I got an Infinity for half the cost of the equivalent Lexus, didn't need a salvaged title to do so, and it worked great until a friend borrowed it and plowed it into a retaining wall at high speed (and walked away from the crash). Had full coverage, but moved on to something cheaper. The Q45a was a great car, but the 1.8l I replaced it with went much farther on the same fuel.
But you were fucking wrong, and a fucking idiot about it.
You obviously care about your ego, or you wouldn't be complaining so hard about being corrected for being an ignorant fucking moron.
I got curious and did a little research
Smart people do research before posting ignorant falsehoods. The lazy idiots concerned about their ego, wait until corrected, then lash out at the person pointing out their error. Fuck you.
Do you even know why we use AC for roughly 95% of the world's power transmission?
Because Westinghouse was better at marketing, and more money was spent on transformers for AC. For a given work on the other end, assuming equally efficient step up and step down for voltages, DC is equal to AC. The problem is that previously, the voltage changes cost more for DC. That's no longer true.
Your complaint is about low voltage, and would apply equally to 12V AC.
You insult the previous poster, but are posting nothing of value in its place.
You can install a high efficiency transformer to step down the 120V into a clean, lower voltage signal but that transformer is not going to be cheap....and you need additional wiring dedicated to lighting.
And why is one smaller one per room (what I have for lighting, with one 120V to 12V transformer per room) so much more expensive than one per house, and separate wiring throughout the whole house? Just go 120V to 12V at the light (well, about 1m from the light). The lights with included transformers are about $50 from a store with a full warranty (and $10 or less from China direct with DOA warranty only).
Because Americans are more likely to not flush a yellow toilet. The Europeans use more, not less, water if that is the case. Europe has the problem of not washing down that many places have toilet brushes next to the toilet, and you are expected to brush your toilet when you are done. Takes 4+ flushes, and uses more water than having a one-flush system that uses twice the water.
My HE front loader uses much less water than before. Though with my bills, that saves me more on power (hot water) than water. And the clothes are clean. The problem isn't HE, its your washer.
The ones I've seen filter the grey water to drinking standards before using it in the toilet. Not any more disgusting than drinking the water in a coastal city, where hundreds of communities up stream have put human waste in it. Or is it worse because you know where it's been?
Sub Prime had nothing to do with it. The Rich White Old Men bankers knew they were doing evil. So when the collapse happened, rather that properly blaming the derivatives, invented by RWOM bankers, they blamed Sub Prime borrowers, and the liberals. Not because any fault laid with them, but because they are the targets America loves to attack.
What problem isn't caused by poor young black single mothers?
"Colored" was the term for "Black" at the time. I slightly updated the term for the correct section. You used the incorrect section.
She was required by law to get up when the whites-only section was full. She sat in a legal seat, without conscious choice of defiance when she sat, making your statement the opposite of the spirit of what she did. She just refused to stand when the last white person got on. More a presence of apathy than a defiant choice made when she boarded the bus.
But if you are going to lie about me being "wrong" because I didn't use the correct archaic term, I can only presume you'll lie about the rest to keep your precious little ego intact. So feel free to explain how your incorrect statement (she didn't sit in the whites section at the front of the bus) is more correct than the factual correction offered, and continue to be a jackass to those who attempt to educate you and your ignorant ways.
The military benefits the rich only. As do most government services, prisons and the like. The real question should be why the rich refuse to pay their share.
The law says that property tax rates are charged (mainly) on the value of the property. If your improvements increase that value, then you've agreed to pay them as part of the purchase of your property. Why are you trying to commit fraud?
Where I am now, they move the tax rates up and down annually to collect for the budget. So, because you are paying $500 less on your taxes by cheating, you've "stolen" $500 from those around you who were taxed more to make up for the amount you cheated.
Rosa Parks sat in the back of the bus, in the "black" section. Making references you don't understand undermines any other points you are trying to make.
In either case there is a record of who owns what, the amount they paid and, most importantly, a record with the local government of who now owns the land
I've never told a government what I paid. I've bought land in two countries, and three states within the US.
Define "operating". My motorcycle likes to stall. I must re-start it often before it's up to full temp. One of the popular places is when I crest a hill approaching a stop light. If the light is red, and I need to stop, I pull in the clutch and apply the brake (no, I don't use engine braking extensively, it's jerky and un-smooth). The bike stalls. I can release the clutch to re-start it, or hit the starter. If it were set to disable the fuel injectors if off and "disabled" then it would, most certainly result in the system causing it to "shut off" while it is "operating".
The makers are unwilling to give more details because they would likely aid in circumventing the devices, but it seems plausible to me that a 0.1% error or unusual vehicle operation would result in a more immediate disable.
The "reasonable" solution is a bright red light in the dash that goes on when the "disable" command is received and 24 hours before the vehicle is actually disabled.
