You fire an AI cruise missile at them. The ECM/ECCM will have trouble taking out a suicidal AI.
You fire clouds of anti-matter at them, at relativistic speeds. You shine powerful lasers at them. The blast from a laser will be about the same at 100M miles as 10 miles in space (presuming you have perfect optics). So long distance shots with a laser will form the minimum combat distance. Any closer, and you'll fry. So you need to be 5 light minutes out to be able to maneuver around the laser blasts. Those 5 light minutes will take months for a modern-day firearm to close the distance. So you need relatavistic particle weapons to cause damage, lasers for up close, and AI cruise missiles/mines for super-long distance. That's why they are far away, long and slow. It's hard to hit someone so far away, and too close and it's instant kill. Perhaps mutual destruction, as 5 light minutes allows them to shoot at you for 5 minutes before you notice, and you could be firing the whole time at them as well. The beams hit, and both are killed, crossing in the middle.
No criminal charges. Were they even officially fired with cause? Or did they get the "resign before we fire you" choice, so they could say "they lost their jobs" but also let them say they were never fired, should they apply to be a cop elsewhere?
Yeah, these guys could get another job. It's not like people line up to be cops. Low pay, high risk. That's why it attracts the violent wife-beaters and such.
It was a European definition, I saw a reference to it coming from the UK regarding analysis of Shakespeare. The central character in Othello was Iago, not Othello. The issue with it is that Iago was scheming in the background, so was the plot mover and more central to the plot and action than Othello. So the definition of "protagonist" was massaged to allow Othello to be the protagonist of Othello. A more strict definition would have Iago as the protagonist.
Yes, they are. People are making changes to reduce use, but aren't reducing demand. They don't drive less, they find ways to conserve. There's a difference.
Thor, Odin's son is his name. Thor, God of Thunder is a job title. Whoever holds the hammer is Thor. This has been consistent for, what, 30 years? There's no retcon in that. Thor is both his name and the title of the job of God of Thunder.
He said there was no plot after 5 minutes into the first movie (Mad Max). I said that Road Warrior (the second movie) had lots of plot. Maybe the OP was confused about the movies, but I wasn't. I didn't realize there was variable naming of the movies, but thought it was like Rambo. The first was First Blood, and the second was Rambo, and then Rambo III, but there was never a Rambo II because of the name changes of the series.
It's a sequel that could be set between #2 and #3. It doesn't identify the location, and doesn't have direct continuity with the original, so it's no more a "sequel" than Avengers is a sequel to the Incredible Hulk TV show with Bill Bixby.
MRAs have some valid points about discrimination against men in family law.
Yes, because most parents who run off and fail to pay support are treated poorly, and those tend to be men, men are treated poorly in family law. Almost always because of their actions.
The men who I see complain are the ones trying to divorce their children with their ex-spouse. It doesn't work that way. Men who fight for custody the whole time fare pretty well. Yes, I know there are exceptions, but in general, the system is fair. It's only biased if you assume every woman is lying and every man is telling the truth, because that's not the standard the courts use.
give them a generation or two without ramming our perverse ideas of women down their throats as soon as they reach 12,
12? What world are you living in? My son came home from his first day of school at age 5, crying. He had picked out a Dorothy the Dinosaur backpack for school. It was pink. I suggested the blue Wiggles bag, but he liked pink. It's bright and fun.
He was made fun of and teased for having a "girl's bag". At age 5. By a bunch of other age 5 children trained that pink is bad, and blue is good, and one must conform or be tortured.
That's the world today. 12 would be a big improvement. Parents train their sub-5 children to recognize boy and girl, and treat them differently. I didn't, so my kid was bullied on his first day of school. I didn't realize how bad it would be, or I'd have insisted on the blue.
The first was clearly pre-apocalyptic, the second and third were obviously post-government breakdown, but a civil war isn't apocalypse. Fury Road is more clearly post-apocalyptic, but being filmed in Africa I think, and no real mention of location separates it from the Australia connection the others had. The actors were from all over, accents were inconsistent, and nothing was identified. So how can you say it's in Australia?
