And right there you've proven his point. Really? Buying a girl from her father against her wish is ok, as long as you don't resell her? That's like a marriage, because you're stuck with her for eternity, huh?
It's like marriage in the majority of places and times throughout history, regardless of culture or religion. Sad but true.
The other alternative is not sending their girls to school at all. Since the alternative you provide is offensive to many of them, if they must choose they will choose the option the Taliban is trying to force them to choose.
Just because they're not extremists doesn't mean they've fully embraced women's lib, as I tried to explain in the other post.
Because our faith-powered rockets keep failing! I blame Joseph. He's seemed pretty doubtful that it could work, with his fancy-schmancy physics degree. His lack of faith is disturbing our rocket!
which is really no different than any of the republican candidates when it comes down to what will get done.
That makes sense if you don't consider defending DOMA, or seeking to have it brought under judicial review for constitutionality, to be getting anything done.
They may both say "it should be left to the states" which is true, strictly speaking. Yet they differ in the federal government's role in this decision -- specifically, whether states should be required to respect another state's decision to allow gays to marry, and whether federal employees can receive benefits tied to marriage.
This would alienate many of those who are willing to accept girls going to school in the first place. It would be somewhat analogous to trying to solve the problem people had with blacks receiving an education at all in the Reconstruction era by forcing integration 80 years early. In trying to stymie your foes, you've only succeeded in multiplying them.
Basically, the situation is more complicated than complete backward asshats willing to poison girls just to punish them for trying to become educated, and equality-of-sexes feminists.
Uh I don't think you get the import. This wasn't an attack against random women, it was an attack against women seeking an education. They are aware that they need women. They would rather those women stay at home and spit out then take care of sons rather than seek to better themselves.
The message is: Women who seek to become educated will be targeted with violence. Remain at home, weak, ignorant, and dependent. Then there will be slightly less^W^W no violence.
Naw, disingenuous. They're framing the usual BS anti-AGW arguments like "they didn't consider alternative explanations" (monumentally false) with a flimsy rhetorical device to make it sound like they're just bemoaning the current state of things which just happens to be the fault of the scientists...
Absurd and silly are synonyms. There may be a specific definition/connotation of absurd you are referring to where this is not the case, but nevertheless.
Assuming that they radiate equally in all directions.
No, assuming a non-zero divergence, which is everything because even the most highly collimated laser beam experiences diffraction. Whether your radiation is best described as a sphere or a cone, you're subject to the inverse-square law.
Nevertheless good post, and indeed wireless power is possible -- but I think it will remain limited to either low power applications which are more a feature of the modern world than Tesla's, or very specific applications where high-power laser power transmission is feasible. Tesla's dream of every home powered wirelessly is probably not going to come to pass.
Yeah, and CPU SIMD instruction sets include approximation instructions for inverse and inverse square root.
My question is whether they have controlled for where the error occurs. The nice thing about approximations is that you know what the error is. If you can have bit errors anywhere including the MSB then you're going to be limited to situations where you don't actually care about the answer in which case it's more energy efficient to just not do it for a savings of 100%.:P
I'm guessing that's part of why they only get 15% -- because they can only be sloppy in certain parts of the circuits.
So yeah, UK weirdness aside, Svalbad and Taiwain are the only ones that break the "rule"? That's odd. Is there some dispute about Svalbad or something? Or is Google just being weird?
The "Alaska" font is smaller than the "Canada" font however.
Yes it's the same font as used for every other state or province (or territory ala Puerto Rico). It is not an example of what the GP was talking about.
Svalbard is also a region
This is much more interesting. Svarlbard is part of the Kingdom of Norway. This made me wonder about Ireland, part of the UK, but also given the same font. China's provinces -- including the island of Hainan -- don't use that font, only Taiwan.
But still, it seems the separation isn't clear-cut and you can't infer Google's opinion nationhood in some edge-cases which I'm sure they consider a feature.
No, it's a "region". All the countries are "regions", but not all "regions" are necessarily countries.
Huh. So are there any "regions" which aren't "countries" according to people who don't have a vested political interest in them not being countries, or is this literally a "Let's make China happy" weasel?
Um, you can look at Google Maps yourself and see that I'm telling the truth. Or you could try to justify your baseless claim by using poetic verbiage. Which would be more adult?
