You know leaning to one side with one leg up on the ottoman.
As a prelude to the 'one cheek sneak'.
When the bot gets fed up...
on
Robocoaster
·
· Score: 2
...with the pedestrian task of waving humans around at the end of its arm, it will simply extend the motion a little, and bash you repeatedly on the floor.
a nice party (as usual) w/ valet parking.
Oh...and some companies ARE giving bonuses. Our fiscal year ends in March, so Apr 1 will deliver a 6% bonus. The irony of it being April Fool's day is not lost on the bosses.
www.mtbr.com for instance. (Mountain bikes and parts user reviews)
Very few reviews are "If *I* bought it, it must be good" and conversely
"I don't want anyone to think I'm a weenie for spending money on crap"
Add in the flush of newuseritis, and you get overly high ratings across the board.
Useful info CAN be gleaned from these things though. Look for a consistent small problem in the reviews for a particlar product. If everyone says they don't like one particular aspect of the product, you might not either. Even if they gave it a 5 star rating.
So, how many motorcyclists will die a preventable death before the DOT gets off its ass and allows these.
Or, how many would be injured or die due to use of a "safety" device not properly tested and evaluated, which may introduce other, more serious problems. Even though "It seemed like a good idea at the time".
These things may be the best prevention device going. Or, they may compound the problems in a crash. Causing the rider to tumble instead of slide, inadvertant activations, too much force resulting in broken ribs, compatibility with other user worn articles (backpacks, etc), and on and on.
Just because it looks like a good idea doesn't mean it is a good idea.
So in answer to a previous post, can a US company be sued in Saudi Arabia for publishing pornography on the internet? No, so long as that company has no presence in Saudi Arabia. However if a US company with a branch in Saudi Arabia publishes pornography then yes, because they have assets which are under the jurisdiction of the Saudi court.
Then quite a lot of western based clothing companies are theoretically treading on thin ice. Pornography, in Saudi, is not merely naked bodies. Bikini clad women count as well. So any clothing company that has a Saudi presence (and quite a lot do), and also makes/sells bikinis and probably has a catalog or ads depicting such, is, according to your statement, in danger of being sued by a Saudi court. Even if they do not export those particular items to Saudi Arabia.
So, the solution would seem to be either a) pander to the most restrictive countries on the planet, or b) do not sell goods anywhere but your own country.
I prefer C) this suit is a bunch of BS.
On the off chance that you are not totally stupid, and the "third amendment" is merely an honest mistake for the "second amendment":
How bout some facts to back up your thoughts?
Removing guns from lawful, responsible people does nothing to keep them out of the hands of actual criminals. By definition, being criminals, they will not surrender the firearms in their posession. So they they have them, and no one else does.
Not a good concept for self protection. And the police being what they are, they cannot be everywhere at once.
A firearm in the hands (or closet) of a lawful, responsible person is no threat to you, if you do not break into his home or otherwise attack him.
Would you, as a presumably anti-gun person, be willing to put a sign in your front yard "This house is gun free!" ?
If not, you are reaping the benefits of allowing guns in the hands of lawful citizens. The crimnals do not know which household may or may not have a gun inside, and so may be less inclined to break in. You may not own one, but no one knows that but you.
Faced with an increasingly difficult challenge in raising both average revenue per user (ARPU) and numbers of subscribers,
whoa...hold the phone here. MUST it be both?
Why not: (Good service + small fee per subscriber) * large # of subscribers = PROFIT.
Probably they just want to get as much as possible before the inevitable shredding party, SEC investigation, the jailing of the scape goats, the private island for the honchos, annd the abandonment of the public.
Charging for email is NOT the solution.
1. Even at a threshold of 1000. So he breaks up his sending into lumps of 999.
2. You then screw all the listservs, hobby groups, non-profits, etc, etc.
3. Junk snailmail costs, and you still get that, right?
4. So it costs. Cut down his profit by 50%, and he STILL makes money. And sends out twice as many.
5. He hijacks some unsuspecting user, and uses THEIR act to send it. THEY get the bill.
No. The answer is...get him on something else. Deceptive marketing, tax evasion, misuse of telephone services.
But charging for email screws US, not him.
This is the reason why you should not keep your will in your safety deposit box.
There is usually a provision for 'Will discovery'. One family member, usually the proposed executor/administrator, is allowed to go into the box to look for and retrieve the will. Life insurance policies as well. Nothing else may be removed, though, until after probate.
IANAL, but I just had to go through this procedure.
To ensure safety, Smith and Venter said the cell will be deliberately hobbled to render it incapable of infecting people; it also will be strictly confined, and designed to die if it does manage to escape into the environment.
hmmm...where have I heard this before? Something to do with female dinosaurs and frog DNA.
We built a checklist for our flight operations, which was a very good idea. Going through it before setting off caught several things we almost forgot.
Except the one thing that you did forget.
Haing a checklist is one thing. Having a complete checklist is evidently something else.
Slashdot Mirror
Amazingly close to der Moron.
You know leaning to one side with one leg up on the ottoman.
As a prelude to the 'one cheek sneak'.
...with the pedestrian task of waving humans around at the end of its arm, it will simply extend the motion a little, and bash you repeatedly on the floor.
A couple of things we'll be trying is a longer cord (PS/2 extension cable), and a pinhole video camera velcroed to the bottom, pointing straight down.
Vectron Blackhawk
UFO-like semi-remote (wired) flying thingy. Before I wrapped it for my son, I HAD to try it out. Hard to fly initially, but very cool.
Not as simple as just the weight. Key words are "Weight and balance"
The C/G of the aircraft matter a whole lot. Removing 1000 lbs from the front affects it differently than the same 1000 lbs from the aft section.