This was more Thunderdome than the others, as it's driven by a dictator-run town who needs it some liberation.
I think you replied to the wrong post. Mad Max was not post apocalyptic. I never claimed it was. Though WA seems pretty post apocalyptic, even to those who live there. I also didn't say anything about the vehicles used in any of the movies.
Thor is the title of the person who can wield the hammer. It was the title named after the first such person to hold it, but the (Marvel) lore is clear. "Whosoever holds this hammer, if he be worthy, shall possess the power of Thor." So the holder is Thor in title, if not name.
Unlike what Hollywood thinks not all problems are solved simply by running across a border. Have you ever: tried to get a passport for a minor without the other parent's signature? tried to travel as the sole parent of a minor? tried to enter a country as the sole parent of a minor?
Yes, yes, and yes. Never a problem. One trick. The one that worked for me, but wasn't done as an intentional trick at the time, Take a female of your age with you. Have her watching the kids until they are needed at the counter. No questions will be asked. Two adults with a child applying for a passport are assumed parents, and will be taken as such, unless you do something stupid. Same goes with travel. Both leaving and arriving in the foreign country.
When you claim that there was no plot after 5 minutes into the first movie, you prove your bias and stupidity. The Road Warrior had more plot than similar movies of the time. The plot could be summed up as "standard siege film" but that's more a genre of plot, than specific plot. There were side/sub plots about father figures, redemption and such.
What helps is to identify the protagonist. By the classical definition, it's the character with change. Mad Max undergoes no change. The protagonist in the movie is not Mad Max, but instead the wives/harem. And the antagonist is the villain (not always the case, but is here). The villain wants the harem to not change.
Same setup as #2. Where Mad Max wasn't the main protagonist, but a plot device for the villager's protagonism (yes, I know that isn't a word, but it's still a word if you know what I mean).
If there's "no plot" then the speaker is too dumb to find it. If it had "no plot" then it would fail in the theaters, no matter how much of a spectacular it is.
Though I agree with the spirit of what you are saying, the term "reverse discrimination" is a misnomer at best and discriminatory at worst — because it implies, that discriminations are or can be different. They aren't and they can not — any preference given to one race, sex, etc. is discrimination and there are neither "forward" nor "reverse" among them.
Reverse discrimination in this context is one privileged class discriminating against another privileged class, though "reverse" started out as same-class discrimination. Discrimination, at the time the word became widely used, meant privileged class against minority. "reverse" indicates it isn't the standard definition.
For ultimate win, claiming to be Black — if you can pull it off — is the best.
Why would anyone have trouble pulling it off? Race is defined by the federal government as the race you identify as. So if you identify as Black, then by the definition of the federal government, you are. Now, when you go to an interview after having checked "black" and you look like you, you might have an issue for "lying" on your application. But that's a separate matter.
Is that why the red states are the most armed and the most anti-education? They don't want to make any more managers for the big revolution. But will be hunting them.
Nope. Much like supply and demand doesn't much affect gasoline and milk, it also doesn't greatly impact jobs. This is so common there's even a term for it. Inelastic demand. What happens with many inelastic goods is not changes in demand, but removal of demand. When you raise milk by 5%, people still buy about the same amount. But if you raise the price by 500%, people will buy soy milk, or otherwise replace the good with one that's sufficiently similar.
The same happens in jobs. People will move (though not nearly enough to satisfy most models), and employers will move. Jobs will be ended, and new jobs created. The changing of the job market will come before the supply and demand moves the job that much. Jobs will never pay below minimum wage, and never above their value for the company (excepting management). So supply and demand can't fully define the market for jobs.
Braking can never exceed the friction force, or you go into a sliding condition. That's the upper bound. You are pointing out that my definition of the upper bound is correct, but doing so in a disagreeable manner.
Slashdot Mirror
You fire an AI cruise missile at them. The ECM/ECCM will have trouble taking out a suicidal AI.
