Pro tip: there's no need to prefix 'rock' with 'dead'.
Actually, there is. Although the rock itself is not "dead" or "alive", a "Live Rock" is one that supports it's own mini ecosystem of bacteria and other micro fauna and flora.
Steel is a really bad money-losing business to be in. An automated steel mill may seem clean, but you also need coal mines, coke kilns, limestone quarries, etc.
You could use Pepsi kilns instead of coke kilns. In blind taste tests 2 out of 3 diabetics preferred steel made using pepsi kilns.
ww2 started because it was essentially more ww1. The steal-each-others-land meme was appropriate for the middle ages, but after the invention of nationalism in about 1848 it's pretty much a mistake.
Lebensraum dates back to WWI. It was a policy of the Germans during WWI to conquer more land and remove the native population to replace them with Germans.
This became more extreme, and in the 20's Hitler started promoting the idea that all the land to the East of Germany be removed of it's native people and repopulated with Germans.
In WWII, Germany's goal was not just to take over land with German speaking people. It is well published that they wanted to wipe out all Slavic people and replace their land with Germans. Once that was done they were going to go into Asia.
They had less problems with people to the West, whom they considered almost as pure. It was the "inferior" people to the east they thought they should displace.
Germany's goal absolutely was way more nefarious than just taking land that already had Germans on it.
World War 2 was started because Germany wanted a chunk of land that was predominately German and no one wanted to give it to them so they took it by force,
I think you're being highly generous to Germany there. The war actually didn't start as WWII until they invaded Poland which they had split with Russia.
That's much more than just claiming land that was predominantly German.
Hey I'm already doing that! I mean I really only do about 16 hours of effective work a week, but get paid for the full 40. Is that different than most people really?
I think that's true of many people. Cut the number of hours they have to work and they end up actually working a greater % of those hours.
What do you think Star Wars is if it isn't a super hero movie?
Yeah, and there hasn't been a good Star Wars film made in the last 30 years either.
There is nothing to say a superhero movie can't be good. It's just that in the modern era of film, that's not going to happen because studios want a guaranteed return on their productions and so every high budget film has to follow a predictable formula with a specified number of highs and lows- and at what part of the film they have to occur, etc.
Back in the 70's and early 80's films could have more flexibility, and so big budget films COULD be more unique. (they often weren't for superhero films even then though, but the potential was there),
Light Amplification by Zimulated Emission of Radiation
- nice over-britishization
Laser spelt with a "Z" is not a British spelling, it's an American spelling. It is spelt with an "S" in Britain. The bastardisation of the abbreviation originates on the Western edge of the pond.
Knowing where a movie is going ahead of time does not by itself make it less interesting. In virtually all superhero movies you know the main character is going to live and the ending will probably be a happy one. Most of the time the story is rather predictable too. Doesn't make it uninteresting as long as they make the journey getting there fun.
I don't think "superhero" movies are a good example. They're the epitome of high-budget junk with no original plot or quality of story. - just action.
They sell well to kids wanting to watch their favourite marketing device, but you'll find very few superhero films on any critics "must watch" top films.
Honestly, I don't know if it's because I'm an adult now, or the quality of the films have gone down. The first three films (Ep IV- VI) were fantastic to me as a kid. Everything since has ranged from awful to "decent".
One of the prequels (I don't remember which now) was actually ok. Rogue One was decent, just nothing amazing, it would probably have been better if NOT in the Star Wars universe, just a standalone movie with a similar plot. Force Awakens was very blah.
Star Wars just seems very stale to me now. Perhaps I'm getting old, perhaps they've taken it the wrong direction, or perhaps... just perhaps... they've over done Star Wars. Maybe they should wait another 30 years before revisiting it.
That said, this does highlight something important; OnePlus started as an "affordable" solution for people wanting an almost premium phone but not wanting to pay the obscene prices of Samsung, LG, or Apple.
At almost $500 this is outside the "affordable" bracket now and ventures into the premium phone territory they were differentiating themselves from.
They're still cheaper than Samsung or Apple by a long way, but they're not "an almost premium phone at a decent price" anymore.
I have one cat pushing 20 years. She just lays around doing nothing now- but when she was young she was a terror. She knew she wasn't allowed to play with the blinds (because she destroyed them). She also knew if I was in bed in one room, I was unlikely to get out of bed to discipline her if she went into the next room.
When I was up and about, blinds were safe. The minute I went to bed she went to the neighbouring room and started destroying the blinds. The bedroom blinds she waited until I was at work to mangle to her satisfaction.
BSG started great but quickly went down hill. The first season was fantastic, an absolute classic, the second season was OK. I can't remember when I gave up watching because it became too awful. Probably around the beginning of the third season.
If he lived outside the US he could watch it on Netflix. It's only in the US where CBS is punishing the consumer with this annoying private channel. Rest of the world gets it on Netflix.
