This should be different because the child was agreed upon to not be the father's responsibility BY THE MOTHER. Child support is the right of a custodial parent to hold the other parent financially responsible for the child. The custodial parent, in this case, said, "We just need material, we don't need you." Then they came back demanding aid.
It's really stupid. The problem is the law links genetics and the fact that the sperm that got there came from your particular testicles. If a woman gets in a gangbang with 6 men and gets pregnant, the courts order a DNA test. The ONE man who matches as father is responsible for alimony. That's ludicrous. This is also ludicrous: the woman's claim is essentially that he's physically the source of the genetic material, so any agreement, contract, or whatnot put forth is null because it's his baby.
Women can lie to you, commit fraud, and then make you pay them for it. Women can rape you and have you arrested for it. Welcome to America.
To be crude and inaccurate, Chess is technically inferior to Go because Chess is almost entirely tactical--"Left Brained" (inaccurate, but familiar)--while Go fully exercises tactical and strategic thinking--"Left Brained" and "Right Brained", as they say. Chess cannot stimulate the same centers of the brain as Go, but Go can cover every neurological function stimulated by Chess.
Go is a valuable use of my time because it provides me with mental exercise that has helped with some of the weaknesses in my mind--notably my lack of ability to apply abstract thinking (anything that isn't solvable by logical process is difficult for me). Besides just play on the board, I also expand that to using Go as an analogy for life, a purpose for which it has proved excellent; Chess applied the same way tends to analogize to narrow-minded, short-sighted thinking.
Yes, of course. Like vinyl records and CDs, libraries, books, and reading are outdated business models. School is run on outdated tactics; we refuse to treat education like a technology and instead will continue to run schools as they were run in medieval times for fear of breaking it, somehow. But we want to incorporate other technology into the existing framework and act like giving students laptops helps, somehow.
There are not "fringe cases" of illiquid stocks. High-liquidity stocks are the fringe cases. There are 30 blue-chip stocks, there are a handful of big financials, and the exciting-bullshit-of-the-week. Most of the NYSE and the BATF are illiquid on the order of "a trade the size of your annual salary". Your retirement account can't be liquidated all that easily unless it's a select few stocks or funds. There's hundreds of them sure, but there's TENS OF THOUSANDS of listed stocks, and vastly more OTC stocks!
I'm implying that solar panels are hilariously stupid and the worst solution to a problem.
In major installations, they're inefficient as living fuck. you can do much better with parabolic concentrators, solar towers, the like. Shiny flat glass is not only inefficient, but fragile.
In minor installations, they're expensive as living fuck, inconvenient (eventually you'll need to repair that roof...), and have dodgy ROI. Oh and better add on insurance--a 15 panel installation here has no less than 5 damaged panels, 3 of which are completely destroyed. Nobody else has solar. With long ROI, the risk of just coming out negative is so high.
Solar water heat: evacuated tube collectors into a tank. Hell, in general, a solar collector--a trombe wall on the roof, evacuated tubes, whatnot--with an insulated pipeline circulating to a solar mass (a concrete, water-filled, or beeswax box packed inside massive insulation, about the size of a chest freezer if you use beeswax but that shit is expensive as silver!) is a lot more effective. You can pipe the collected energy to water heating, space heating, space cooling, and even to electricity generation using a sterling engine (potentially you could use a high-temperature heat pump to achieve cooking and high temperatures for more efficient heat-engine power generation, same concept as a solar tower).
Advantage? In the case of evacuated tubes, extreme simplicity, low cost, ease of management, lower hazards, fast ROI (less than a year). A trombe wall on the roof has the disadvantage of being fixed, but the advantage of being fixed as well: the roof builds up over top of that part, containing insulation (You don't want your heat to radiate back out) and all the elements of a roof. It can be used for just space heating, or used as an isolated minor thermal mass and collector for a basement-stored thermal mass used to drive thermal equipment (water heater, space heating, sterling generator, thermal cooling, etc.). The disadvantage is weight--it's going to be a big piece of 2 inch thick concrete on your roof--and the complexity of insulated plumbing.
Direct heating and thermal cooling reduce the number of transformations and increase efficiency of utilizing collected solar power. Solar energy used for space heating comes in as thermal energy (light) and is moved as thermal energy to space heat at near 100% efficiency. Solar energy used for cooling comes as thermal energy and is used to drive a thermal air conditioner (like those natural gas ACs that are all the rage now). Solar energy used to generate electricity is piped through a sterling engine to achieve 38% energy extraction as electricity instead of 19% or less.
