And the even bigger upside is that it would then make sense to display it in 3D prettiness. Displaying a 3D image from a fixed 2D viewpoint is just bad.
I just have a hard time taking Ireland seriously because the Irish have one of the silliest sounding accents in Europe. However, you make damned good whiskey, so I support you.
Nope, you still get cable TV. At least the several places I've had TWC Internet in NY, I also got free(ish) basic cable. It's only ten or twelve channels, but it includes the major networks and the local news.
For the same reason they invented IPX/SPX, Appletalk and TCP/IP in the first place? Or for the same reason they invented Beta and VHS? Or Blu-Ray and whatever that other one was? There have always been competing standards.
Interestingly, the US has no official language and, according to Wikipedia, has well over 300 spoken/signed languages in general use. Of course, 80% of the population are native English speakers but it still has the fifth largest Spanish-speaking population in the world. However, 20% of the roughly 300 million people in the US means some 60 million people have a native language other than English... in other words, the US contains a population nearly equal to the UK that does not speak English as a primary language. No word on how Americans speak Klingon natively, but they're not expected to have children to pass it on to.
I'm not sure how a quart is a more obscure measurement than a gallon or fluid ounce. If anything, I think a fluid ounce is more obscure than a quart, at least to the population at large.
The black market sales may be harder to come by, but the money from those sales tends to be used to fund other things that most of society would rather not be funded.
That would actually make more sense, as French-speaking Canadians are five times more likely to know English than English-speaking Canadians are to know French. Outside of Quebec, there's only about half a million native French speakers in Canada and even within Quebec, half of the French-speaking population knows English.
To extend this, I've known plenty of people who have lived in Asian countries (for at least a few years) but never really picked up the language. It's one of the advantages of being a native English speaker... you can go almost anywhere on Earth and find people that know enough English for you to live day-to-day life. The only things you really need to pick up are words and phrases with no direct translation.
I agree that the war on drugs is stupid and causes more harm than good. However, the counter argument that "people should be allowed to do things that only hurts themselves" is pretty poor in the case of most addictions (including but definitely not limited to drugs). Personally, I think people should be allowed to do whatever they want as long as there's no adverse affects to those around them. Unfortunately, most people only think of the immediate physical effects (e.g. secondhand smoke) and don't think of the more long-term effects, especially those which are harder to quantify.
If you're addicted to skydiving to the point where you're ignoring safety protocols, someone should intervene on your behalf. I never said we should outright ban anything. My only point was that there's rarely such a thing as drugs only harming the person taking them.
It's pretty rare that "self-harm" only harms the person doing it, especially with addictive substances. They may be the only one suffering the physical effects, but there's emotional, financial, social, etc, etc effects that radiate out to their family, friends, co-workers and more. It's not as obvious as second-hand smoke from cigarettes, but the detrimental effects are still there.
The argument for why it's legal is right in the summary if you care to read. They acknowledge the risks, but feel the benefits outweigh it. It's the same argument that was used to give marijuana the push to become legal for medicinal use. As far as I know, nobody has provided an argument in favor of heroin's benefits outweighing it's drawbacks.
Slashdot Mirror
Plus, people like the Scots. Nobody likes the Quebecois.
Scots don't think it. Scots think other people will think it, which they likely do.
"spin the viewpoint around the country"
And the even bigger upside is that it would then make sense to display it in 3D prettiness. Displaying a 3D image from a fixed 2D viewpoint is just bad.
I just have a hard time taking Ireland seriously because the Irish have one of the silliest sounding accents in Europe. However, you make damned good whiskey, so I support you.
They can distort their maps, but they cannot take their FREEEDOM!
Nope, you still get cable TV. At least the several places I've had TWC Internet in NY, I also got free(ish) basic cable. It's only ten or twelve channels, but it includes the major networks and the local news.
You may want to review your OSI model. I don't remember QoS, but layer 1 is the physical medium. Ethernet is layer 2.
For the same reason they invented IPX/SPX, Appletalk and TCP/IP in the first place? Or for the same reason they invented Beta and VHS? Or Blu-Ray and whatever that other one was? There have always been competing standards.
Interestingly, the US has no official language and, according to Wikipedia, has well over 300 spoken/signed languages in general use. Of course, 80% of the population are native English speakers but it still has the fifth largest Spanish-speaking population in the world. However, 20% of the roughly 300 million people in the US means some 60 million people have a native language other than English... in other words, the US contains a population nearly equal to the UK that does not speak English as a primary language. No word on how Americans speak Klingon natively, but they're not expected to have children to pass it on to.
I'm not sure how a quart is a more obscure measurement than a gallon or fluid ounce. If anything, I think a fluid ounce is more obscure than a quart, at least to the population at large.
Five nicks or twenty-five penns. Also, one fourth of a doll.
The Martians will never penetrate our water armor!
I haven't heard any dead people complaining about it.
With some allowances for rounding, it's from Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L...
The black market sales may be harder to come by, but the money from those sales tends to be used to fund other things that most of society would rather not be funded.
When the hell did I say anything about jail?
That would actually make more sense, as French-speaking Canadians are five times more likely to know English than English-speaking Canadians are to know French. Outside of Quebec, there's only about half a million native French speakers in Canada and even within Quebec, half of the French-speaking population knows English.
To extend this, I've known plenty of people who have lived in Asian countries (for at least a few years) but never really picked up the language. It's one of the advantages of being a native English speaker... you can go almost anywhere on Earth and find people that know enough English for you to live day-to-day life. The only things you really need to pick up are words and phrases with no direct translation.
Quebec isn't a country. French or otherwise.
I agree that the war on drugs is stupid and causes more harm than good. However, the counter argument that "people should be allowed to do things that only hurts themselves" is pretty poor in the case of most addictions (including but definitely not limited to drugs). Personally, I think people should be allowed to do whatever they want as long as there's no adverse affects to those around them. Unfortunately, most people only think of the immediate physical effects (e.g. secondhand smoke) and don't think of the more long-term effects, especially those which are harder to quantify.
If you're addicted to skydiving to the point where you're ignoring safety protocols, someone should intervene on your behalf. I never said we should outright ban anything. My only point was that there's rarely such a thing as drugs only harming the person taking them.
The point is that "regulate the hell out of it" is a pretty shitty blanket solution to the problem.
It's pretty rare that "self-harm" only harms the person doing it, especially with addictive substances. They may be the only one suffering the physical effects, but there's emotional, financial, social, etc, etc effects that radiate out to their family, friends, co-workers and more. It's not as obvious as second-hand smoke from cigarettes, but the detrimental effects are still there.
The argument for why it's legal is right in the summary if you care to read. They acknowledge the risks, but feel the benefits outweigh it. It's the same argument that was used to give marijuana the push to become legal for medicinal use. As far as I know, nobody has provided an argument in favor of heroin's benefits outweighing it's drawbacks.
Sometimes regulating the hell out of things decreases its availability for good use and jump starts the black market for bad use.