The question for me is, why would I want to pay $6/month just to watch a few episodes of Star Trek: Discovery?
Please don't. Wait patiently like the rest of us for the day it gets on Netflix, Amazon Prime, or Hulu.
I really don't want the balkanization of online content to occur. Pretty soon it's going to cost just as much to watch internet TV as cable TV because every show worth watching is going to be on a different provider.
I'm hoping enough people hold off buying into CBS's venture online so it crashes and burns and they put stuff on Hulu like all the other networks.
I really want to watch this new Star Trek, but won't as long as it's on a CBS private access channel.
What is the summary talking about? Cats stopped being antisocial? I beg to differ, especially when cats are compared against dogs. While dogs largely have been tamed, largely becoming scavengers instead of predators, cats seem to retailers many more undomesticated attributes. The development of dogs from wolves was largely accidental, too, with the social skills of approaching human colonies for their scraps providing a significant survival advantage over wolves, which were far less social.
Anyone that has lived with a cat can tell you that they are very social animals. They're just not DEPENDANT on people like dogs are. Dogs are stuck on the "look at me, pay attention to me" mode. Cats are more like people, they have times they want to be with others, and times they want to be alone. They are very social though. They get lonely when left alone, and enjoy the company of others, even if they don't want constant petting.
Cats will typically want to curl up and sleep in whatever room you're in. They may not want you to touch them all the time, but they want to be near you.
The feline brain is very similar in structure to the human brain, only obviously a lot smaller.
Just like humans they are very adaptive and able to change with their environment. So if that environment includes humans, they adapt and learn to live with a human environment.
Slashdot Mirror
Disco sucks!
Live music is best!
(Sorry, I'll go back to bed now.)
I dunno.
I always hate when I buy an album without studying it first and realise it's full of crappy live tracks.
Please, give me the version of the song without people coughing and clapping in the background
Pro tip: there's no need to prefix 'rock' with 'dead'.
Actually, there is. Although the rock itself is not "dead" or "alive", a "Live Rock" is one that supports it's own mini ecosystem of bacteria and other micro fauna and flora.
Let us know how that turns out for you. I recommend finishing the chocolate bar before moving on to the second task.
Steel is a really bad money-losing business to be in. An automated steel mill may seem clean, but you also need coal mines, coke kilns, limestone quarries, etc.
You could use Pepsi kilns instead of coke kilns. In blind taste tests 2 out of 3 diabetics preferred steel made using pepsi kilns.
They sell Crisco routers and Sonny televisions.
My Crisco router got fried.
Sadly, while some are already throwing words like "monopoly" around, I suspect this is perfectly above board -
Not being a lawyer, I don't know if it is legal or not.
It's a dick move either way.
ww2 started because it was essentially more ww1. The steal-each-others-land meme was appropriate for the middle ages, but after the invention of nationalism in about 1848 it's pretty much a mistake.
Lebensraum dates back to WWI. It was a policy of the Germans during WWI to conquer more land and remove the native population to replace them with Germans.
This became more extreme, and in the 20's Hitler started promoting the idea that all the land to the East of Germany be removed of it's native people and repopulated with Germans.
In WWII, Germany's goal was not just to take over land with German speaking people. It is well published that they wanted to wipe out all Slavic people and replace their land with Germans. Once that was done they were going to go into Asia.
They had less problems with people to the West, whom they considered almost as pure. It was the "inferior" people to the east they thought they should displace.
Germany's goal absolutely was way more nefarious than just taking land that already had Germans on it.
World War 2 was started because Germany wanted a chunk of land that was predominately German and no one wanted to give it to them so they took it by force,
I think you're being highly generous to Germany there. The war actually didn't start as WWII until they invaded Poland which they had split with Russia.
That's much more than just claiming land that was predominantly German.
There is no fucking way any employer will EVER let someone work 16 hours a day and pay them what they're currently paying them to work 40.
If they're paying someone to work 40 hours a day, someone is getting scammed.
Fortunately, in 40 years I'll be almost 80, and only 20 years away from being able to finally retire.
Hey I'm already doing that! I mean I really only do about 16 hours of effective work a week, but get paid for the full 40. Is that different than most people really?
I think that's true of many people. Cut the number of hours they have to work and they end up actually working a greater % of those hours.
No one will have full time employment, everybody will be working multiple jobs just to rent some shitty hole in the wall and buy trash food
Meanwhile Quintillionaires will be jerking themselves off in space
FUTURE!
Highly unlikely that would happen.
Instead Quintillionaires would hire prostitutes to do that for them.
What do you think Star Wars is if it isn't a super hero movie?
Yeah, and there hasn't been a good Star Wars film made in the last 30 years either.
