The memories themselves may be stored in the brain, but what you'd be missing from the Kung-Fu download would be the proprioception mapping for your body. If the original Kung-Fu masters musculature and limb lengths were very much different from the learner, the learner would be more likely to beat himself to death than anyone else.
Please allow us to enroll in a 'first-class only' program for $1/year that allows you to trash any mail destined for my address that isn't personally addressed to me and isn't a first-class letter. Please continue to charge the sender for the cost of the junk mail, just never deliver it, and don't let them know who's enrolled. You could even make money off recycling all that non-1st class mail.
BUT NOT BY UNTRAINED VALETS, FOR PETE'S SAKE. Did you even read the summary???
Also, since when do any citizens have to comply with government 'orders' besides those given during a legal arrest (and as a stretch, flight attendants/pilots, who are not gov't employees but are operating under the FAAs color of law).
Once you've voluntarily handed the valet the means of getting into the trunk (i.e. the keys), I think it likely they'd argue you cannot even expect privacy there.
So if I give a restaurant coat-check person my coat and my house keys are in my coat pocket, I shouldn't complain when they go root thru my house? For that matter, I shouldn't be upset if they rifle thru my coat pockets in the first place?
Similarly, If I hand a waiter my credit card (the means to access my bank account/credit balance), I shouldn't be bothered by seeing charges they decided to make 'looking around'?
When you give 'the means' of accessing something to someone, their legitimate and legal access can be limited in scope to what is reasonable to accomplish their task.
Valet - driver's door + ignition. Nothing else. Coat check: handle the coat enough to hang it up/down. Nothing else.
Even the best satellite cannot watch an event before it happens.
Most if not all CME's are preceded by optical, X-Ray, and/or gamma ray bursts that travel at the speed of light and arrive within about 8.5 minutes. We can get a good idea of the strength of the CME from that, and an idea of its direction from where the burst occurred on the sun.
That is a very simplistic overview of a large, high-voltage transformer. You realize that 765kV can start an arc across a little more than 25cm in air, right? And these transformers weigh in at many10's of tons, and are designed to handle MANY megawatts of power, perhaps up to 1000 MW (yes, that's a gigawatt). They may even have 1.21 JiggaWatt ones.:-)
That is not something that can be cobbled together in a small factory.
Two words explain this attitude historically: "Secret Tribunal." (You can insert the word "military" if you'd prefer three words).
I think there's some middle ground here. I would MUCH rather see the sordid details of most arrests* and trials kept out of the public eye until they're over. I would require all of them to be filmed, and the news media can have the footage after the trial is over. That prevents a lot of the sensationalism, court of public opinion, and corruptions of justice.
I don't think the founding fathers ever thought their modern-day counterparts (judges and Congresscritters) would be so corrupt and easily swayed by public opinion and the almighty dollar.
*The only details I would give would be "So-and-so was arrested on a [civil | criminal] charge and [will | will not] be allowed out on bail."
And yet, oddly, millions of people drive to and from their destinations for hundreds of thousands of miles without harming themselves or others.
Do you really believe that? Driving is one of the most dangerous things you can do - it's only because driving is so familiar to us that its death toll is ignored. Licensing is a joke in most places - hell, my parked car got sideswiped by a woman TAKING HER DRIVING TEST.
And here's where the kneejerk comes in. The idea of--heaven forfend--registering your ability to safely use and operate dangerous equipment is accepted at all levels of society, from CDL licensing to heavy equipment operation, yet suggest it for a gun, and out comes the hissy fit, because someone has told you, over and over again, that if *they* know you have one, *they* will come for it some time in the middle of the night...[blathering continues]
Do you really think that's the reason that every gun owner is against registration? You're the one that's consumed the conspiracy kool-aid. "Shall not Be Infringed" means just that - there is no valid obstacle that may be placed by the government between a citizen and "keeping and bearing arms". I don't see heavy equipment or CDLs mentioned as the 2nd most important thing our forefathers could address in our country's most important document. I suppose you agree with the "freedom of speech zones"? That's an obvious (but currently legal) infringement to the 1st amendment.
