"shitposting" (wow, that's objective) and spreading, "inflammatory memes"? Oh noes! Someone sounds butthurt. It's not like Democrats haven't done this for ages, basically having the majority of college age youth on their side.
Ideally, neither party would do it, but neither one is going to quit while the other one does it. They lecture about how dangerous Trump is, or would be, but any self-justified fascist calling for censorship is far more dangerous.
Experts such as physiologists who know a fuck ton more than you do.
LOL.. What the fuck would a physiologist know about psychology or behaviorism? And you're suggesting I'm the one who's stupid?
That's a convincing way to cite your claims.
And you're a fucking asshole who should be waterboarded so you know what you're talking about...
Then you can apologize over and over and over about how sorry and wrong you were.
Oh, I see.. Let's be nice to the truly evil people, discomfort = torture = wrong. But make *me* mad and suddenly I call for waterboarding, and start using insults like an angry child.
I hope, for your sake, you're a troll, "FlyHelicopters", because otherwise you've got a mental illness. Thanks for wasting my time, in either case.
What experts are those? And if you're talking about solitary confinement, okay, sort of, for prolonged periods. But the vast majority of the prison population aren't in the cells all day though, or in SC. They already get gym time, television, a library, and other amenities.
You believe treating bad people who violently hurt other people for wanton reasons (like greed or hate) will stop being violent because you treat them with kid gloves? That it won't actually increase crime because the sentence is basically a reward? You're not going to ween people off of violence by catering and bowing to them, because it's an ingrained part of human nature, more so for some people than others. Your newfound innocence is charming but I'm afraid dangerously naive.
Wait, who said anything about torturing? that's your definition. I think jail is a logical and self preserving reaction, most of these people are dangerous (I wasn't referring to say, simple drug offenders, but rapists and murderers) and will hurt more people unless they are removed from society; further, there is no justification to *reward* their awful and anti-social behavior with a carefree, happy, simple, meals and board paid life on a farm somewhere. That's better than most good people have it. Personal responsibility requires consequences for one's actions. Do bad acts *without justification or defensible provocation*, bad things happen to you.
He never once said anything about race, so you've just provided the perfect example of how the media and the "never-trumps" paraphrase, exaggerate, and lie to change the narrative. He's talking about terror profiling: that would include a whole slew of behaviors, markers and properties.
On top of that, only an idiot would still think all islamic terrorists = arabic or persian and that it's about race. Adam Ghadan is perfect example: he was Californian born, son of a jewish doctor, quite "white", and joined Al Qaida. He would've matched the profile. You have Islamic radicals from the Philippines and elsewhere in Asia, as well, and from every hemisphere of the planet.
Even if the person does horrible things, that is now how you treat humans, or you're no better than them...
Maybe you can't let them go free, but you could have prison farms and communities made up of such people where they have an area to build a home, farm food, and have a life away from the rest of us...
False, if you're talking about violent criminals. People who brutally hurt innocent victims have nothing like a moral equivalence to a system which punishes said people. With this logic, punishment itself becomes intrinsically "wrong", because it makes us "as bad" as them. Next they'll argue that separating these poor bastards from the rest of society is cruel.
I don't agree with him but I think I get what's he's trying to say: that NASA doesn't appear to be developing any special tech or sensors to detect signs of life, and putting it on their rovers, so continuing to send them ill-equipped is costing money; but he's not sure what tech you *would* need but figures NASA should have a better idea.
He's missing the fact that many of the devices, e.g. the spectrometers on the rovers, should be able to detect signs of life -present or past- if it just ran across some. Or at least organic compounds.
I can't recall any of those. I was 5 when TOS first aired in '67. I do remember my older sister recording episodes on a small reel to reel tape recorder though (audio only, of course); the precursor to the VCR. She had a huge crush on Kirk.
So 80% of your words had to go to the lookup table then:D
English has more exceptions than rules. (put, putt; boot, book; school, scissors.. you get the gist). That must've been a tedious but interesting project.
Yes, surely all those people the cops shot were innocent victims that weren't going for the cop's weapon, or didn't already had one of their own and weren't threatening them or anyone else in any way, or weren't resisting arrest, or any combination of the above.
OTOH, I agree the suit against Twitter holds no water, it smacks of desperation.
It's quite possible (not to mention depressing) that we're in the diminishing returns phase regarding our knowledge of the laws of physics, our understanding of the nature of reality, and our technological development.