She starts. 2 years later, you start. 5 years later, she has 7 years experience, and you 5, and she takes off 2 for family. Then she comes back. 3 years later, she has 10 years experience, and you 10 years experience. And she's paid less. The numbers take that into account.
So a married man with kids is getting full pay because it's expected that they will put their career above their family? But a woman in the same situation is paid less because she's expected to put her kids first? And not because of actual actions that lead to this conclusion? Women who miss more work (caring for their children) should get paid less, but women with the same results shouldn't get paid less because people expect some future impairment.
To let your kid go to their toy isle and pick out their own is likely to just reinforce the stereotype of women being "princesses", waiting for their prince to come pay for their pampering.
Only when you are a bad parent. Why is the girl's isle "their toy isle"? Because you coached her so. Bad parenting.
My son preferred the "girls isle" until he went to school. He went to 1st grade with the pink Dorthoy the Dinosaur bag, rather than the blue Wiggles bag, so people made fun of him. Before that, I didn't coach him on what a "real man" should do, and steer him to specific isles in stores. He still has more dollhouses than Lego. But new is more likely to be Lego, because of all the other bad parents like you that teach their children that gender brings with it many rules that must be followed.
Any "activist group" that doesn't wish harm on others is just a "group". PETA assaults people with paint. Greenpeace assaults people with boats. Christian activists assault people near abortion clinics.
And those are actual acts, not just "wishes". Most people wish harm of some kind to their opponents. Activists are just more likely to say it out loud.
Re:Might want to tighten the bolts on those sabers
on
China's Island Factory
·
· Score: 1
So you agree reclaimed land is valid. Now that we've established that, we can worry about the minutia of this case.
Re:Might want to tighten the bolts on those sabers
on
China's Island Factory
·
· Score: 1
Every place I've seen recognizes reclaimed land as "natural" for these purposes. Nobody is arguing Haneda Airport isn't Japanese land, for these purposes, nor recovered Netherlands land. Dumping soil on a reef should be debatable, as the reef may have been above water or theoretically habitable recently. Expanding such natural lands has never been seen as a problem before.
Because physical connections are very very problematic. They've been tried before, and always abandoned. The skin doesn't seal 100% to any current materials, so there's a near 100% chance of infection at the plug site, not to mention the increased likelihood of damage and other problems.
Slashdot Mirror
I got an Infinity for half the cost of the equivalent Lexus, didn't need a salvaged title to do so, and it worked great until a friend borrowed it and plowed it into a retaining wall at high speed (and walked away from the crash). Had full coverage, but moved on to something cheaper. The Q45a was a great car, but the 1.8l I replaced it with went much farther on the same fuel.
You obviously care about your ego, or you wouldn't be complaining so hard about being corrected for being an ignorant fucking moron.
I got curious and did a little research
Smart people do research before posting ignorant falsehoods. The lazy idiots concerned about their ego, wait until corrected, then lash out at the person pointing out their error. Fuck you.
Do you even know why we use AC for roughly 95% of the world's power transmission?
Because Westinghouse was better at marketing, and more money was spent on transformers for AC. For a given work on the other end, assuming equally efficient step up and step down for voltages, DC is equal to AC. The problem is that previously, the voltage changes cost more for DC. That's no longer true.
Your complaint is about low voltage, and would apply equally to 12V AC.
You insult the previous poster, but are posting nothing of value in its place.
You can install a high efficiency transformer to step down the 120V into a clean, lower voltage signal but that transformer is not going to be cheap....and you need additional wiring dedicated to lighting.
And why is one smaller one per room (what I have for lighting, with one 120V to 12V transformer per room) so much more expensive than one per house, and separate wiring throughout the whole house? Just go 120V to 12V at the light (well, about 1m from the light). The lights with included transformers are about $50 from a store with a full warranty (and $10 or less from China direct with DOA warranty only).
Because Americans are more likely to not flush a yellow toilet. The Europeans use more, not less, water if that is the case. Europe has the problem of not washing down that many places have toilet brushes next to the toilet, and you are expected to brush your toilet when you are done. Takes 4+ flushes, and uses more water than having a one-flush system that uses twice the water.
My HE front loader uses much less water than before. Though with my bills, that saves me more on power (hot water) than water. And the clothes are clean. The problem isn't HE, its your washer.
The ones I've seen filter the grey water to drinking standards before using it in the toilet. Not any more disgusting than drinking the water in a coastal city, where hundreds of communities up stream have put human waste in it. Or is it worse because you know where it's been?
Enjoy. You voted for it.
No, I didn't. I have never voted for a winning president, Voting since 1992, never missed an election.