The difference here being your speech and existence as a citizen is a function of existence. Gun insurance is a function of owning a gun.
I could say that speech is a choice and that you must have mandatory speech insurance if you choose to speak. We have mandatory health insurance now, and it's only contingent on my existence, so your argument has been weakened by creeping socialism. I'm not against there being gun insurance (that's between my insurance agent and myself). I'm against getting any government involved in the expression of ANY of our rights.
The reason why gun safety is not mandatory is that gun ownership is not mandatory...unless that's where *you're* wanting to go...[more conspiracy-fueled drivel]
Neither is diving a car, yet it's taught to every student in middle/high school. Sex ed is taught regardless of the student's desire or ability to engage in sex. Wouldn't it be safer for our kids to assume that at some point in their lives they'll be exposed to a firearm and teach them basic safety, if nothing more than DO NOT TOUCH IT?
And no, I absolutely would not support the idea of mandatory gun ownership. It is a RIGHT, not a requirement. Those that choose not to exercise that right, however, should not be permitted to interfere with those that do. In my mind it's the same as and as sacred as the 1st amendment. I may not agree with a word you say, but I will not attempt to prevent you from saying it. I would like the same respect with regard to both amendments.
[With regard to Obamacare - for the first time ever a citizen of the US is being required to purchase something as a condition of existence. Think about that - there is only one other situation that requires action (much less an on-going purchase) as a condition of mere existence - boys must register for the draft. Taxes only apply if you chose to work, etc]
Logic dictates that you did creep every inch for at least some small portion, as you indicate that honking stops in that case. If not, how would you know?
Again, reading comprehension - practice it. I said...irate drivers honking and attempting to rear-end you if you didn't creep every inch.... I used the pronoun 'you', which indicates a situation not specific the the writer. I did not say I gave in to the honking, only that there were those doing the honking and those that crept (I presume those with automatics) were spared additional honking until there was another gap. There were only about a hundred other cars immediately around me that I could use as examples. Car X doesn't creep, gets honked at until it moves. Repeat for all the other cars around me in the traffic jam.
One time I was stuck in a turn lane in a smaller car, and I couldn't see far enough over the hill in front to see whether it was safe to turn. So I waited. The guy behind me honked. I stepped out of my car, walked back and informed him that I will go the first opportunity I feel safe going, and I'd appreciate him not honking.
No mention of being at a light, no mention of the possibility of a 'protected arrow', so your vitriol at my interpretation of your poorly-described situation is unwarranted.
Your problem is that you are an idiot and presume everyone else is as well....and the ad hominem attacks that indicate a weak mind begin. I don't associate intelligence with driving ability as you seem to. My intelligence aside, I must be doing something right because I've been driving since I was 16 (that's 32 years now) without a single speeding ticket and without ever causing* an accident of any sort. I do assume that everyone is a bad driver - that is called defensive driving and it keeps me and those around me safe.
I managed to spend a long time with the clutch out, either in first or neutral. Time spent with the clutch out was not the issue, if that was your understanding than you misread my statement. It was the sheer number of clutch engagements/disengagements (even without creeping at every chance) that wore me out.
If someone deliberately rams me from behind because they are mad at traffic, I'll press assault charges against them, so bring it on. He'll not be driving for a while.
I love your passive-agressive bravado. In the real world you'd find it impossible to prove malice or intent, so it would just be chalked up to another typical fender-bender.
All of your replies in this thread have been rather angry; perhaps you should interact with society more or get some help with anger management.
Don't bother replying, I will not read it.
*I have been involved in exactly 1 'accident' where someone plowed into the side of my car from a driveway. Not at fault. Funny aside: She was driving a rental car because she totaled her own car the day before.
Your 'sensible' regulation has failed miserably for automobiles.