And then you need to consider mass core geothermal plants, non-disruptive hydroelectric (as opposed to disruptive), wind, quantum-newtonian-oscillation generators, and of course the storage mechanisms like FTL gasodiesel manufactured from atmosphere using excess electricity.
Electric ranges don't produce adequate heat transfer to the cookware, either. Electric ovens have lower relative humidity--gas produces water as a combustion product.
Thorium Pebble Bed Reactors are stable, but low density. It's like comparing batteries to super capacitors: batteries hold more, but output less power at once; supercaps can output more power, but hold less. PBRs use less-dense fuel so need to cycle out fuel more often, plus they don't produce as much heat per volume and thus produce less power output. Less energy density and less power output.
It's kind of like how a carbon-zinc battery is less likely to violently explode than an alkaline battery, a lithium polymer battery, or a lithium ion battery. Lithium ion batteries have more energy density and higher output than rechargeable LiPo, NiMH, or NiCd. NiCd won't explode as easily or violently as Li+, but it won't power your laptop for more than 20 minutes either without a 15 pound battery.
Again Go proves superior: Memorizing Go openings is a start. Learning why they work the way they do is required.
In Go, your opening is strong for a reason. Somebody plops a stone in the middle of it, or does an approach out of turn, you have an advantage or at least are no worse off than if you played a standard opening. Fast players just play standard openings and get into midgame--Koreans like to do this. The Japanese like to analyze their opponent, the board, and form a long-term strategy based on standard openings, often not even following the standard more than 2 or 3 moves. Standard openings like Ni Ren Sei and San Ren Sei are only a few moves (Ni Ren Sei is black on two adjacent corners, white on two adjacent corners, black's move--which is usually approach, or strengthen, sometimes split).
In Go, your opponent can do more than just move a piece toward you in a bumbling and foolish manner. He can jump right into the middle of your opening and screw it up. Mid-level players do this a lot: a slightly stronger opponent will disrupt a weaker opponent because he can make a position off the disruption, and the weaker opponent does not know why he is playing the Low Chinese other than because it is a correct opening--and thus makes a really screwy position responding poorly.
Go is about concepts. Memorizing Joseki is often advertised as a good way to start; it is a poor way to continue. Joseki study is done to learn why: to learn about variations, about how a joseki is strong, about why a korean Jung-Sek is formed differently from a similar looking Japanese Joseki--what was the goal?
Life and Death is often by rote... for the simple shapes. Vulnerable points. Recognizing the shapes before they come.
Go on 9x9 is very similar to Chess neurologically: it's a tactics game. I'm bad at it. I hate chess for emotional-political reasons: it is technically inferior to Go, being that it is tactical, and thus I cannot stomach nor can I support wasting my time on such an inefficient pursuit. Someone has been reasoning, correctly, that I should practice Chess to gain additional, non-domain tactical exercise so as to improve my Go playing. I have been, incorrectly, resistant.
Go in 13x13 is strategically different to Go in 19x19. On a 13x13 board, abstract strategy and tactics both apply simultaneously: control of a corner exerts strong influence over another corner, and you can develop very quickly. Strategic moves must also be tactical.
Go in 19x19 is, early on, strategic: the stretch of influence is too big, and only vague tactical considerations are helpful because of too much variation. Early play accounts for strategy alone: it accounts for providing a position that has strong but non-specific tactical value for all variations. As the board develops, tactical situations arise: the strategy employed provides a variety of tactical responses to tactical approaches. This exercises, both separately and conjointly, the full utilization of abstract strategic thinking and logical tactical computation.
Thus Go 9x9 and Chess are both tactical calculation; Go 13x13 is strategic-tactical or tactical depending on position, weakly exercising abstract reasoning and more strongly exercising tactical calculation; and Go 19x19 exercises the full breadth of abstract strategic thinking, blended thinking (including feedback looping tactics into strategic impact and strategy into tactical options), and direct tactical thinking (when the immediate position is only a win-lose proposition, not a resultant strategic position proposition).
I am better at Go 13x13 because I can cover the weaknesses in my abilities while abusing the weaknesses in my opponent's abilities. It is an easy game for me because I start with the option of using whichever mode of thinking I'm better at in the current position, and retain that until it's too late to really swing the game. 9x9 relies on tactical calculation, while 19x19 relies on effective use of the greatest breadth of mental skills based on what's on the board more than what I feel like I can handle at the time; I like 19x19 because it forces me to grow and learn.