OTOH, maybe there's still something major in physics we still haven't discovered; applied science is based on the knowledge learned from natural science, so there's still a possibility we could do these things some day. It seems a bit arrogant to believe we've discovered everything significant by now, and then again, I doubt that there are an infinite number of laws to physics to discover. Dark matter, dark energy, and a possible 5th force of nature do hint that we're not done yet though. I'll take an agnostic approach. History is full of naysayers, but also, realists.
True, but referring strictly to the psychological component, where the crew member said he was confident they could do it, he also had in the back of his head that he wasn't really trapped on a spaceship or planet whose atmosphere -or lack of one- would kill him dead in minutes, so the stress isn't exactly the same. Still, agreed it's a good, necessary step.
He said "Rockefeller".
But do go on with your rant, even though your mention of a different (but strangely rather specific) era is non-sequitur. Nobody was saying this is the worst era ever. And actually, if anyone would suggest that, it'd likely be the left, not the right; they're ashamed of the US, everything is horrible, they cite inequality, sexism, racism, homophobia, islamophobia, "christian oppression", wars, joblessness, loss of rights, loss of privacy, etc.. like that stuff hasn't existed in some form all throughout history in greater degrees.
Not entirely fair to compare to modern day devices, but I had a lot of those same issues with a Galaxy S1, which was utterly horrible, and my 2012 Nexus 7 became more and more bogged down over each upgrade. With Jellybean, it's about useless, forget having more than one app open at a time. (though since putting Cyanogen mod on it, it's much more like it's original self).
Not that I think Apple is the end all be all either. But for personal use I use an iPhone because it does seem snappier; I want a phone above all else, the smart features are great but if lags or reboots while trying to place a call while I'm stranded in my car somewhere, it's not worth it. I don't really want a portable computer more than I want a solid phone. That also being said, I have an S4 now for a work phone, and though it has minor quirkiness here and there, it's miles and miles better than that old S1 I had, and seems pretty reliable.
Really, as someone who grew up in the late 60s and early 70s, all these gadgets are kind of amazing to see realized. They're like one of the few future predictions that really came true.
Slashdot Mirror
Hillary will be as dangerous as Trump with the nuke codes. Which is to say, neither is going to use them.
Great, my fingers aren't working today, typos out the yin-yang.
"shitposting" (wow, that's objective) and spreading, "inflammatory memes"? Oh noes! Someone sounds butthurt. It's not like Democrats haven't done this for ages, basically having the majority of college age youth on their side.
Ideally, neither party would do it, but neither one is going to quit while the other one does it. They lecture about how dangerous Trump is, or would be, but any self-justified fascist calling for censorship is far more dangerous.
Experts such as physiologists who know a fuck ton more than you do.
LOL.. What the fuck would a physiologist know about psychology or behaviorism? And you're suggesting I'm the one who's stupid?
That's a convincing way to cite your claims.
And you're a fucking asshole who should be waterboarded so you know what you're talking about...
Then you can apologize over and over and over about how sorry and wrong you were.
Oh, I see.. Let's be nice to the truly evil people, discomfort = torture = wrong. But make *me* mad and suddenly I call for waterboarding, and start using insults like an angry child.
I hope, for your sake, you're a troll, "FlyHelicopters", because otherwise you've got a mental illness. Thanks for wasting my time, in either case.
What experts are those? And if you're talking about solitary confinement, okay, sort of, for prolonged periods. But the vast majority of the prison population aren't in the cells all day though, or in SC. They already get gym time, television, a library, and other amenities.
You believe treating bad people who violently hurt other people for wanton reasons (like greed or hate) will stop being violent because you treat them with kid gloves? That it won't actually increase crime because the sentence is basically a reward? You're not going to ween people off of violence by catering and bowing to them, because it's an ingrained part of human nature, more so for some people than others. Your newfound innocence is charming but I'm afraid dangerously naive.
Wait, who said anything about torturing? that's your definition. I think jail is a logical and self preserving reaction, most of these people are dangerous (I wasn't referring to say, simple drug offenders, but rapists and murderers) and will hurt more people unless they are removed from society; further, there is no justification to *reward* their awful and anti-social behavior with a carefree, happy, simple, meals and board paid life on a farm somewhere. That's better than most good people have it. Personal responsibility requires consequences for one's actions. Do bad acts *without justification or defensible provocation*, bad things happen to you.
He never once said anything about race, so you've just provided the perfect example of how the media and the "never-trumps" paraphrase, exaggerate, and lie to change the narrative. He's talking about terror profiling: that would include a whole slew of behaviors, markers and properties.
On top of that, only an idiot would still think all islamic terrorists = arabic or persian and that it's about race. Adam Ghadan is perfect example: he was Californian born, son of a jewish doctor, quite "white", and joined Al Qaida. He would've matched the profile. You have Islamic radicals from the Philippines and elsewhere in Asia, as well, and from every hemisphere of the planet.
