The cool thing about situational irony is that expectations are a personal matter, so if GGP finds it ironic, he is using the term correctly whatever your expectations were. In other words, you may not find it ironic, but it is still not a misuse of the term in the sense that you are trying to imply. It is like you are trying to argue that he is misusing the term "delicious" when he applies it to ice cream because you don't personally enjoy ice cream.
Unfortunately for you, there is no SI unit for either irony or deliciousness, so you'll have to find some other arcane grammar rule to correct in other people's posts to feel good about yourself. I'd suggest who/whom, split infinitives, or dangling participles (a few of my favorites). Just the other day I made a comment regarding a poster using "loose" when they meant "lose", and I even got to make a reference to his mom during the course of the correction, so there are plenty of opportunities if you just apply yourself.
There is no such company. The only thing that ever comes before profit in any for-profit business of any size (especially publicly traded) is avoiding jail time, and sometimes not even that. Any catering done to people concerned about safety (or any other trait that benefits the public good) is done in order to leverage the improved image for additional profit.
Sort of. You only generate the fast decaying isotopes as quickly as your slower isotope decays, so the radioactivity in cases like that only goes up linearly. An isotope with a 2 million year half-life is still going to emit way less radiation than one with a 2 day halflife, even if it decays into an isotope that decays into an isotope that decays into an isotope each with a half-life of seconds.
Really, the people that think it is cool to tell people that they are using "irony" incorrectly are more frequently wrong than the people they are trying to prove linguistically inferior. You should look into what situational irony is and why it has been used correctly in this situation.
IIRC Guild Wars 2 only has auto attack in the sense that you can set one of your weapon skills to automatically activate on recharge. All attacks come from your skill bar, so there is not auto attack in the strictest sense.
Apples and oranges. Those complaining that it's too simplified are intellectuals and nerds - exactly the audience this isn't intended for. Those complaining it's too complex are those interested in the graphic actually being useful for education and information.
We are exactly the audience that graph is intended for: scientists, engineers, and other people with graph comprehension skills that just don't happen to have chosen nuclear physics as our domain of learning. It gives enough information to give a proper sense of scale across multiple orders of magnitude of exposure. I touched upon more information in 5 minutes of looking at that graph than I had in hours of reading the sensationalist crap that I get from someplace like CNN or Fox News (this is not hypothetical, as I have actually been trying to get a grasp of what is going on from mainstream news sources just like everybody else in the past week). If there is any doubt, consider the source. You have an article on Slashdot about a graph made by the creator of XKCD, both havens for nerds and intellectuals.
Here's an idea - you're an elitist idiot. You don't want anyone educated because that means they might actually want to take part in our representative democracy. You want to hand this country over to a self appointed body empowered to make decisions for the rest of us.
I think you are confused about what a representative democracy was intended to be. Your proscribed part in a representative democracy is to elect officials to represent you who can examine individual issues full time because you, as an average citizen, have a day job and don't have the time to assemble information sources necessary to make informed decisions. This is why we do not have a direct democracy, and additionally, why we have an electoral college. Originally, people were so disjoint from the workings of the federal government that they elected people to elect the president. Admittedly, we live in a different world from the one we did back then, so the double layer of indirection is not really necessary, but the general concept still stands.
I also have no problem with getting people educated, but I don't think boiling everything down to 8 second sound bites has anything to do with education. You either need to be willing to spend enough time to gather a broad understanding of the situation, or you are just going to be a puppet doing the dance of some news conglomerate that has no interest in making our country better unless it benefits their bottom line.
Piss right the hell off. I'm a citizen of this country and have every right to participate in this discussion.
You have every right, but that does not mean exercising your right will result in anything positive. I'm not telling you that you can't, I am telling you that you shouldn't.
I love it. Half the people are complaining that this chart is an oversimplification and the other half is too complicated.
