You know, people do eat cows. Before eating them, they are killed. If we're going to kill them regardless, I can't see any ban on bullfighting that wouldn't be blatant hypocrisy.
I think you've got to give credit where it's due. I have no problems with the Blade Runner novel, but the movie was terrible. I don't know whose fault it was; we can argue over that in some other thread.
Blade Runner is a convoluted mess of crap, with all the watchability of a movie-adaptation of the 2006 Congressional Budget. I'm sorry, but I'm no Blade Runner fanboy.
The movie was in love with itself, a marriage of endless scenes of dreary, dirty, rainy dystopian insanity and a plot that made the final 10 minutes of 2001 seem easy-to-follow by comparison. You and others equate this style of writing and directing with high-brow Sci-Fi, but the rest of us know it as utterly, utterly boring tripe.
All hail the power of induction! The same power that lets insane farmers lay down ~2km of copper wire underneath high tension lines to leech ~110V of current will power our PDAs from... a few centimeters away.
Well yes, that's true that many politicians take that stance, but it only works because people are hating on evolution, etc, due to the reason I gave above.
The mindset is simply this: Any agenda, promoted by anyone, that contradicts something said in the bible, is an attack on its literal truth and thus, an attack on fundamentalist Christianity.
That 2000lb aircraft is going to have two or three times the horizontal velocity of that truck, and an additional vertical velocity component when it impacts the ground.
Given the relation p = m v, you do the math on that, and couple it with the fact that no non-military building I know of is built to withstand impacts from above. Anyone in a home or apartment that's hit by a falling, fast-moving aircraft is dead meat.
Unless we're looking at some kind of computer-only piloting, a personal "skycar" would be a very bad idea. That's way too much kinetic energy in the hands of John Q. Public. You think car accidents are bad now? Wait for a midair collision that takes out a whole apartment block.
No. Works of fiction, fantasy, and straight reporting -- in any medium, for any purpose -- are not indicative of either "unhealthy behavior" or even an unhealthy tendency towards such behavior.
I wouldn't rely on it as a primary, absolute signal that a person is trouble, but it should raise a few flags in combination with other things (especially past complaints about the person, or a relevant criminal history). It could very well be a clincher in the police's decision to label someone like that a "person of concern".
Yeah, because political views, which change often and rapidly over a lifetime, make a great analogy to something as ingrained and sick as a sexual interest in the rape of small children.
Private members' bills almost never come up for a first vote, let alone a second or final one. They almost never pass. I can count on one hand the number of these bills that passed in the last parliamentary session, and they were mostly ceremonial.
You don't agree that someone writing "fictional works" about the raping of children, for sexual pleasure, is someone who deserves to be, at the very least, monitored? That isn't exactly a healthy behaviour. Come on man, use common fucking sense. I think we can tell the difference between a serious literary work and a perv's fantasy literature.
Both could be correct if you use them properly in the sentence. Supernovae when it's the subject, supernovas when it's the object. Assuming we're treating "supernova" as a regular 1st-declension latin feminine noun.
Strictly speaking, super (as a preposition of space or location, in this case) takes nova in the ablative case, so the ending on nova is a long a (ahhhhh). If we were writing in Latin I don't know that we'd use the -ae ending for the plural at all. In fact, I'm not sure what the plural would be. I assume we'd throw a pronoun before "super nova", maybe "eae super nova" (they who are above the new [thing]), and continue on with the sentence with "eae" (feminine they) as our subject. Or we could use Illae (those) as our subject, which might be less proper and more vulgar-latin slangy.
We once had this idea for a global voice network. Everyone would have a number and accept calls by default, and people could talk to each other. One guy on Slashdot knew better, though. He informed us that people could call businesses with bomb threats, for example, and disrupt the economy. Adults could call children and try to abduct them. Random businesses could harass individuals with marketing calls. Loopholes abounded and there was no way to fix the system without breaking it more.
We would have called this a telephone network, but we had to give up on it since its security was obviously so flawed. Thankfully that guy on Slashdot saved us all that wasted infrastructure money. Nothing good would have come of it anyway.
Can't you just ventilate by gently compressing the diaphragm anyways? People who are unconcious don't need a huge volume of oxygen to survive. Watch your breathing as you're falling asleep sometime. It's extremely shallow, or at least is for me, but I run a lot.
Yes, apparently. People come to Slashdot, post comments under science stories, and don't even know the definition of a standing wave, phase vs group velocity, wave vs particle velocity, etc... It's really disheartening.
This goes beyond idiocy... This is blatant pandering to the cattle lobby at the expense of our health. Everyone of us who might one day get MRSA, or flesh-eating disease...
Any increased use of these drugs, especially on bacteria present in the food supply, is asking for disaster. When a federal agency start making bad decisions for corporate lobbyists that will cost real lives, it's time for heads to roll.
Slashdot Mirror
You know, people do eat cows. Before eating them, they are killed. If we're going to kill them regardless, I can't see any ban on bullfighting that wouldn't be blatant hypocrisy.
I think you've got to give credit where it's due. I have no problems with the Blade Runner novel, but the movie was terrible. I don't know whose fault it was; we can argue over that in some other thread.
