exact phenomenon in his book Blink, which he calls the Warren Harding effect.
Each winter, as required by law, I swap my summer tires for winter ones and I can go skiing: with proper tires you don't need 4WD to drive up a snowy road. I keep a set of chains (also required by law) for when it gets bad (and I only used them once in the last 4 years).
Not where some of us with trucks drive.
Also, in my truck I keep tools with me at all times; if someone's ever stuck alongside the road, I have the capability to pull them out, or help them fix it. A station wagon isn't necessarily going to have the strength nor traction (provided by vehicle weight) to pull a vehicle up a bank.
For most people I'm sure you're right, they drive a truck/SUV because they can, but for many of us, it really is a necessity for the way we live, and we really can't easily change the way we live now.
I'm just happy they committed to maintaining the desktop as the primary platform. I fully expected a fully integrated system that would support mobile apps and input methods including touchscreens and whatever garbled buzzwords they wanted to fit in there.
Don't you remember, we're not a first to invent country anymore, we're first to file. They filed first, so they're right.
To be honest, I never followed up on this, did it get signed into law?
Every single survey, poll, etc that was on the news at the time had between 96 and 98% of american black voters voting for him. That means they ignored all policy, all politics, all financial plans, all qualifications, all personal history, all things in general he said he'd do, and just for him based on the color of his skin.
I'm going to take a wild guess that those kind of numbers beat the 3-5% range of racist people stated in this article.
Except that IS racism. It just changes the range to the favorable side for him.
Slashdot Mirror
Heh, is this like Palin's "real America."
Here's a clue, all 19 of the 9/11 hijackers were college educated.
Perhaps the Islamists not bothered by mere words are the ones who, regardless of education, don't take that religion so seriously. Because any cursory reading of the Quran has it repeated to you how all apostates are evil and doomed forever by Allah, and that lying and killing them is no big deal.
"College educated" does NOT mean "smart" or "Intelligent".
I'd love to see a source for this. Well, a source to anything actually, but it seems to much to ask around here these days...
Seems to me the study is the source. Called a "primary source" where I come from.
Current body armor (and I'm talking about the Interceptor vest, MTV (Modular Tactical Vest) and the Plate Carrier) don't have anything to do with the word "flexibility". The armor plates (Small Arms Protective Inserts, or SAPI) are stiff; they're slightly contoured, the front being the same contour as the back, which makes sense if you're disfigured I suppose...I digress...
Since current vests don't provide flexibility at all, then the CNC being stiffer won't have much of an effect. It will, however, be wonderful to save on weight, those vests get cumbersome fast. But those are ceramic. Replacing those would be much more effective than replacing the Kevlar, I would think, in terms of weight-saving.
The Kevlar itself is light enough (disclaimer: I was an infantry machine gunner), it's the SAPI plates that were/are horrible to deal with.
Also - it wouldn't be such an obvious scam if you could purchase only the access code and acquire your book from the secondary market. In all instances that I've seen, the access codes come only with new books.
In all instances I've seen the online access codes are sold bundled with the new book, and separately alongside, so we the students are able to buy the book used, and buy an access code. Interesting that you haven't seen this.
I'm always tempted to blame the professors for choosing course materials like this; however, on more than one occasion I've heard professors complaining about pressure to switch to the latest edition. Pressure from whom? I have no idea...
All professors I've had share the sentiments of yours; they're apologetic about the book prices. But I'm at WSU Tri-Cities, the main Pullman campus makes the book decisions, so it's not up to the campus here which books to use; so posters above are likely correct in that the professors making the decision to use these materials are jerks.
Also, a note on the effectiveness of these systems. SOOOO much easier to cheat on homework. One book I have (http://www.wwnorton.com/college/chemistry/chemistry3/) is ridiculously easy. If you guess or use hints it lets you try again with no penalty (even the Mastering (http://masteringphysics.com and http://masteringchemistry.com/ series gives a penalty for guessing or using hints). I can even type the question into Google verbatim and most times (read: every time so far) get the exact answer. For Mastering Physics, I can pull the answer straight out of the solutions manual, with only slight changes in figures (so I just recalculate, plugging in the new figures).