When I look at it in Google Maps, I actually see the localized Chinese label, so I don't know what it says. But it doesn't look like a country label - it's slightly bolded, and larger than other labels, but e.g. Hong Kong is labelled in exact same font size/weight.
Then it's localized to also not be a country (or just more confusing with Chinese characters). On my Google Maps it's the exact same font as everything that is a country and nothing that isn't. It is very clear that it is treated as a country.
or otherwise state or imply that it's a sovereign country.
Which, as I should have clarified, is exactly what they've done. Taiwan is labeled as an independent country. Contrast with Puerto Rico or any of the islands that make up the Philippines to see the difference.
Since I'm assuming it doesn't outdo Hal in terms of actual sentient intelligence, is it safe to guess that the "Ultra" comes from being less likely to try to murder you?
Or is it that it is ultra likely to try to murder you?
I had to check and sure enough the Persian Gulf isn't labeled. So I did the obvious thing and scrolled over to China and saw that Taiwan was labeled Taiwan.
As far as geopolitics go, I think keeping China happy by not provoking them on the Taiwan issue is far more important than ticking off Iran by not labeling the Persian Gulf.
I couldn't even fathom why this was an issue, but google brought up this link about a naming dispute which Iran apparently takes quite seriously. So, if the goal was to piss off and humiliate Iran, wouldn't Google have labeled it the Arabian Gulf?
Yes, now re-read the headline making sure to remember that everyone knows what you just said, and instead of being a twat who sees something that interpreted one way doesn't make sense and then jumps into the comments to complain, re-interpret in a way that does make sense (i.e. as "premature death from the factors listed in the summary") like every human does automatically without even having to consciously think about it who isn't a Slashdot Pedantard.
Slashdot Mirror
And right there you've proven his point. Really? Buying a girl from her father against her wish is ok, as long as you don't resell her? That's like a marriage, because you're stuck with her for eternity, huh?
It's like marriage in the majority of places and times throughout history, regardless of culture or religion. Sad but true.
The other alternative is not sending their girls to school at all. Since the alternative you provide is offensive to many of them, if they must choose they will choose the option the Taliban is trying to force them to choose.
Just because they're not extremists doesn't mean they've fully embraced women's lib, as I tried to explain in the other post.
How exactly is it more complicated?
By people who fall into neither group, as I just finished explaining.
Why don't you get off our planet?
Because our faith-powered rockets keep failing! I blame Joseph. He's seemed pretty doubtful that it could work, with his fancy-schmancy physics degree. His lack of faith is disturbing our rocket!
which is really no different than any of the republican candidates when it comes down to what will get done.
That makes sense if you don't consider defending DOMA, or seeking to have it brought under judicial review for constitutionality, to be getting anything done.
They may both say "it should be left to the states" which is true, strictly speaking. Yet they differ in the federal government's role in this decision -- specifically, whether states should be required to respect another state's decision to allow gays to marry, and whether federal employees can receive benefits tied to marriage.
Make the schools coeducated.
This would alienate many of those who are willing to accept girls going to school in the first place. It would be somewhat analogous to trying to solve the problem people had with blacks receiving an education at all in the Reconstruction era by forcing integration 80 years early. In trying to stymie your foes, you've only succeeded in multiplying them.
Basically, the situation is more complicated than complete backward asshats willing to poison girls just to punish them for trying to become educated, and equality-of-sexes feminists.
Uh I don't think you get the import. This wasn't an attack against random women, it was an attack against women seeking an education. They are aware that they need women. They would rather those women stay at home and spit out then take care of sons rather than seek to better themselves.
The message is: Women who seek to become educated will be targeted with violence. Remain at home, weak, ignorant, and dependent. Then there will be slightly less^W^W no violence.
You're pretty naive.
Naw, disingenuous. They're framing the usual BS anti-AGW arguments like "they didn't consider alternative explanations" (monumentally false) with a flimsy rhetorical device to make it sound like they're just bemoaning the current state of things which just happens to be the fault of the scientists...
Absurd and silly are synonyms. There may be a specific definition/connotation of absurd you are referring to where this is not the case, but nevertheless.
Batman's head < Churk Norris' thighs
Assuming that they radiate equally in all directions.