Computational analysis is not relevant for wide-play of Go because it's impossible and there are other, more abstract ways to do this. There are even computer algorithms to analyze influence and use this to analyze strategic strengths and weaknesses, then analyze those areas of the board to analyze the strategic position. Humans are better at it, but direct computation isn't the only way to approach the problem.
I'm guilty of not taking my accounting final exams in college. Because my grades were high enough that the dent from completely failing the final netted me an A at just above 90%.
Point still stands: bitcoins aren't going to show up on a boat and net you a phone call demanding you come get this stuff and pay warehousing fees. Stocks cannot be sold unless there is liquidity; and there are a great many stocks that aren't liquid enough to withstand your average day-trader's funds, whereby a NYSE listed security can't handle a $25,000 sell order in a day. Build-a-Bear Workshop can't do it, for example. I've had trouble buying and selling Sinclair Broadcast Group (SBGI), and they own oh... better than 60% of all the television broadcast stations in the United States? Four trading days for a market sell of 5000 shares to go through completely, for a $2 BILLION a year revenue company!
This is actually rather interesting, and is better than soliciting a "Look at this cool link I found!" from the user. I agree with the post--this is basically a giant ass-dance of "We make it move around more so it's harder to hit! That's security!" (that's an arms race, which we live in already; and it's an automated one that we already have software to mitigate--the fucking web browser). He's provided me a source to point and say, "This smart fellow understands and says the same thing I am," since I would look at this shit and go "uh no" and non-savvy management would go "but it says security!"
He misses things like the technology completely fucking up any kind of caching you want to do, or neutering itself to not do that. Also the "changing form field names" thing... it better change them back on the way back in (and how does it track that i.e. from shared IP addresses? Cookies?), because otherwise your web apps are in for a world of hurt!
This is the slippery slope fallacy. What you said was "You do know where fire goes, right? Nero burned Rome!" and argued that we shouldn't have stoves and should eat all meat cold and raw.
Some of us would say "What does this bullshit mean?...well it's logically inconsistent and insane, and too wordy, and open to interpretation. Let's rewrite it straightforward and without ambiguity that can be exploited by creative interpretation."
The US FTC will probably investigate Network Solutions for this. High-pressure sales tactics will get you fined and barred from ever working in anything financial or sales-related again. This is high-pressure sales and beyond.
You are stuck with stocks until you find a buyer. The thing is a boat doesn't show up at a dock and you have to come get them.
Once you BUY bitcoin, you have bitcoin. Once you BUY GOOG, you have GOOG.
Once you BUY 4000 tonnes Coal, you have a contract for 4000 tonnes Coal. 45 days later, you get a phone call. Somebody starts charging you because you have 4000 tonnes Coal being warehoused at the docks, and you need to pay $40,000/day until you can find a buyer to take it off your hands. That coal physically shows up, just like Bitcoin and GOOG do not.
Stocks are NOT a liquid investment because you cannot buy (most) things with them. They must first be sold. A liquid asset is petty cash; a checking account is liquid; a line of credit has liquidity; bonds are illiquid, stocks are illiquid. Did you not take Economics in high school, or Accounting in college?
No, wrong. CO binds to hemoglobin strongly. Oxygen binds weakly, but stronger than CO2. The partial pressure of oxygen being 0, oxygen will boil out of the blood and be replaced with nitrogen; then you will die. A 100% nitrogen atmosphere WILL remove all oxygen from your blood in roughly 1 second.
Common stock usually carries with it the right to vote on certain matters, such as electing the board of directors. However, a company can have both a "voting" and "non-voting" class of common stock.
Non-voting common stock is now common. But I see preferred stock is also non-voting. Often preferred stock is custom-issued, too, with certain rights attached to it as desired (for example when Warren Buffet negotiated a 7% dividend in Bank of America!).
Again: a lot of stocks are illiquid. Penny stocks are both illiquid and not as regulated, but not unregulated. And trading coffee beans? If the boat shows up at the docks, you need to come get your coffee; when do the bitcoins show up?
Doctors cannot administer lethal injection or write prescription for the drugs. The hippocratic oath demands they do no harm. This is also why abortion is patently ridiculous: doctors are sworn to do no such thing, explicitly. People argue about legality, but I have to ask who the hell is going to perform all these abortions?