Your proposal reeks of a registration plan (how else do you keep track of all that bureaucratic clap-trap?) which would be unacceptable to many/most gun owners. You don't need to register to exercise your 1st Amendment rights, neither should we have to register to exercise our 2nd Amendment rights. Same goes for insurance - would you like to have mandated 1st Amendment insurance against libel/slander/perjury, etc?
I would love to see mandatory primary school education in gun safety, including how to safely check that any firearm is actually unloaded, safely store them, and safely handle them. This is taught in the home for other dangerous tools such as knives, saws, etc. Sadly this is not the case in the majority of households with respect to firearms. I was lucky enough to have firearm safety taught to me my my father from a young age and when I was in middle school - I think it was part of 'shop class' or perhaps 'health class'.
Ignoring the education issue makes the problem worse, not better, as we've learned from sex ed. Teaching them gun safety will not turn them into gun nuts just as sex ed doesn't turn girls into sluts. Confront the demon no matter how repulsive it is to your politics to keep your kids and others safe.
That you reward honkers with aggressive driving when you'd rather drive in a different manner doesn't indicate any failing with clutches, just the driver.
Reading comprehension - practice it. I didn't say I participated in the creeping every inch, I said I was getting honked at for NOT participating in it. Even with decent amounts of forward movement I still had to use the clutch thousands of times, and it was a pain.
You sound like one of those 'no one is a better driver than me' folks. Your example seems to indicate that you're a bad driver - if you couldn't see over the hill, there was NO safe time to execute your left turn no matter how long you waited. You should've proceeded straight and turned around at the first safe spot to approach your turn from the other direction.
There's a world of difference between condemned and prohibited. Condemnation occurs in the court of public opinion; prohibition occurs in a court of law.
All speech, including that which condemns other speech, must never be prohibited. Well-thought-out arguments, refutations, etc should be encouraged as the more ideas are presented, the better the solution may be. Poor arguments should be discouraged (condemned?) as being noise.
Once again, dead wrong. Driving a manual rocks, it's just that you just dont know how to drive one.
That is your [somewhat arrogant] opinion.
I have a six-speed manual with a moderately stiff clutch in my car (2003 Mini Cooper S), and enjoy it very nearly all of the time. When I was caught in a traffic jam due to an accident in a tunnel (no possibility of off ramps) that lasted 4 HOURS and traffic moved mere feet at a time for several miles (with irate drivers honking and attempting to rear-end you of you didn't creep every inch), I LOATHED it. My left leg was aching from the literal thousands of clutch actuations.
Liberals are no more interested in using the state to force people to actually agree with them then [sic] conservatives.
1) Gun Control 2) Banning large soda cups 3) Banning/regulating fast food 4) Requiring citizens to purchase insurance (Obamacare)...
The list is endless of things that liberals attempt to force on the public in the name liberal progress. I'm not saying conservatives aren't as bad, but your statement is demonstrably false.
I agree with the AC, below: NO speech should be "interpreted as offensive, and thus condemned by everyone". That's censorship, plain and simple. The expression of all speech should be equally protected (as in never illegal or forbidden), although there may be consequences that stem from that expression in limited cases (fire in a theater, etc). If I find someone's speech offensive, that's between me and them or society and them, not the government and them.
BTW, there wouldn't be a term 'politically-incorrect' if the New Left hadn't revived the phase politically-correct along about 1970 or so. Interestingly, the Socialists used that very term disparagingly against the communists back in the early to mid 20th century.
Slashdot Mirror
And where do you think muscle memory is stored?
The memories themselves may be stored in the brain, but what you'd be missing from the Kung-Fu download would be the proprioception mapping for your body. If the original Kung-Fu masters musculature and limb lengths were very much different from the learner, the learner would be more likely to beat himself to death than anyone else.
Please allow us to enroll in a 'first-class only' program for $1/year that allows you to trash any mail destined for my address that isn't personally addressed to me and isn't a first-class letter. Please continue to charge the sender for the cost of the junk mail, just never deliver it, and don't let them know who's enrolled. You could even make money off recycling all that non-1st class mail.