No, assuming a non-zero divergence, which is everything because even the most highly collimated laser beam experiences diffraction. Whether your radiation is best described as a sphere or a cone, you're subject to the inverse-square law.
Nevertheless good post, and indeed wireless power is possible -- but I think it will remain limited to either low power applications which are more a feature of the modern world than Tesla's, or very specific applications where high-power laser power transmission is feasible. Tesla's dream of every home powered wirelessly is probably not going to come to pass.
More like:
"Hey, the horse has escaped! Quick, close the barn door!"
If we were going to penalize China for dumping and try to protect domestic solar industry, waiting until after Solyndra et. al. folded was kinda dumb.
Yeah, and CPU SIMD instruction sets include approximation instructions for inverse and inverse square root.
My question is whether they have controlled for where the error occurs. The nice thing about approximations is that you know what the error is. If you can have bit errors anywhere including the MSB then you're going to be limited to situations where you don't actually care about the answer in which case it's more energy efficient to just not do it for a savings of 100%. :P
I'm guessing that's part of why they only get 15% -- because they can only be sloppy in certain parts of the circuits.
Why, it didn't help the first time. :)
So yeah, UK weirdness aside, Svalbad and Taiwain are the only ones that break the "rule"? That's odd. Is there some dispute about Svalbad or something? Or is Google just being weird?
The "Alaska" font is smaller than the "Canada" font however.
Yes it's the same font as used for every other state or province (or territory ala Puerto Rico). It is not an example of what the GP was talking about.
Svalbard is also a region
This is much more interesting. Svarlbard is part of the Kingdom of Norway. This made me wonder about Ireland, part of the UK, but also given the same font. China's provinces -- including the island of Hainan -- don't use that font, only Taiwan.
But still, it seems the separation isn't clear-cut and you can't infer Google's opinion nationhood in some edge-cases which I'm sure they consider a feature.
Maybe step one would be asking your lawyer what "acts of god" means in a legal context...
I know, I know: whoosh.
This is exactly why we threw that tea in the harbor!
No, it's a "region". All the countries are "regions", but not all "regions" are necessarily countries.
Huh. So are there any "regions" which aren't "countries" according to people who don't have a vested political interest in them not being countries, or is this literally a "Let's make China happy" weasel?
Um, you can look at Google Maps yourself and see that I'm telling the truth. Or you could try to justify your baseless claim by using poetic verbiage. Which would be more adult?
When I look at it in Google Maps, I actually see the localized Chinese label, so I don't know what it says. But it doesn't look like a country label - it's slightly bolded, and larger than other labels, but e.g. Hong Kong is labelled in exact same font size/weight.
Then it's localized to also not be a country (or just more confusing with Chinese characters). On my Google Maps it's the exact same font as everything that is a country and nothing that isn't. It is very clear that it is treated as a country.
or otherwise state or imply that it's a sovereign country.
Which, as I should have clarified, is exactly what they've done. Taiwan is labeled as an independent country. Contrast with Puerto Rico or any of the islands that make up the Philippines to see the difference.
It's labeled as an independent country, which I assure you is the essence of the dispute.
my own Ultra Hal was disqualified
Since I'm assuming it doesn't outdo Hal in terms of actual sentient intelligence, is it safe to guess that the "Ultra" comes from being less likely to try to murder you?
Or is it that it is ultra likely to try to murder you?
I had to check and sure enough the Persian Gulf isn't labeled. So I did the obvious thing and scrolled over to China and saw that Taiwan was labeled Taiwan.
As far as geopolitics go, I think keeping China happy by not provoking them on the Taiwan issue is far more important than ticking off Iran by not labeling the Persian Gulf.
I couldn't even fathom why this was an issue, but google brought up this link about a naming dispute which Iran apparently takes quite seriously. So, if the goal was to piss off and humiliate Iran, wouldn't Google have labeled it the Arabian Gulf?
Everyone has a 100% of death
Yes, now re-read the headline making sure to remember that everyone knows what you just said, and instead of being a twat who sees something that interpreted one way doesn't make sense and then jumps into the comments to complain, re-interpret in a way that does make sense (i.e. as "premature death from the factors listed in the summary") like every human does automatically without even having to consciously think about it who isn't a Slashdot Pedantard.
Thank you and have a nice day.