Here's an idea. If this chart overwhelms you, you aren't smart enough to engage in any meaningful conversation on the topic. We don't need more armchair nuclear physicists to help figure out the problem. We need an elected body of representatives to hire out of a field of professionals to decide what action should be taken in our country's self interest, and we need a small but highly informed and interested portion of the population (for instance, professors that do actual research in the field) to act as a safeguard versus corruption of the system. When you reward news outlets for catering to the lowest common denominator so that you can pretend you somehow have the ability to micromanage every issue that faces your elected officials, you help muddy the waters so the interested third party portion of the system does not work (it is almost impossible to tell the real information from the noise if media outlets make scientists dumb everything down and mix their opinions into a pile of other uninformed commentators and bought and paid for "scientists" that fit into the sensationalist script).
So kick back and relax and stop trying to analyze the situation. You'll be doing more for your country than you ever could by trying to get involved.
By that reasoning, we shouldn't be teaching our children anything in schools at all, and definitely not ever testing them. This isn't a question of having an open mind to competing theories. You are arguing that basic scientific rigor leads to a lack of scientific progress.
Assholes like you try to convolute nebulous mysticism with science and pretend that the two are somehow on equal footing, and the rest of us get stuck trying to keep our children from getting taught this festering pile of lies. Come talk to me about perspective and insight when you bring along a hypothesis that is both testable and not already empirically proven untrue. Until then, you aren't offering valid criticism, you are spewing worthless bullshit.
Citation, please. The Supreme Court ruled that the Constitution did not allow for secession. Please show documentation that the Articles of Confederation have any legal weight at all after the Constitution was ratified, which nullified the Articles (since the perpetual union clause included a provision for alteration based on the approval of Congress and all of the states.)
Any special secession status attributed to the state of Texas is pure urban legend. Which makes it doubly depressing that our own governor doesn't seem to realize this, of course, but I invite anybody to provide a citation for why exactly Texas has any more right than any other state to secede.
It should certainly be taken into consideration in the same way that any other deficiency in their knowledge base is. And we aren't talking about just college admission, either. I'm fairly certain that the first time a creationist fails a biology class because all of their answers were that "God did it", this will be used to file a lawsuit because they were not being given the same "academic support" as they would have if they put down those dirty evolutionist answers.
I've always wonder kind of half-assed logic chain makes one conclude that going back to the gold standard does anybody any good. It begs the question: if you don't like that our currency is backed solely by a collective delusion of our populace, could you please explain to me how gold's value is derived any differently? Does it really do anybody any good if instead of having arbitrarily valued paper to use as a vehicle of trade, you have paper you can trade in for arbitrarily valued lumps of metal? What is the gold backed by?
But the point was that Portal as much of a risk as one might think, because Narbacular Drop had already won a pile of awards. The innovation still came from an independent developer, not from Valve. The only experimentation on Valve's end was picking up a team of developers that were already clearly up and coming in the world and giving them the resources to make a mainstream title. That is only marginally more "done properly" than Ubisoft putting out whatever Assassin's Creed game they put out this year.
FYI, Portal was actually the upgrade. The original concept was Narbacular Drop, which was a project made at Digipen by the creators of Portal before they picked up by Valve.
It's called a CDN cache server. All major residential broadband providers have them. The peering point isn't the sore spot for AT&T anyway; it is the last mile and the neighborhood node, where U-Verse TV really is using bandwidth the exact same way that Netflix would be.
The trick, of course, is that it is being billed as a separate service. The interesting question is whether Net Neutrality demands that AT&T's television service has to be separated out from the bandwidth used to provide that service, and thus the bandwidth would have to be lumped into the internet plan and billed the same way. I have a suspicion that in the long haul, the answer will be a firm "yes."
I was just thinking how awesome it would be to add up and down votes to Google's search results crowdsource cleaning up SEO abuse. But then I started thinking about it and realized that I didn't want my front page for every possible search query filled with Justin Beiber and Charlie Sheen.
Slashdot Mirror
Run a webkit based browser on another OS?
Uhm, the same thing that already happens when m is negative: e is also negative. Were you being facetious?
The cool thing about situational irony is that expectations are a personal matter, so if GGP finds it ironic, he is using the term correctly whatever your expectations were. In other words, you may not find it ironic, but it is still not a misuse of the term in the sense that you are trying to imply. It is like you are trying to argue that he is misusing the term "delicious" when he applies it to ice cream because you don't personally enjoy ice cream.