And it's way easier for the teachers to grade, because the system does all the work for them, all they're responsible for are lectures, questions, quizzes, and exams.
Oh, and on top of all these extra costs for online access kits, tuition just took another hike up. $5700 for 12 credits for me, after all fees. (Including a "Spcl Crs Fee" for EVERY course. What's special about it if every course has it?)
I didn't say that management was so great either. They had gold faucets, new cars every month (IIRC) and free fuel. Their benefits were as lavish as the Unions.
The entire thing was fucked up. I wasn't trying to condemn any single party (though I do dislike unions), as I stated at the beginning: "for an intriguing read..." That's all it's supposed to be, interesting, not some deep analysis of who screwed over who or o a comparison of one party being better than the other (apologies if it came out that way).
To answer your question though: yes, I have.
It's about a section manager's time working in a Ford plant during unspecified years (though it's not hard to figure out) and how the Union was
The kind of union you describe I could support; the kind of union we actually have I can't. The UAW is (I think) one of the reasons we should have let our auto industry fail; even with companies going into the red, the UAW still demanded 100% of all their benefits ( Crash Course
Of course, these are empirical examples of only one union, and I'm sure there's a bit of bias, but in my experience it's a fairly accurate picture of labor unions in the US. They used to be good, but now they're over-powerful and corrupt.
Cut the guy some slack...he uses Unity...
No, you're an idiot.
You failed to qualify your statement of "You can't buy a car exceeding 54mpg highway in the U.S." Apparently what you meant was: "You can't buy a car exceeding 54mpg highway as rated by the EPA in the U.S."
Everybody knows EPA ratings are a basis for comparison, that is all. Actual mileage may, and in fact does, vary.
Next time try not to compare generalized ratings to empirically observed and well-documented phenomena, mmmmkay?
I know what the government is using to calculate CAFE, I follow that stuff. Your point that I think you are trying to make (no EPA-rated vehicles over 50mpg) is valid, and does in fact apply to the current CAFE standards, but that is not what you were originally saying. Things are usually better understood when you actually say what you are meaning to say.
Because motorcycles are ridiculously overpowered. Mine only gets about 37mpg if I'm nice to it. I've got a couple engine tweaks...but my 1800cc, 800lb (360kg) bike only does a mediocre 35mpg on average.
It simply has a ridiculously large engine for a bike (I'm ok with that, I ride it for fun, not the fuel savings). Look at Vespas, they get wonderful mileage, and have very small engines.
Your example is also why I think pickups and SUV's should get 30mpg or better, cars should get 80. This 54mpg standard is too little, and too far off in the future. Most cars/trucks/SUV's have engines much larger than they need (it's the American Way!). As such, they waste fuel most of the time. They're also incredibly inefficient internal combustion (only!) engines and do nothing to reclaim any wasted heat (exhaust, coolant) or other wasted energy (shock absorbers, check out GenShocks).
High-mileage cars aren't infeasible, and they aren't a thing of the future. They simply aren't here because the market hasn't demanded them. People keep buying low-mileage vehicles because they don't know any better, so the car manufacturers don't bother change. So the government has to step in and force weak legislation that only half-addresses the issue...
We needed to let GM and Chrysler die and be bought up by new players...
I suppose Volkswagen Jetta TDI's don't get over 50mpg. Oh wait, yes they do: http://forums.tdiclub.com/showthread.php?s=2f0fbcb80a7e7717d17cd2bc777ded2c&t=359736
I'm pretty sure those are sold in America. While they don't ALWAYS get over 50, it's pretty damn common. My Dad's had over 55mpg for an entire tank of fuel several times. They aren't rated at over 50mpg by the EPA, but the EPA's test sucks.
And as much as I dislike gasoline/electric hybrids (for my own reasons) the Prius definitely can achieve over 50mpg. And there are NUMEROUS (valid) demonstrations of practical vehicles achieving over 80mpg, which I think would be much more acceptable for a passenger car.
Right, cause you can't possibly work on the computer between phone calls and working hours.
There's an inherent delay in the system in trying to do your 2-6; they can't be done immediately. And doing them immediately will just have you waiting on hold and impatiently working through the automated phone systems.