Sub Prime had nothing to do with it. The Rich White Old Men bankers knew they were doing evil. So when the collapse happened, rather that properly blaming the derivatives, invented by RWOM bankers, they blamed Sub Prime borrowers, and the liberals. Not because any fault laid with them, but because they are the targets America loves to attack.
What problem isn't caused by poor young black single mothers?
"Colored" was the term for "Black" at the time. I slightly updated the term for the correct section. You used the incorrect section.
She was required by law to get up when the whites-only section was full. She sat in a legal seat, without conscious choice of defiance when she sat, making your statement the opposite of the spirit of what she did. She just refused to stand when the last white person got on. More a presence of apathy than a defiant choice made when she boarded the bus.
But if you are going to lie about me being "wrong" because I didn't use the correct archaic term, I can only presume you'll lie about the rest to keep your precious little ego intact. So feel free to explain how your incorrect statement (she didn't sit in the whites section at the front of the bus) is more correct than the factual correction offered, and continue to be a jackass to those who attempt to educate you and your ignorant ways.
The military benefits the rich only. As do most government services, prisons and the like. The real question should be why the rich refuse to pay their share.
The law says that property tax rates are charged (mainly) on the value of the property. If your improvements increase that value, then you've agreed to pay them as part of the purchase of your property. Why are you trying to commit fraud?
Where I am now, they move the tax rates up and down annually to collect for the budget. So, because you are paying $500 less on your taxes by cheating, you've "stolen" $500 from those around you who were taxed more to make up for the amount you cheated.
Rosa Parks sat in the back of the bus, in the "black" section. Making references you don't understand undermines any other points you are trying to make.
In either case there is a record of who owns what, the amount they paid and, most importantly, a record with the local government of who now owns the land
I've never told a government what I paid. I've bought land in two countries, and three states within the US.
Define "operating". My motorcycle likes to stall. I must re-start it often before it's up to full temp. One of the popular places is when I crest a hill approaching a stop light. If the light is red, and I need to stop, I pull in the clutch and apply the brake (no, I don't use engine braking extensively, it's jerky and un-smooth). The bike stalls. I can release the clutch to re-start it, or hit the starter. If it were set to disable the fuel injectors if off and "disabled" then it would, most certainly result in the system causing it to "shut off" while it is "operating".
The makers are unwilling to give more details because they would likely aid in circumventing the devices, but it seems plausible to me that a 0.1% error or unusual vehicle operation would result in a more immediate disable.
The "reasonable" solution is a bright red light in the dash that goes on when the "disable" command is received and 24 hours before the vehicle is actually disabled.
Illegally parking is illegal. Being late for a payment isn't a crime (yet). Are you claiming it should be?
She starts. 2 years later, you start. 5 years later, she has 7 years experience, and you 5, and she takes off 2 for family. Then she comes back. 3 years later, she has 10 years experience, and you 10 years experience. And she's paid less. The numbers take that into account.
So a married man with kids is getting full pay because it's expected that they will put their career above their family? But a woman in the same situation is paid less because she's expected to put her kids first? And not because of actual actions that lead to this conclusion? Women who miss more work (caring for their children) should get paid less, but women with the same results shouldn't get paid less because people expect some future impairment.
We're discussing factors that contribute to the perceived wage disparity among women and men.
Well, thanks for letting us know it's only "perceived", and doesn't actually happen.
To let your kid go to their toy isle and pick out their own is likely to just reinforce the stereotype of women being "princesses", waiting for their prince to come pay for their pampering.
Only when you are a bad parent. Why is the girl's isle "their toy isle"? Because you coached her so. Bad parenting.
My son preferred the "girls isle" until he went to school. He went to 1st grade with the pink Dorthoy the Dinosaur bag, rather than the blue Wiggles bag, so people made fun of him. Before that, I didn't coach him on what a "real man" should do, and steer him to specific isles in stores. He still has more dollhouses than Lego. But new is more likely to be Lego, because of all the other bad parents like you that teach their children that gender brings with it many rules that must be followed.
Any "activist group" that doesn't wish harm on others is just a "group". PETA assaults people with paint. Greenpeace assaults people with boats. Christian activists assault people near abortion clinics.
And those are actual acts, not just "wishes". Most people wish harm of some kind to their opponents. Activists are just more likely to say it out loud.
So you agree reclaimed land is valid. Now that we've established that, we can worry about the minutia of this case.
Every place I've seen recognizes reclaimed land as "natural" for these purposes. Nobody is arguing Haneda Airport isn't Japanese land, for these purposes, nor recovered Netherlands land. Dumping soil on a reef should be debatable, as the reef may have been above water or theoretically habitable recently. Expanding such natural lands has never been seen as a problem before.
Because physical connections are very very problematic. They've been tried before, and always abandoned. The skin doesn't seal 100% to any current materials, so there's a near 100% chance of infection at the plug site, not to mention the increased likelihood of damage and other problems.