There is nothing to say a superhero movie can't be good. It's just that in the modern era of film, that's not going to happen because studios want a guaranteed return on their productions and so every high budget film has to follow a predictable formula with a specified number of highs and lows- and at what part of the film they have to occur, etc.
Back in the 70's and early 80's films could have more flexibility, and so big budget films COULD be more unique. (they often weren't for superhero films even then though, but the potential was there),
Light Amplification by Zimulated Emission of Radiation
- nice over-britishization
Laser spelt with a "Z" is not a British spelling, it's an American spelling. It is spelt with an "S" in Britain. The bastardisation of the abbreviation originates on the Western edge of the pond.
Onions? I've never seen stickers on onions. By-the-piece onions (around here at least) come in three flavors - red, white, and yellow.
No Vidalias? Pearl Onions? Shallots? Spring Onions? Ramps? Cippolini?... ummm... I'm sure there are more...
Knowing where a movie is going ahead of time does not by itself make it less interesting. In virtually all superhero movies you know the main character is going to live and the ending will probably be a happy one. Most of the time the story is rather predictable too. Doesn't make it uninteresting as long as they make the journey getting there fun.
I don't think "superhero" movies are a good example. They're the epitome of high-budget junk with no original plot or quality of story. - just action.
They sell well to kids wanting to watch their favourite marketing device, but you'll find very few superhero films on any critics "must watch" top films.
Honestly, I don't know if it's because I'm an adult now, or the quality of the films have gone down. The first three films (Ep IV- VI) were fantastic to me as a kid. Everything since has ranged from awful to "decent".
One of the prequels (I don't remember which now) was actually ok. Rogue One was decent, just nothing amazing, it would probably have been better if NOT in the Star Wars universe, just a standalone movie with a similar plot. Force Awakens was very blah.
Star Wars just seems very stale to me now. Perhaps I'm getting old, perhaps they've taken it the wrong direction, or perhaps... just perhaps... they've over done Star Wars. Maybe they should wait another 30 years before revisiting it.
Nice fishing, you reeled a few.
That said, this does highlight something important; OnePlus started as an "affordable" solution for people wanting an almost premium phone but not wanting to pay the obscene prices of Samsung, LG, or Apple.
At almost $500 this is outside the "affordable" bracket now and ventures into the premium phone territory they were differentiating themselves from.
They're still cheaper than Samsung or Apple by a long way, but they're not "an almost premium phone at a decent price" anymore.
Cool. I'm buying underwear.
I have one cat pushing 20 years. She just lays around doing nothing now- but when she was young she was a terror. She knew she wasn't allowed to play with the blinds (because she destroyed them). She also knew if I was in bed in one room, I was unlikely to get out of bed to discipline her if she went into the next room.
When I was up and about, blinds were safe. The minute I went to bed she went to the neighbouring room and started destroying the blinds. The bedroom blinds she waited until I was at work to mangle to her satisfaction.
BSG started great but quickly went down hill. The first season was fantastic, an absolute classic, the second season was OK. I can't remember when I gave up watching because it became too awful. Probably around the beginning of the third season.
If he lived outside the US he could watch it on Netflix. It's only in the US where CBS is punishing the consumer with this annoying private channel. Rest of the world gets it on Netflix.
The question for me is, why would I want to pay $6/month just to watch a few episodes of Star Trek: Discovery?
Please don't. Wait patiently like the rest of us for the day it gets on Netflix, Amazon Prime, or Hulu.
I really don't want the balkanization of online content to occur. Pretty soon it's going to cost just as much to watch internet TV as cable TV because every show worth watching is going to be on a different provider.
I'm hoping enough people hold off buying into CBS's venture online so it crashes and burns and they put stuff on Hulu like all the other networks.
I really want to watch this new Star Trek, but won't as long as it's on a CBS private access channel.
What is the summary talking about? Cats stopped being antisocial? I beg to differ, especially when cats are compared against dogs. While dogs largely have been tamed, largely becoming scavengers instead of predators, cats seem to retailers many more undomesticated attributes. The development of dogs from wolves was largely accidental, too, with the social skills of approaching human colonies for their scraps providing a significant survival advantage over wolves, which were far less social.
Anyone that has lived with a cat can tell you that they are very social animals. They're just not DEPENDANT on people like dogs are. Dogs are stuck on the "look at me, pay attention to me" mode. Cats are more like people, they have times they want to be with others, and times they want to be alone. They are very social though. They get lonely when left alone, and enjoy the company of others, even if they don't want constant petting.
Cats will typically want to curl up and sleep in whatever room you're in. They may not want you to touch them all the time, but they want to be near you.
The feline brain is very similar in structure to the human brain, only obviously a lot smaller.
Just like humans they are very adaptive and able to change with their environment. So if that environment includes humans, they adapt and learn to live with a human environment.