Let me know when they find UB 40 ...
When they do, it'll be filled with several vintages of "Red Red Wine" - vintages released every few years.
.. because as we all know, There are no ... tarrrrr pits[ch] in Scotland!
... their vehicle is subject to search
BUT NOT BY UNTRAINED VALETS, FOR PETE'S SAKE. Did you even read the summary???
Also, since when do any citizens have to comply with government 'orders' besides those given during a legal arrest (and as a stretch, flight attendants/pilots, who are not gov't employees but are operating under the FAAs color of law).
Once you've voluntarily handed the valet the means of getting into the trunk (i.e. the keys), I think it likely they'd argue you cannot even expect privacy there.
So if I give a restaurant coat-check person my coat and my house keys are in my coat pocket, I shouldn't complain when they go root thru my house? For that matter, I shouldn't be upset if they rifle thru my coat pockets in the first place?
Similarly, If I hand a waiter my credit card (the means to access my bank account/credit balance), I shouldn't be bothered by seeing charges they decided to make 'looking around'?
When you give 'the means' of accessing something to someone, their legitimate and legal access can be limited in scope to what is reasonable to accomplish their task.
Valet - driver's door + ignition. Nothing else.
Coat check: handle the coat enough to hang it up/down. Nothing else.
ABBA references are lost on all the 'yutes on /.
Or Klinefelter's Syndrome, trisomy-23.
Even the best satellite cannot watch an event before it happens.
Most if not all CME's are preceded by optical, X-Ray, and/or gamma ray bursts that travel at the speed of light and arrive within about 8.5 minutes. We can get a good idea of the strength of the CME from that, and an idea of its direction from where the burst occurred on the sun.
That is a very simplistic overview of a large, high-voltage transformer. You realize that 765kV can start an arc across a little more than 25cm in air, right? And these transformers weigh in at many10's of tons, and are designed to handle MANY megawatts of power, perhaps up to 1000 MW (yes, that's a gigawatt). They may even have 1.21 JiggaWatt ones. :-)
That is not something that can be cobbled together in a small factory.
Two words explain this attitude historically: "Secret Tribunal." (You can insert the word "military" if you'd prefer three words).
I think there's some middle ground here. I would MUCH rather see the sordid details of most arrests* and trials kept out of the public eye until they're over. I would require all of them to be filmed, and the news media can have the footage after the trial is over. That prevents a lot of the sensationalism, court of public opinion, and corruptions of justice.
I don't think the founding fathers ever thought their modern-day counterparts (judges and Congresscritters) would be so corrupt and easily swayed by public opinion and the almighty dollar.
*The only details I would give would be "So-and-so was arrested on a [civil | criminal] charge and [will | will not] be allowed out on bail."
And on the other end of the scale, Formula 1 cars regularly decelerate and turn at over 5G. It's amazing what all that downforce can do.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formula_One_car#Performance
http://www.zeroto60times.com/F1-0-60.html
And yet, oddly, millions of people drive to and from their destinations for hundreds of thousands of miles without harming themselves or others.
Do you really believe that? Driving is one of the most dangerous things you can do - it's only because driving is so familiar to us that its death toll is ignored. Licensing is a joke in most places - hell, my parked car got sideswiped by a woman TAKING HER DRIVING TEST.
And here's where the kneejerk comes in. The idea of--heaven forfend--registering your ability to safely use and operate dangerous equipment is accepted at all levels of society, from CDL licensing to heavy equipment operation, yet suggest it for a gun, and out comes the hissy fit, because someone has told you, over and over again, that if *they* know you have one, *they* will come for it some time in the middle of the night...[blathering continues]
Do you really think that's the reason that every gun owner is against registration? You're the one that's consumed the conspiracy kool-aid. "Shall not Be Infringed" means just that - there is no valid obstacle that may be placed by the government between a citizen and "keeping and bearing arms". I don't see heavy equipment or CDLs mentioned as the 2nd most important thing our forefathers could address in our country's most important document.