Unfortunately for you, there is no SI unit for either irony or deliciousness, so you'll have to find some other arcane grammar rule to correct in other people's posts to feel good about yourself. I'd suggest who/whom, split infinitives, or dangling participles (a few of my favorites). Just the other day I made a comment regarding a poster using "loose" when they meant "lose", and I even got to make a reference to his mom during the course of the correction, so there are plenty of opportunities if you just apply yourself.
There is no such company. The only thing that ever comes before profit in any for-profit business of any size (especially publicly traded) is avoiding jail time, and sometimes not even that. Any catering done to people concerned about safety (or any other trait that benefits the public good) is done in order to leverage the improved image for additional profit.
Sort of. You only generate the fast decaying isotopes as quickly as your slower isotope decays, so the radioactivity in cases like that only goes up linearly. An isotope with a 2 million year half-life is still going to emit way less radiation than one with a 2 day halflife, even if it decays into an isotope that decays into an isotope that decays into an isotope each with a half-life of seconds.
And by that, of course, I meant magnetized.
You wuss... a real coder uses a magnified needle and a steady hand!
Really, the people that think it is cool to tell people that they are using "irony" incorrectly are more frequently wrong than the people they are trying to prove linguistically inferior. You should look into what situational irony is and why it has been used correctly in this situation.
IIRC Guild Wars 2 only has auto attack in the sense that you can set one of your weapon skills to automatically activate on recharge. All attacks come from your skill bar, so there is not auto attack in the strictest sense.
Apples and oranges. Those complaining that it's too simplified are intellectuals and nerds - exactly the audience this isn't intended for. Those complaining it's too complex are those interested in the graphic actually being useful for education and information.
We are exactly the audience that graph is intended for: scientists, engineers, and other people with graph comprehension skills that just don't happen to have chosen nuclear physics as our domain of learning. It gives enough information to give a proper sense of scale across multiple orders of magnitude of exposure. I touched upon more information in 5 minutes of looking at that graph than I had in hours of reading the sensationalist crap that I get from someplace like CNN or Fox News (this is not hypothetical, as I have actually been trying to get a grasp of what is going on from mainstream news sources just like everybody else in the past week). If there is any doubt, consider the source. You have an article on Slashdot about a graph made by the creator of XKCD, both havens for nerds and intellectuals.
Here's an idea - you're an elitist idiot. You don't want anyone educated because that means they might actually want to take part in our representative democracy. You want to hand this country over to a self appointed body empowered to make decisions for the rest of us.
I think you are confused about what a representative democracy was intended to be. Your proscribed part in a representative democracy is to elect officials to represent you who can examine individual issues full time because you, as an average citizen, have a day job and don't have the time to assemble information sources necessary to make informed decisions. This is why we do not have a direct democracy, and additionally, why we have an electoral college. Originally, people were so disjoint from the workings of the federal government that they elected people to elect the president. Admittedly, we live in a different world from the one we did back then, so the double layer of indirection is not really necessary, but the general concept still stands.
I also have no problem with getting people educated, but I don't think boiling everything down to 8 second sound bites has anything to do with education. You either need to be willing to spend enough time to gather a broad understanding of the situation, or you are just going to be a puppet doing the dance of some news conglomerate that has no interest in making our country better unless it benefits their bottom line.
Piss right the hell off. I'm a citizen of this country and have every right to participate in this discussion.
You have every right, but that does not mean exercising your right will result in anything positive. I'm not telling you that you can't, I am telling you that you shouldn't.
I love it. Half the people are complaining that this chart is an oversimplification and the other half is too complicated.