Blade Runner is a convoluted mess of crap, with all the watchability of a movie-adaptation of the 2006 Congressional Budget. I'm sorry, but I'm no Blade Runner fanboy.
The movie was in love with itself, a marriage of endless scenes of dreary, dirty, rainy dystopian insanity and a plot that made the final 10 minutes of 2001 seem easy-to-follow by comparison. You and others equate this style of writing and directing with high-brow Sci-Fi, but the rest of us know it as utterly, utterly boring tripe.
All hail the power of induction! The same power that lets insane farmers lay down ~2km of copper wire underneath high tension lines to leech ~110V of current will power our PDAs from... a few centimeters away.
Well yes, that's true that many politicians take that stance, but it only works because people are hating on evolution, etc, due to the reason I gave above.
The mindset is simply this: Any agenda, promoted by anyone, that contradicts something said in the bible, is an attack on its literal truth and thus, an attack on fundamentalist Christianity.
That's all you really need to know.
So you want to run a non-profit Costco for electronics.
That 2000lb aircraft is going to have two or three times the horizontal velocity of that truck, and an additional vertical velocity component when it impacts the ground.
Given the relation p = m v, you do the math on that, and couple it with the fact that no non-military building I know of is built to withstand impacts from above. Anyone in a home or apartment that's hit by a falling, fast-moving aircraft is dead meat.
Unless we're looking at some kind of computer-only piloting, a personal "skycar" would be a very bad idea. That's way too much kinetic energy in the hands of John Q. Public. You think car accidents are bad now? Wait for a midair collision that takes out a whole apartment block.
I wouldn't rely on it as a primary, absolute signal that a person is trouble, but it should raise a few flags in combination with other things (especially past complaints about the person, or a relevant criminal history). It could very well be a clincher in the police's decision to label someone like that a "person of concern".
Yeah, because political views, which change often and rapidly over a lifetime, make a great analogy to something as ingrained and sick as a sexual interest in the rape of small children.
No shit, the submitter is a Liberal (or troll) painting the Conservatives with their own bill's brush! What a joke.
This story should be modded -1 Troll.
Private members' bills almost never come up for a first vote, let alone a second or final one. They almost never pass. I can count on one hand the number of these bills that passed in the last parliamentary session, and they were mostly ceremonial.
This has no chance.
You don't agree that someone writing "fictional works" about the raping of children, for sexual pleasure, is someone who deserves to be, at the very least, monitored? That isn't exactly a healthy behaviour. Come on man, use common fucking sense. I think we can tell the difference between a serious literary work and a perv's fantasy literature.
Super is not an adjective. It is either an adverb or a preposition. Since there is no verb in the phrase "super nova" it must be a preposition.
Both could be correct if you use them properly in the sentence. Supernovae when it's the subject, supernovas when it's the object. Assuming we're treating "supernova" as a regular 1st-declension latin feminine noun.
Strictly speaking, super (as a preposition of space or location, in this case) takes nova in the ablative case, so the ending on nova is a long a (ahhhhh). If we were writing in Latin I don't know that we'd use the -ae ending for the plural at all. In fact, I'm not sure what the plural would be. I assume we'd throw a pronoun before "super nova", maybe "eae super nova" (they who are above the new [thing]), and continue on with the sentence with "eae" (feminine they) as our subject. Or we could use Illae (those) as our subject, which might be less proper and more vulgar-latin slangy.
We once had this idea for a global voice network. Everyone would have a number and accept calls by default, and people could talk to each other. One guy on Slashdot knew better, though. He informed us that people could call businesses with bomb threats, for example, and disrupt the economy. Adults could call children and try to abduct them. Random businesses could harass individuals with marketing calls. Loopholes abounded and there was no way to fix the system without breaking it more.
We would have called this a telephone network, but we had to give up on it since its security was obviously so flawed. Thankfully that guy on Slashdot saved us all that wasted infrastructure money. Nothing good would have come of it anyway.
Can't you just ventilate by gently compressing the diaphragm anyways? People who are unconcious don't need a huge volume of oxygen to survive. Watch your breathing as you're falling asleep sometime. It's extremely shallow, or at least is for me, but I run a lot.
Dude, it's a troll. I bet he's laughing that you take him so seriously.
Try Coke Zero if you want to drink cola. I love the stuff.
His lucky is what, now?
Well, you just covered all the possibilities in a single sentence, and effectively said nothing.
I'd like to see accellerometers fitted to adults in the same way as with children. Then we can make a real comparison.
Yes, apparently. People come to Slashdot, post comments under science stories, and don't even know the definition of a standing wave, phase vs group velocity, wave vs particle velocity, etc... It's really disheartening.
Yes, apostrophes are definitely fair game.
This goes beyond idiocy... This is blatant pandering to the cattle lobby at the expense of our health. Everyone of us who might one day get MRSA, or flesh-eating disease...
Any increased use of these drugs, especially on bacteria present in the food supply, is asking for disaster. When a federal agency start making bad decisions for corporate lobbyists that will cost real lives, it's time for heads to roll.