It isn't five minutes. It's five minutes, plus five minutes, plus five minutes, plus five minutes, plus five minutes.....
And no, that's not what he would be teaching them. He'd be teaching them self control and forethought. But to understand that, my friend, would require you think beyond your preconceptions.
Most didn't but "Disagreements between crime lab practitioners and defense community representatives on the commission had reduced it to 'a think tank,' yielding few accomplishments and wasted tax dollars" did.
There are two concepts involved with divorce that render your first argument as invalid as you consider his: alimony and child support. Both of which, by the way, can change over time to reflect later greater earnings. (Oddly, rarely lesser earnings.)
How quaint that you actually trust government employees. Even those you elect. It's especially quaint given the historically ongoing reality that they've not shown themselves worthy of said trust.
No one is suggesting you have to look at it. You however, are suggesting that I should be prevented.
(*How well those representatives are actually looking out for us is outside the scope of this discussion)
No, it is exactly the point.
How, pray tell, are we citizens supposed to oversee our representatives if we're not allowed to view the data (throwing a sans in the direction of national security issues) they're making their decisions on?
Since *when* has being "hip" been an attribute, much less a desirable one, of a competent language? The only friggin' professionals who speak in those terms are marketers.
Chemical warfare against civilians is a breach of international law. Once they purposely forfeit that, one shouldn't expect they be treated as model world citizens. In other words: There are laws against assault. Those are ignored if you assault someone beating the shit out of a kid. The assailant in that case is not a "bad guy".
Slashdot Mirror
Another con: making a statement of personal opinion as if it were fact.
You were saying?...
needful ADJECTIVE
1: formal
necessary; requisite:
"a further word was needful"
synonyms: necessary - needed - required - requisite - essential - [more]
2: needy:
"she gave her money away to needful people"
Presumption. It's dependent on the project.
You
How in hell did you get to there?
It isn't five minutes. It's five minutes, plus five minutes, plus five minutes, plus five minutes, plus five minutes.....
And no, that's not what he would be teaching them. He'd be teaching them self control and forethought. But to understand that, my friend, would require you think beyond your preconceptions.
A backhand is the sign of a brute. You can easily shatter an kid's zygomatic arch with a knuckle. A measured spanking, while still physical, isn't.
His kids interrupt, taking time from his work. So your suggestion is that he spend even more time teaching them coding?
Most didn't but "Disagreements between crime lab practitioners and defense community representatives on the commission had reduced it to 'a think tank,' yielding few accomplishments and wasted tax dollars" did.
Said the AC troll being paid to post.
Faux sarcasm disguising actual beliefs.
Must you introduce article reading and facts into this?
False dichotomy. Both.
Like commenting on SlashDot? That aside, it's none of your friggin' business how someone spends their leisure time.
Statistics say you're wrong. Against those you present a single anecdote.
Selfishness is not an emotion. One can be selfish about something for entirely rational reasons.
Following specific tenets or not is a choice.
And there is the crux.
There are two concepts involved with divorce that render your first argument as invalid as you consider his: alimony and child support. Both of which, by the way, can change over time to reflect later greater earnings. (Oddly, rarely lesser earnings.)
How quaint that you actually trust government employees. Even those you elect. It's especially quaint given the historically ongoing reality that they've not shown themselves worthy of said trust.
No one is suggesting you have to look at it. You however, are suggesting that I should be prevented.
No, it is exactly the point.
How, pray tell, are we citizens supposed to oversee our representatives if we're not allowed to view the data (throwing a sans in the direction of national security issues) they're making their decisions on?
You can make exactly the same broad generalizations on a face-to-face interview as you can on a video. So, no.
Only a friggin' moron thinks this happened in the last four months.
I agree with you aside from his pompous use of "drones".
Since *when* has being "hip" been an attribute, much less a desirable one, of a competent language? The only friggin' professionals who speak in those terms are marketers.
Or maybe, just maybe, you've swallowed a load of bullshit about the Russian connection.
Chemical warfare against civilians is a breach of international law. Once they purposely forfeit that, one shouldn't expect they be treated as model world citizens. In other words: There are laws against assault. Those are ignored if you assault someone beating the shit out of a kid. The assailant in that case is not a "bad guy".