I generally have plenty of other things to do than to get too involved in politics, but when the topic comes up, I take a passing interest, so who were the other two. I could try to do a search on it, but there's probably too much noise on the Trump/Russia front.
I ask for proof that participation trophies are the problem and you send me links to search results of books written by people in order to virtue signal?
This isn't some role-playing game. Being drunk isn't the issue. I don't think most people put being drunk enough to get yourself into a situation where you are catching a ride with a person too drunk to drive thus putting yourself at risk anywhere near as bad a decision as being a person driving while being too drunk to drive and thus putting anyone you encounter while driving at risk.
Or maybe your issue is with English. The acceleration of the rocket as I would have interpreted it isn't the thrust of the rocket engine but 2m/s^2 net acceleration above the 9.8
There are such things as leprechauns and unicorns, by very common usage of the English language. There is no such things as them according to the way you are choosing to use them. To the best of my knowledge, there are software patents according to the way the term was being used until you chimed in.
That's not what was said. I didn't read that the police report said that was what happened. What I read was that the father claimed she probably swerved to avoid a vehicle going the wrong way. I didn't even read that the police report said that acceleration one way or the other was even a factor.
I've read through a number of recent patents in a variety of areas and the problem wasn't that they used terms that were too technical, but words that were too vague for anything whatsoever to be constructed from them. They shouldn't have been granted, but the legal requirements for a valid patent isn't the problem, but that law means nothing these days... and not just patent law.
I recently left MetroPCS because it is impossible to get to a customer service representative and they refused to do anything about a malfunctioning phone.
Unless I see an explanation of the metric. the metric is generally worthless. Most metrics i see are generally worthless. Having an explanation does not guarantee that a metric isn't worthless, but it is a requrement.
For who, some person as unknown to you and me as any other random person. Why? Entertainment. But "a simulation" actually says nothing about the contents of the universe, so any universe that isn't a simulation is indistinguishable from any universe that is. But since there is likely people that can treat any universe as something they can do whatever they like with, they are all effectively simulations.
And your problem with this is? From what I've been able to figure out, there is no universe that is not what can be called a simulation. Within those universes there are systems that work better than others in some area of performance. Augmenting the performance areas of systems with performance shortcomings makes sense. Your argument is like saying it doesn't make sense to use BSP trees in simulations because they enhance performance.
I don't see the evidence that theory is the correct one out of other theories. There's too many other potential outcomes for being given trophies that that theory doesn't explain. For example, why don't they reach the conclusion, like I did, that trophies are essentially worthless.
Slashdot Mirror
Rich people think that not rich people aren't competent or else they'd be rich.
You don't run a con with a dishonest face.
It is now nearly impossible to apply laws unless a person in power feels like it. Nobody knows what most of them even are!
I generally have plenty of other things to do than to get too involved in politics, but when the topic comes up, I take a passing interest, so who were the other two. I could try to do a search on it, but there's probably too much noise on the Trump/Russia front.
To me governments in general are minor figures of no importance.
Having nothing to hide and what one desires to do about undue pressure are two different things.
He is free to blame whoever he wants. That doesn't mean he is free to win money from Tesla at trial though.
Okay, so what's the moral principle involved?
I ask for proof that participation trophies are the problem and you send me links to search results of books written by people in order to virtue signal?
This isn't some role-playing game. Being drunk isn't the issue. I don't think most people put being drunk enough to get yourself into a situation where you are catching a ride with a person too drunk to drive thus putting yourself at risk anywhere near as bad a decision as being a person driving while being too drunk to drive and thus putting anyone you encounter while driving at risk.
maybe physics isn't your strong suit. Net acceleration is still within its frame of reference.
Or maybe your issue is with English. The acceleration of the rocket as I would have interpreted it isn't the thrust of the rocket engine but 2m/s^2 net acceleration above the 9.8
There are such things as leprechauns and unicorns, by very common usage of the English language. There is no such things as them according to the way you are choosing to use them. To the best of my knowledge, there are software patents according to the way the term was being used until you chimed in.
That's not what was said. I didn't read that the police report said that was what happened. What I read was that the father claimed she probably swerved to avoid a vehicle going the wrong way. I didn't even read that the police report said that acceleration one way or the other was even a factor.
No true Scotsman's what I hear whenever I read "There's no such thing as a...
I've read through a number of recent patents in a variety of areas and the problem wasn't that they used terms that were too technical, but words that were too vague for anything whatsoever to be constructed from them. They shouldn't have been granted, but the legal requirements for a valid patent isn't the problem, but that law means nothing these days... and not just patent law.
How does any of this make Google stupid? It's just attitude that gives the impression that anything even actually went wrong.
I recently left MetroPCS because it is impossible to get to a customer service representative and they refused to do anything about a malfunctioning phone.
Your comment is a non sequitur to the one you are replying to.
Unless I see an explanation of the metric. the metric is generally worthless. Most metrics i see are generally worthless. Having an explanation does not guarantee that a metric isn't worthless, but it is a requrement.
For who, some person as unknown to you and me as any other random person. Why? Entertainment. But "a simulation" actually says nothing about the contents of the universe, so any universe that isn't a simulation is indistinguishable from any universe that is. But since there is likely people that can treat any universe as something they can do whatever they like with, they are all effectively simulations.
Two stories I read long ago are "Computer Friendly" by Eileen Gunn, and "Echea" by Kristine Kathryn Rusch.
I often wonder what would happen if we removed all barriers to greed.
And your problem with this is? From what I've been able to figure out, there is no universe that is not what can be called a simulation. Within those universes there are systems that work better than others in some area of performance. Augmenting the performance areas of systems with performance shortcomings makes sense. Your argument is like saying it doesn't make sense to use BSP trees in simulations because they enhance performance.
I don't see the evidence that theory is the correct one out of other theories. There's too many other potential outcomes for being given trophies that that theory doesn't explain. For example, why don't they reach the conclusion, like I did, that trophies are essentially worthless.