OK I can admit the use of the word literally is now often hyperbolic. That just leaves the problem of what word to use for unfiguratively literally; I kid you not.
I don't give a shit. But that's true for any famous brand. All I want is a dual-sim phone, and if it has a minimum of smartphone features, all the better.
The European/Worldwide language for non-natives is called EFL. It's a subset of English but would probably get them by in Britain, and probably get them through an English test.
Funnily enough people from other parts of Britain, who I'm pretty sure don't understand him any better than you, don't complain and in fact think it's quaint.
Yes, I too would rather have a language with a million inflections to save a dozen pronouns and structured so inflexibly that you have to add a zillion articles and conjunctions.
Don't knock him. Right or wrong, he's addressing an inescapable future problem. Which other listened-to names are addressing it? What is your alternative solution?
We'll buy it if there's still money around to buy it. But usually you get money from jobs. So if they want customers, they'd better make sure there are people working, unless they find some other way to give them money, like, oh I don't know, taxes?
...the sandwich on my plate to decelerate my hunger. After that I'm going to leverage the lever on my handlebar to leverage the deceleration of my bike.
What Churchill says in his essay is hardly what I call intellectual. He's repeating the kind of stuff plenty of kids fathom out for themselves without any scholarly guidance. Put it another way, if someone found an essay by Joe Unknown that said exactly the same thing, would they be astonished?
He's probably saying it because, like me, he saw "the making of". There was a detailed, graphical explanation of the method on French TV by the company doing it.
It was a back projection. No holography involved at all. "Abus de langage" as the French say.
To be fair, "to beg the question" is a particulary stupid way in this day and age of saying "to reason in a circle". And to be fair to both sides, "to beg" is a particularly stupid way of saying "to raise". Beg someone for something -- food, mercy -- yeah sure. Beg a question for something -- no, I'm not that desperate.
It might be specific to my optical prescription, but I just looked out of the corner of my progressives and what I see outside the frame looks exactly the same as what I see inside, with no distortion, except that it's in focus. It does take a big effort to swivel my eyes that far sideways, mind. Quite honestly, it took me about 5 minutes to adapt to my first pair. Now I'm onto my third. I can't fault them.
Slashdot Mirror
No progeny then?
OK I can admit the use of the word literally is now often hyperbolic.
That just leaves the problem of what word to use for unfiguratively literally; I kid you not.
I don't give a shit. But that's true for any famous brand. All I want is a dual-sim phone, and if it has a minimum of smartphone features, all the better.
The European/Worldwide language for non-natives is called EFL.
It's a subset of English but would probably get them by in Britain, and probably get them through an English test.
Funnily enough people from other parts of Britain, who I'm pretty sure don't understand him any better than you, don't complain and in fact think it's quaint.
So their take on "round figures" is numbers ending in 7. OK I'll buy that.
The most awesome thing on IMDB is this.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt00...
(You have to look closely at the score next to the star at the top.)
But they can spell ordinance perfectly. It just doesn't explode like they think it does.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
No no no, that was Mike Rowsoft.
And another reason they don't allow alcohol is they don't want people posting to the wrong article.
Well, if the Express said that in an 8-month old article I guess it must be true.
Yes, I too would rather have a language with a million inflections to save a dozen pronouns and structured so inflexibly that you have to add a zillion articles and conjunctions.
Don't knock him.
Right or wrong, he's addressing an inescapable future problem. Which other listened-to names are addressing it? What is your alternative solution?
We'll buy it if there's still money around to buy it.
But usually you get money from jobs. So if they want customers, they'd better make sure there are people working, unless they find some other way to give them money, like, oh I don't know, taxes?
A free month in a free game? That sounds like a bargain.
...the sandwich on my plate to decelerate my hunger. After that I'm going to leverage the lever on my handlebar to leverage the deceleration of my bike.
Dead right. Instead of converting it to dollars they should describe it in terms of football fields.
What Churchill says in his essay is hardly what I call intellectual. He's repeating the kind of stuff plenty of kids fathom out for themselves without any scholarly guidance.
Put it another way, if someone found an essay by Joe Unknown that said exactly the same thing, would they be astonished?
It might have been lost once upon a time, but now surely it's a found essay.
OK, semantic moment, I should have known better.
He's probably saying it because, like me, he saw "the making of".
There was a detailed, graphical explanation of the method on French TV by the company doing it.
It was a back projection. No holography involved at all. "Abus de langage" as the French say.
To be fair, "to beg the question" is a particulary stupid way in this day and age of saying "to reason in a circle".
And to be fair to both sides, "to beg" is a particularly stupid way of saying "to raise".
Beg someone for something -- food, mercy -- yeah sure. Beg a question for something -- no, I'm not that desperate.
Do you get 5% back if its 40% abroad?
It might be specific to my optical prescription, but I just looked out of the corner of my progressives and what I see outside the frame looks exactly the same as what I see inside, with no distortion, except that it's in focus. It does take a big effort to swivel my eyes that far sideways, mind.
Quite honestly, it took me about 5 minutes to adapt to my first pair. Now I'm onto my third. I can't fault them.
It means it passed so close it caused temperatures to double.
I beg your pardon?