Why? We already have Hillary.
Even if the person does horrible things, that is now how you treat humans, or you're no better than them...
Maybe you can't let them go free, but you could have prison farms and communities made up of such people where they have an area to build a home, farm food, and have a life away from the rest of us...
False, if you're talking about violent criminals. People who brutally hurt innocent victims have nothing like a moral equivalence to a system which punishes said people. With this logic, punishment itself becomes intrinsically "wrong", because it makes us "as bad" as them. Next they'll argue that separating these poor bastards from the rest of society is cruel.
I don't agree with him but I think I get what's he's trying to say: that NASA doesn't appear to be developing any special tech or sensors to detect signs of life, and putting it on their rovers, so continuing to send them ill-equipped is costing money; but he's not sure what tech you *would* need but figures NASA should have a better idea.
He's missing the fact that many of the devices, e.g. the spectrometers on the rovers, should be able to detect signs of life -present or past- if it just ran across some. Or at least organic compounds.
Thank you for making my day
No, we have Wells Fargo, and turned that shit off. My wife pays the bills online, but manually.
Same here.
I can't recall any of those. I was 5 when TOS first aired in '67. I do remember my older sister recording episodes on a small reel to reel tape recorder though (audio only, of course); the precursor to the VCR. She had a huge crush on Kirk.
So 80% of your words had to go to the lookup table then :D
English has more exceptions than rules. (put, putt; boot, book; school, scissors.. you get the gist). That must've been a tedious but interesting project.
Kaddafi was a bit different during Reagan's era, he was more pro-terrorist. He had calmed down some since then.
"..if you pull the trigger" Yes, the gun will *react* to human direction, but it doesn't do anything all on its own.
Yes, surely all those people the cops shot were innocent victims that weren't going for the cop's weapon, or didn't already had one of their own and weren't threatening them or anyone else in any way, or weren't resisting arrest, or any combination of the above.
OTOH, I agree the suit against Twitter holds no water, it smacks of desperation.
Better Lukoil next time.
These puns are getting so sickening I'm gonna need a TEXACOlogy test.
It's quite possible (not to mention depressing) that we're in the diminishing returns phase regarding our knowledge of the laws of physics, our understanding of the nature of reality, and our technological development.
OTOH, maybe there's still something major in physics we still haven't discovered; applied science is based on the knowledge learned from natural science, so there's still a possibility we could do these things some day. It seems a bit arrogant to believe we've discovered everything significant by now, and then again, I doubt that there are an infinite number of laws to physics to discover. Dark matter, dark energy, and a possible 5th force of nature do hint that we're not done yet though. I'll take an agnostic approach. History is full of naysayers, but also, realists.
Don't get catty, now.
(was that too direct?)
I think the cheese and tuna would probably suffice though. Now you know why they really wore the suits so much of the time.
True, but referring strictly to the psychological component, where the crew member said he was confident they could do it, he also had in the back of his head that he wasn't really trapped on a spaceship or planet whose atmosphere -or lack of one- would kill him dead in minutes, so the stress isn't exactly the same. Still, agreed it's a good, necessary step.
He said "Rockefeller".
But do go on with your rant, even though your mention of a different (but strangely rather specific) era is non-sequitur. Nobody was saying this is the worst era ever. And actually, if anyone would suggest that, it'd likely be the left, not the right; they're ashamed of the US, everything is horrible, they cite inequality, sexism, racism, homophobia, islamophobia, "christian oppression", wars, joblessness, loss of rights, loss of privacy, etc.. like that stuff hasn't existed in some form all throughout history in greater degrees.
Not entirely fair to compare to modern day devices, but I had a lot of those same issues with a Galaxy S1, which was utterly horrible, and my 2012 Nexus 7 became more and more bogged down over each upgrade. With Jellybean, it's about useless, forget having more than one app open at a time. (though since putting Cyanogen mod on it, it's much more like it's original self).
Not that I think Apple is the end all be all either. But for personal use I use an iPhone because it does seem snappier; I want a phone above all else, the smart features are great but if lags or reboots while trying to place a call while I'm stranded in my car somewhere, it's not worth it. I don't really want a portable computer more than I want a solid phone. That also being said, I have an S4 now for a work phone, and though it has minor quirkiness here and there, it's miles and miles better than that old S1 I had, and seems pretty reliable.
Really, as someone who grew up in the late 60s and early 70s, all these gadgets are kind of amazing to see realized. They're like one of the few future predictions that really came true.