You fire clouds of anti-matter at them, at relativistic speeds. You shine powerful lasers at them. The blast from a laser will be about the same at 100M miles as 10 miles in space (presuming you have perfect optics). So long distance shots with a laser will form the minimum combat distance. Any closer, and you'll fry. So you need to be 5 light minutes out to be able to maneuver around the laser blasts. Those 5 light minutes will take months for a modern-day firearm to close the distance. So you need relatavistic particle weapons to cause damage, lasers for up close, and AI cruise missiles/mines for super-long distance. That's why they are far away, long and slow. It's hard to hit someone so far away, and too close and it's instant kill. Perhaps mutual destruction, as 5 light minutes allows them to shoot at you for 5 minutes before you notice, and you could be firing the whole time at them as well. The beams hit, and both are killed, crossing in the middle.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D...
Read that series and let me know what you think about space combat.
No criminal charges. Were they even officially fired with cause? Or did they get the "resign before we fire you" choice, so they could say "they lost their jobs" but also let them say they were never fired, should they apply to be a cop elsewhere?
Yeah, these guys could get another job. It's not like people line up to be cops. Low pay, high risk. That's why it attracts the violent wife-beaters and such.
It was a European definition, I saw a reference to it coming from the UK regarding analysis of Shakespeare. The central character in Othello was Iago, not Othello. The issue with it is that Iago was scheming in the background, so was the plot mover and more central to the plot and action than Othello. So the definition of "protagonist" was massaged to allow Othello to be the protagonist of Othello. A more strict definition would have Iago as the protagonist.
Yes, they are. People are making changes to reduce use, but aren't reducing demand. They don't drive less, they find ways to conserve. There's a difference.
Yes, and the fiction has no requirement to use the mythology beyond inspiration. It's not like Jack Kirby was struck down by lightning.
Thor, Odin's son is his name. Thor, God of Thunder is a job title. Whoever holds the hammer is Thor. This has been consistent for, what, 30 years? There's no retcon in that. Thor is both his name and the title of the job of God of Thunder.
He said there was no plot after 5 minutes into the first movie (Mad Max). I said that Road Warrior (the second movie) had lots of plot. Maybe the OP was confused about the movies, but I wasn't. I didn't realize there was variable naming of the movies, but thought it was like Rambo. The first was First Blood, and the second was Rambo, and then Rambo III, but there was never a Rambo II because of the name changes of the series.
The blogger doth protest too much, methinks. (paraphrased, obviously)
It's a sequel that could be set between #2 and #3. It doesn't identify the location, and doesn't have direct continuity with the original, so it's no more a "sequel" than Avengers is a sequel to the Incredible Hulk TV show with Bill Bixby.
MRAs have some valid points about discrimination against men in family law.
Yes, because most parents who run off and fail to pay support are treated poorly, and those tend to be men, men are treated poorly in family law. Almost always because of their actions.
The men who I see complain are the ones trying to divorce their children with their ex-spouse. It doesn't work that way. Men who fight for custody the whole time fare pretty well. Yes, I know there are exceptions, but in general, the system is fair. It's only biased if you assume every woman is lying and every man is telling the truth, because that's not the standard the courts use.
give them a generation or two without ramming our perverse ideas of women down their throats as soon as they reach 12,
12? What world are you living in? My son came home from his first day of school at age 5, crying. He had picked out a Dorothy the Dinosaur backpack for school. It was pink. I suggested the blue Wiggles bag, but he liked pink. It's bright and fun.
He was made fun of and teased for having a "girl's bag". At age 5. By a bunch of other age 5 children trained that pink is bad, and blue is good, and one must conform or be tortured.
That's the world today. 12 would be a big improvement. Parents train their sub-5 children to recognize boy and girl, and treat them differently. I didn't, so my kid was bullied on his first day of school. I didn't realize how bad it would be, or I'd have insisted on the blue.
The MRAs are SJWs.
The setting is post Apocalyptic Australia.
The first was clearly pre-apocalyptic, the second and third were obviously post-government breakdown, but a civil war isn't apocalypse. Fury Road is more clearly post-apocalyptic, but being filmed in Africa I think, and no real mention of location separates it from the Australia connection the others had. The actors were from all over, accents were inconsistent, and nothing was identified. So how can you say it's in Australia?