I suppose you agree with the "freedom of speech zones"? That's an obvious (but currently legal) infringement to the 1st amendment.
The difference here being your speech and existence as a citizen is a function of existence. Gun insurance is a function of owning a gun.
I could say that speech is a choice and that you must have mandatory speech insurance if you choose to speak. We have mandatory health insurance now, and it's only contingent on my existence, so your argument has been weakened by creeping socialism. I'm not against there being gun insurance (that's between my insurance agent and myself). I'm against getting any government involved in the expression of ANY of our rights.
The reason why gun safety is not mandatory is that gun ownership is not mandatory...unless that's where *you're* wanting to go...[more conspiracy-fueled drivel]
Neither is diving a car, yet it's taught to every student in middle/high school. Sex ed is taught regardless of the student's desire or ability to engage in sex. Wouldn't it be safer for our kids to assume that at some point in their lives they'll be exposed to a firearm and teach them basic safety, if nothing more than DO NOT TOUCH IT?
And no, I absolutely would not support the idea of mandatory gun ownership. It is a RIGHT, not a requirement. Those that choose not to exercise that right, however, should not be permitted to interfere with those that do. In my mind it's the same as and as sacred as the 1st amendment. I may not agree with a word you say, but I will not attempt to prevent you from saying it. I would like the same respect with regard to both amendments.
[With regard to Obamacare - for the first time ever a citizen of the US is being required to purchase something as a condition of existence. Think about that - there is only one other situation that requires action (much less an on-going purchase) as a condition of mere existence - boys must register for the draft. Taxes only apply if you chose to work, etc]
Logic dictates that you did creep every inch for at least some small portion, as you indicate that honking stops in that case. If not, how would you know?
Again, reading comprehension - practice it. I said ...irate drivers honking and attempting to rear-end you if you didn't creep every inch.... I used the pronoun 'you', which indicates a situation not specific the the writer. I did not say I gave in to the honking, only that there were those doing the honking and those that crept (I presume those with automatics) were spared additional honking until there was another gap. There were only about a hundred other cars immediately around me that I could use as examples. Car X doesn't creep, gets honked at until it moves. Repeat for all the other cars around me in the traffic jam.
One time I was stuck in a turn lane in a smaller car, and I couldn't see far enough over the hill in front to see whether it was safe to turn. So I waited. The guy behind me honked. I stepped out of my car, walked back and informed him that I will go the first opportunity I feel safe going, and I'd appreciate him not honking.
No mention of being at a light, no mention of the possibility of a 'protected arrow', so your vitriol at my interpretation of your poorly-described situation is unwarranted.
Your problem is that you are an idiot and presume everyone else is as well. ...and the ad hominem attacks that indicate a weak mind begin. I don't associate intelligence with driving ability as you seem to. My intelligence aside, I must be doing something right because I've been driving since I was 16 (that's 32 years now) without a single speeding ticket and without ever causing* an accident of any sort. I do assume that everyone is a bad driver - that is called defensive driving and it keeps me and those around me safe.
I managed to spend a long time with the clutch out, either in first or neutral.
Time spent with the clutch out was not the issue, if that was your understanding than you misread my statement. It was the sheer number of clutch engagements/disengagements (even without creeping at every chance) that wore me out.
If someone deliberately rams me from behind because they are mad at traffic, I'll press assault charges against them, so bring it on. He'll not be driving for a while.
I love your passive-agressive bravado. In the real world you'd find it impossible to prove malice or intent, so it would just be chalked up to another typical fender-bender.
All of your replies in this thread have been rather angry; perhaps you should interact with society more or get some help with anger management.
Don't bother replying, I will not read it.
*I have been involved in exactly 1 'accident' where someone plowed into the side of my car from a driveway. Not at fault. Funny aside: She was driving a rental car because she totaled her own car the day before.
Nice link - it says I can withstand 88m of sea level rise before my house gets wet. I'd have to invest in a boat to get out, however.
What do you think it is? ... ... ...
No, it's more like . . - - . .