Instead of the bobble, I'd rather the CEO just walk around and hand out a $10 bill each. Sounds like a marketing type came up with that idea.
a nice party (as usual) w/ valet parking.
Oh...and some companies ARE giving bonuses. Our fiscal year ends in March, so Apr 1 will deliver a 6% bonus. The irony of it being April Fool's day is not lost on the bosses.
www.mtbr.com for instance. (Mountain bikes and parts user reviews)
Very few reviews are "If *I* bought it, it must be good"
and conversely
"I don't want anyone to think I'm a weenie for spending money on crap"
Add in the flush of newuseritis, and you get overly high ratings across the board.
Useful info CAN be gleaned from these things though. Look for a consistent small problem in the reviews for a particlar product. If everyone says they don't like one particular aspect of the product, you might not either. Even if they gave it a 5 star rating.
Eddie Bauer
Kathy Ireland
Martha Stweart
Tommy whatshisname
Ad infinitum
Celebrity connection sells. Real signature or just a logo.
And retailing at $10k, it's not unusual that we haven't heard more about it.
but at least with these riders have a choice of buying them or not.
So far. Just like there used to be a choice with helmets.
They've already done extensive testing for situations a rider might encounter.
And any manufacturer will do their own testing, and tell you the product is GREAT.
Me, I prefer some independant testing.
So, how many motorcyclists will die a preventable death before the DOT gets off its ass and allows these.
Or, how many would be injured or die due to use of a "safety" device not properly tested and evaluated, which may introduce other, more serious problems. Even though "It seemed like a good idea at the time".
These things may be the best prevention device going. Or, they may compound the problems in a crash. Causing the rider to tumble instead of slide, inadvertant activations, too much force resulting in broken ribs, compatibility with other user worn articles (backpacks, etc), and on and on.
Just because it looks like a good idea doesn't mean it is a good idea.
So in answer to a previous post, can a US company be sued in Saudi Arabia for publishing pornography on the internet? No, so long as that company has no presence in Saudi Arabia. However if a US company with a branch in Saudi Arabia publishes pornography then yes, because they have assets which are under the jurisdiction of the Saudi court.
Then quite a lot of western based clothing companies are theoretically treading on thin ice. Pornography, in Saudi, is not merely naked bodies. Bikini clad women count as well. So any clothing company that has a Saudi presence (and quite a lot do), and also makes/sells bikinis and probably has a catalog or ads depicting such, is, according to your statement, in danger of being sued by a Saudi court. Even if they do not export those particular items to Saudi Arabia.
So, the solution would seem to be either a) pander to the most restrictive countries on the planet, or b) do not sell goods anywhere but your own country.
I prefer C) this suit is a bunch of BS.
On the off chance that you are not totally stupid, and the "third amendment" is merely an honest mistake for the "second amendment":
How bout some facts to back up your thoughts?
Removing guns from lawful, responsible people does nothing to keep them out of the hands of actual criminals. By definition, being criminals, they will not surrender the firearms in their posession. So they they have them, and no one else does.
Not a good concept for self protection. And the police being what they are, they cannot be everywhere at once.
A firearm in the hands (or closet) of a lawful, responsible person is no threat to you, if you do not break into his home or otherwise attack him.
Would you, as a presumably anti-gun person, be willing to put a sign in your front yard "This house is gun free!" ?
If not, you are reaping the benefits of allowing guns in the hands of lawful citizens. The crimnals do not know which household may or may not have a gun inside, and so may be less inclined to break in. You may not own one, but no one knows that but you.
Faced with an increasingly difficult challenge in raising both average revenue per user (ARPU) and numbers of subscribers,
whoa...hold the phone here. MUST it be both?
Why not:
(Good service + small fee per subscriber) * large # of subscribers = PROFIT.
Probably they just want to get as much as possible before the inevitable shredding party, SEC investigation, the jailing of the scape goats, the private island for the honchos, annd the abandonment of the public.
Screw long term growth. Get it now.
Except for possibly "how about some solid bugfree code.", everything you've described is part of the Win2000 GUI.
how many of you have done anything to alert your representatives about the madness of a unilateral attack by the US on Iraq?
How about we just have them wait until there is another large scale attack? Maybe in your city.
No, no, no, no. Oh...did I say NO.
Charging for email is NOT the solution.
1. Even at a threshold of 1000. So he breaks up his sending into lumps of 999.
2. You then screw all the listservs, hobby groups, non-profits, etc, etc.
3. Junk snailmail costs, and you still get that, right?
4. So it costs. Cut down his profit by 50%, and he STILL makes money. And sends out twice as many.
5. He hijacks some unsuspecting user, and uses THEIR act to send it. THEY get the bill.
No. The answer is...get him on something else. Deceptive marketing, tax evasion, misuse of telephone services.
But charging for email screws US, not him.
This is the reason why you should not keep your will in your safety deposit box.
There is usually a provision for 'Will discovery'. One family member, usually the proposed executor/administrator, is allowed to go into the box to look for and retrieve the will. Life insurance policies as well. Nothing else may be removed, though, until after probate.
IANAL, but I just had to go through this procedure.
To ensure safety, Smith and Venter said the cell will be deliberately hobbled to render it incapable of infecting people; it also will be strictly confined, and designed to die if it does manage to escape into the environment.
hmmm...where have I heard this before? Something to do with female dinosaurs and frog DNA.
We built a checklist for our flight operations, which was a very good idea. Going through it before setting off caught several things we almost forgot.
Except the one thing that you did forget.
Haing a checklist is one thing. Having a complete checklist is evidently something else.
This is what happens when you miss the timing on a rocketjump.
TIA is cool, and will probably be a very helpful tool,...
No, the real concept is, the government has no business tracking what books I buy!