This was more Thunderdome than the others, as it's driven by a dictator-run town who needs it some liberation.
I think you replied to the wrong post. Mad Max was not post apocalyptic. I never claimed it was. Though WA seems pretty post apocalyptic, even to those who live there. I also didn't say anything about the vehicles used in any of the movies.
Thor is the title of the person who can wield the hammer. It was the title named after the first such person to hold it, but the (Marvel) lore is clear. "Whosoever holds this hammer, if he be worthy, shall possess the power of Thor." So the holder is Thor in title, if not name.
Unlike what Hollywood thinks not all problems are solved simply by running across a border. Have you ever: tried to get a passport for a minor without the other parent's signature? tried to travel as the sole parent of a minor? tried to enter a country as the sole parent of a minor?
Yes, yes, and yes. Never a problem. One trick. The one that worked for me, but wasn't done as an intentional trick at the time, Take a female of your age with you. Have her watching the kids until they are needed at the counter. No questions will be asked. Two adults with a child applying for a passport are assumed parents, and will be taken as such, unless you do something stupid. Same goes with travel. Both leaving and arriving in the foreign country.
When you claim that there was no plot after 5 minutes into the first movie, you prove your bias and stupidity. The Road Warrior had more plot than similar movies of the time. The plot could be summed up as "standard siege film" but that's more a genre of plot, than specific plot. There were side/sub plots about father figures, redemption and such.
What helps is to identify the protagonist. By the classical definition, it's the character with change. Mad Max undergoes no change. The protagonist in the movie is not Mad Max, but instead the wives/harem. And the antagonist is the villain (not always the case, but is here). The villain wants the harem to not change.
Same setup as #2. Where Mad Max wasn't the main protagonist, but a plot device for the villager's protagonism (yes, I know that isn't a word, but it's still a word if you know what I mean).
If there's "no plot" then the speaker is too dumb to find it. If it had "no plot" then it would fail in the theaters, no matter how much of a spectacular it is.
He didn't fuck over his coworkers, the US voters did.
Though I agree with the spirit of what you are saying, the term "reverse discrimination" is a misnomer at best and discriminatory at worst — because it implies, that discriminations are or can be different. They aren't and they can not — any preference given to one race, sex, etc. is discrimination and there are neither "forward" nor "reverse" among them.
Reverse discrimination in this context is one privileged class discriminating against another privileged class, though "reverse" started out as same-class discrimination. Discrimination, at the time the word became widely used, meant privileged class against minority. "reverse" indicates it isn't the standard definition.
For ultimate win, claiming to be Black — if you can pull it off — is the best.
Why would anyone have trouble pulling it off? Race is defined by the federal government as the race you identify as. So if you identify as Black, then by the definition of the federal government, you are. Now, when you go to an interview after having checked "black" and you look like you, you might have an issue for "lying" on your application. But that's a separate matter.
Then the bubble burst and people lost jobs and workers had to pay huge taxes on stock incentives that were now worthless
The worker's failure to cash out of a bad investment doesn't mean it wasn't real income paid at the time it was earned.
Is that why the red states are the most armed and the most anti-education? They don't want to make any more managers for the big revolution. But will be hunting them.
Nope. Much like supply and demand doesn't much affect gasoline and milk, it also doesn't greatly impact jobs. This is so common there's even a term for it. Inelastic demand. What happens with many inelastic goods is not changes in demand, but removal of demand. When you raise milk by 5%, people still buy about the same amount. But if you raise the price by 500%, people will buy soy milk, or otherwise replace the good with one that's sufficiently similar.
The same happens in jobs. People will move (though not nearly enough to satisfy most models), and employers will move. Jobs will be ended, and new jobs created. The changing of the job market will come before the supply and demand moves the job that much. Jobs will never pay below minimum wage, and never above their value for the company (excepting management). So supply and demand can't fully define the market for jobs.
The go-to example was Standard Oil, but there were others.
Braking can never exceed the friction force, or you go into a sliding condition. That's the upper bound. You are pointing out that my definition of the upper bound is correct, but doing so in a disagreeable manner.