Here's an idea. If this chart overwhelms you, you aren't smart enough to engage in any meaningful conversation on the topic. We don't need more armchair nuclear physicists to help figure out the problem. We need an elected body of representatives to hire out of a field of professionals to decide what action should be taken in our country's self interest, and we need a small but highly informed and interested portion of the population (for instance, professors that do actual research in the field) to act as a safeguard versus corruption of the system. When you reward news outlets for catering to the lowest common denominator so that you can pretend you somehow have the ability to micromanage every issue that faces your elected officials, you help muddy the waters so the interested third party portion of the system does not work (it is almost impossible to tell the real information from the noise if media outlets make scientists dumb everything down and mix their opinions into a pile of other uninformed commentators and bought and paid for "scientists" that fit into the sensationalist script).
So kick back and relax and stop trying to analyze the situation. You'll be doing more for your country than you ever could by trying to get involved.
By that reasoning, we shouldn't be teaching our children anything in schools at all, and definitely not ever testing them. This isn't a question of having an open mind to competing theories. You are arguing that basic scientific rigor leads to a lack of scientific progress.
Assholes like you try to convolute nebulous mysticism with science and pretend that the two are somehow on equal footing, and the rest of us get stuck trying to keep our children from getting taught this festering pile of lies. Come talk to me about perspective and insight when you bring along a hypothesis that is both testable and not already empirically proven untrue. Until then, you aren't offering valid criticism, you are spewing worthless bullshit.
"...the right heretofore claimed by the State of Texas to secede from the Union, is hereby distinctly renounced. Passed 15th March, 1866"
Citation, please. The Supreme Court ruled that the Constitution did not allow for secession. Please show documentation that the Articles of Confederation have any legal weight at all after the Constitution was ratified, which nullified the Articles (since the perpetual union clause included a provision for alteration based on the approval of Congress and all of the states.)
Any special secession status attributed to the state of Texas is pure urban legend. Which makes it doubly depressing that our own governor doesn't seem to realize this, of course, but I invite anybody to provide a citation for why exactly Texas has any more right than any other state to secede.
It should certainly be taken into consideration in the same way that any other deficiency in their knowledge base is. And we aren't talking about just college admission, either. I'm fairly certain that the first time a creationist fails a biology class because all of their answers were that "God did it", this will be used to file a lawsuit because they were not being given the same "academic support" as they would have if they put down those dirty evolutionist answers.
You don't have a beak, so this is a non-issue.
A "loser" is what you are when you don't win.
"Looser" is what your mom was after I was done with her.
I've always wonder kind of half-assed logic chain makes one conclude that going back to the gold standard does anybody any good. It begs the question: if you don't like that our currency is backed solely by a collective delusion of our populace, could you please explain to me how gold's value is derived any differently? Does it really do anybody any good if instead of having arbitrarily valued paper to use as a vehicle of trade, you have paper you can trade in for arbitrarily valued lumps of metal? What is the gold backed by?
But the point was that Portal as much of a risk as one might think, because Narbacular Drop had already won a pile of awards. The innovation still came from an independent developer, not from Valve. The only experimentation on Valve's end was picking up a team of developers that were already clearly up and coming in the world and giving them the resources to make a mainstream title. That is only marginally more "done properly" than Ubisoft putting out whatever Assassin's Creed game they put out this year.
FYI, Portal was actually the upgrade. The original concept was Narbacular Drop, which was a project made at Digipen by the creators of Portal before they picked up by Valve.
It's called a CDN cache server. All major residential broadband providers have them. The peering point isn't the sore spot for AT&T anyway; it is the last mile and the neighborhood node, where U-Verse TV really is using bandwidth the exact same way that Netflix would be.
The trick, of course, is that it is being billed as a separate service. The interesting question is whether Net Neutrality demands that AT&T's television service has to be separated out from the bandwidth used to provide that service, and thus the bandwidth would have to be lumped into the internet plan and billed the same way. I have a suspicion that in the long haul, the answer will be a firm "yes."
That's exactly the policy they are circumventing by allowing you to see the answers at the bottom of the page as long as you come from Google.
I was just thinking how awesome it would be to add up and down votes to Google's search results crowdsource cleaning up SEO abuse. But then I started thinking about it and realized that I didn't want my front page for every possible search query filled with Justin Beiber and Charlie Sheen.
The real question is what Jozsef Szajer is getting out of the endorsement deal?