There's no reason the computer can't be worked on at the same time.
We took bright-eyed young people raised in an age of hope and peace and dropped them in to the middle of a secratarian human rights mess and forced them to watch the destruction of countless families and lives first hand.. And often by actions of their own hands.
No, we volunteered for it.
And a lot of troops did spend time overseas, but most of them weren't in infantry, nor were they in combat. I'm not sure how this country fails so miserably at taking care of a few (A few in this case being a small fraction of a percentage of the entire population).
In Washington, it is illegal to drive while talking on a cell phone (meaning holding the phone to your ear)... UNLESS
So if you're old and can't year, you can drive while talking on your cell phone with it up to your ear. Or if it's on speaker phone you can hold it up to your ear. Otherwise you need a hands-free handset; as if using a hands-free set is somehow SO much better for you than holding the phone.
It's obviously a law designed to placate those demanding the law, while providing no real benefit to anybody.
We're already heading towards 1984, now it seems like we're heading towards Gattaca , great!
My wife worked for a pediatrician in a well to do area a couple of years ago and if it looked like their kid was going to be under 6 foot, they would ask for a referral to an endocrinologist for hormones to get the kid to grow a bit more. The pediatrician didn't think it was necessary in most cases, but they are his patients so he complied. The parents wanted the best for their kids and wanted to insure that they could get any advantage that they could possibly get for them.
James Watson, co-discover of DNA, was on the National Press Club a few years ago, and this question was asked (can't find the archive right now - heard on NPR). Anyway to paraphrase,
90% of CEOs are over 6 foot. A 5 foot 2 inch tall man and a five foot tall woman may want to better the opportunities for their child.
Of course, what he meant was that up to a point, height matters in all sorts of endeavors and not only sports: politics, finding a mate, work, etc ... There is a strong correlation between height and success. Yes, I know - queue up all the exceptions but keep in mind, many of those were extraordinary people; such as Einstein - 5' 5".
Malcolm Gladwell pointed out this exact phenomenon in his book Blink , which he calls the Warren Harding effect.
While searching for the presiden't name (I'd forgotten it, but I loved reading the book) I also ran across this: Malcolm Gladwell Explains Why Underdogs Win An 'Astonishing' Amount Of The Time. Ha! Take that You expert in practical ethics!
What the hell is an expert in practical ethics, anyway?
Not where some of us with trucks drive.
Also, in my truck I keep tools with me at all times; if someone's ever stuck alongside the road, I have the capability to pull them out, or help them fix it. A station wagon isn't necessarily going to have the strength nor traction (provided by vehicle weight) to pull a vehicle up a bank.
For most people I'm sure you're right, they drive a truck/SUV because they can, but for many of us, it really is a necessity for the way we live, and we really can't easily change the way we live now.
http://www.ebooks-shares.org/
http://LibraryPirate.ph
Maybe: https://thepiratebay.se/
More likely: http://ebooks-shares.org/
Always good to look through: http://www.gutenberg.org/
I'm just happy they committed to maintaining the desktop as the primary platform. I fully expected a fully integrated system that would support mobile apps and input methods including touchscreens and whatever garbled buzzwords they wanted to fit in there.
What about the innocent, but accused? You did know that the majority of Tent Citie's population are merely accused and awaiting trial, right?
Citation?
How about a ban on stupid trailer-park dumbass kids who ruin it for the rest of us?
That's called Natural Selection. We, as a species, have been fighting that for some time now to allow those who should die to flourish.
In the meantime, those who would otherwise flourish are brought down to the lowest common standard.
Drove
Through empirical observation, of course!
Don't you remember, we're not a first to invent country anymore, we're first to file . They filed first, so they're right. To be honest, I never followed up on this, did it get signed into law?
Every single survey, poll, etc that was on the news at the time had between 96 and 98% of american black voters voting for him. That means they ignored all policy, all politics, all financial plans, all qualifications, all personal history, all things in general he said he'd do, and just for him based on the color of his skin.
I'm going to take a wild guess that those kind of numbers beat the 3-5% range of racist people stated in this article.
Except that IS racism. It just changes the range to the favorable side for him.