Your 'sensible' regulation has failed miserably for automobiles.
Your proposal reeks of a registration plan (how else do you keep track of all that bureaucratic clap-trap?) which would be unacceptable to many/most gun owners. You don't need to register to exercise your 1st Amendment rights, neither should we have to register to exercise our 2nd Amendment rights. Same goes for insurance - would you like to have mandated 1st Amendment insurance against libel/slander/perjury, etc?
I would love to see mandatory primary school education in gun safety, including how to safely check that any firearm is actually unloaded, safely store them, and safely handle them. This is taught in the home for other dangerous tools such as knives, saws, etc. Sadly this is not the case in the majority of households with respect to firearms. I was lucky enough to have firearm safety taught to me my my father from a young age and when I was in middle school - I think it was part of 'shop class' or perhaps 'health class'.
Ignoring the education issue makes the problem worse, not better, as we've learned from sex ed. Teaching them gun safety will not turn them into gun nuts just as sex ed doesn't turn girls into sluts. Confront the demon no matter how repulsive it is to your politics to keep your kids and others safe.
That you reward honkers with aggressive driving when you'd rather drive in a different manner doesn't indicate any failing with clutches, just the driver.
Reading comprehension - practice it. I didn't say I participated in the creeping every inch, I said I was getting honked at for NOT participating in it. Even with decent amounts of forward movement I still had to use the clutch thousands of times, and it was a pain.
You sound like one of those 'no one is a better driver than me' folks. Your example seems to indicate that you're a bad driver - if you couldn't see over the hill, there was NO safe time to execute your left turn no matter how long you waited. You should've proceeded straight and turned around at the first safe spot to approach your turn from the other direction.
There's a world of difference between condemned and prohibited. Condemnation occurs in the court of public opinion; prohibition occurs in a court of law.
All speech, including that which condemns other speech, must never be prohibited. Well-thought-out arguments, refutations, etc should be encouraged as the more ideas are presented, the better the solution may be. Poor arguments should be discouraged (condemned?) as being noise.
You are correct - I did 'accidentally' agree with you. I misread your sentence - sorry about that.
Once again, dead wrong. Driving a manual rocks, it's just that you just dont know how to drive one.
That is your [somewhat arrogant] opinion.
I have a six-speed manual with a moderately stiff clutch in my car (2003 Mini Cooper S), and enjoy it very nearly all of the time. When I was caught in a traffic jam due to an accident in a tunnel (no possibility of off ramps) that lasted 4 HOURS and traffic moved mere feet at a time for several miles (with irate drivers honking and attempting to rear-end you of you didn't creep every inch), I LOATHED it. My left leg was aching from the literal thousands of clutch actuations.
Liberals are no more interested in using the state to force people to actually agree with them then [sic] conservatives.
1) Gun Control ...
2) Banning large soda cups
3) Banning/regulating fast food
4) Requiring citizens to purchase insurance (Obamacare)
The list is endless of things that liberals attempt to force on the public in the name liberal progress. I'm not saying conservatives aren't as bad, but your statement is demonstrably false.
I agree with the AC, below: NO speech should be "interpreted as offensive, and thus condemned by everyone". That's censorship, plain and simple. The expression of all speech should be equally protected (as in never illegal or forbidden), although there may be consequences that stem from that expression in limited cases (fire in a theater, etc). If I find someone's speech offensive, that's between me and them or society and them, not the government and them.
BTW, there wouldn't be a term 'politically-incorrect' if the New Left hadn't revived the phase politically-correct along about 1970 or so. Interestingly, the Socialists used that very term disparagingly against the communists back in the early to mid 20th century.
Excellent! Those guys do good work. Are you a ham?
Then I've already given 2 myriareasons - 20k unique and special little holes drilled accurately and safely into paper.
Myria was a metric prefix meaning 10,000 for a while - it has since fallen into desuetude. It also can mean 'countless'.
myria-
combining form
indicating a very great number myriapod
[from Greek murios countless]