They haven't. It's not a rational thing; it has to be an underlying, instinctive fear. That's why in places where gang crime runs wild the death penalty has no deterrent effect: you executed 1 murderer in several hundred murders involving other murderers. Their daily criminal life is more likely to get them killed than a state execution.
Execution deters people who are impulsed to murder, who let go their convictions to not kill someone, and immediately encounter a fear they're well aware of but have never in their life faced: the fear that they WILL die for this. If you're afraid you're going to die at any time any day, this doesn't make half a difference. If you're well-socialized, you probably don't face that fear a hell of a lot, and when it hits the back of your mind you will stop dead what you are doing.
Slashdot Mirror
Women's groups. Just get a boat and bring more Irish over. They'll solve the problem right quick.
This should be different because the child was agreed upon to not be the father's responsibility BY THE MOTHER. Child support is the right of a custodial parent to hold the other parent financially responsible for the child. The custodial parent, in this case, said, "We just need material, we don't need you." Then they came back demanding aid.
It's really stupid. The problem is the law links genetics and the fact that the sperm that got there came from your particular testicles. If a woman gets in a gangbang with 6 men and gets pregnant, the courts order a DNA test. The ONE man who matches as father is responsible for alimony. That's ludicrous. This is also ludicrous: the woman's claim is essentially that he's physically the source of the genetic material, so any agreement, contract, or whatnot put forth is null because it's his baby.
Women can lie to you, commit fraud, and then make you pay them for it. Women can rape you and have you arrested for it. Welcome to America.
To be crude and inaccurate, Chess is technically inferior to Go because Chess is almost entirely tactical--"Left Brained" (inaccurate, but familiar)--while Go fully exercises tactical and strategic thinking--"Left Brained" and "Right Brained", as they say. Chess cannot stimulate the same centers of the brain as Go, but Go can cover every neurological function stimulated by Chess.
Go is a valuable use of my time because it provides me with mental exercise that has helped with some of the weaknesses in my mind--notably my lack of ability to apply abstract thinking (anything that isn't solvable by logical process is difficult for me). Besides just play on the board, I also expand that to using Go as an analogy for life, a purpose for which it has proved excellent; Chess applied the same way tends to analogize to narrow-minded, short-sighted thinking.
Yes, of course. Like vinyl records and CDs, libraries, books, and reading are outdated business models. School is run on outdated tactics; we refuse to treat education like a technology and instead will continue to run schools as they were run in medieval times for fear of breaking it, somehow. But we want to incorporate other technology into the existing framework and act like giving students laptops helps, somehow.
There are not "fringe cases" of illiquid stocks. High-liquidity stocks are the fringe cases. There are 30 blue-chip stocks, there are a handful of big financials, and the exciting-bullshit-of-the-week. Most of the NYSE and the BATF are illiquid on the order of "a trade the size of your annual salary". Your retirement account can't be liquidated all that easily unless it's a select few stocks or funds. There's hundreds of them sure, but there's TENS OF THOUSANDS of listed stocks, and vastly more OTC stocks!
I'm implying that solar panels are hilariously stupid and the worst solution to a problem.
In major installations, they're inefficient as living fuck. you can do much better with parabolic concentrators, solar towers, the like. Shiny flat glass is not only inefficient, but fragile.
In minor installations, they're expensive as living fuck, inconvenient (eventually you'll need to repair that roof...), and have dodgy ROI. Oh and better add on insurance--a 15 panel installation here has no less than 5 damaged panels, 3 of which are completely destroyed. Nobody else has solar. With long ROI, the risk of just coming out negative is so high.
Solar water heat: evacuated tube collectors into a tank. Hell, in general, a solar collector--a trombe wall on the roof, evacuated tubes, whatnot--with an insulated pipeline circulating to a solar mass (a concrete, water-filled, or beeswax box packed inside massive insulation, about the size of a chest freezer if you use beeswax but that shit is expensive as silver!) is a lot more effective. You can pipe the collected energy to water heating, space heating, space cooling, and even to electricity generation using a sterling engine (potentially you could use a high-temperature heat pump to achieve cooking and high temperatures for more efficient heat-engine power generation, same concept as a solar tower).
Advantage? In the case of evacuated tubes, extreme simplicity, low cost, ease of management, lower hazards, fast ROI (less than a year). A trombe wall on the roof has the disadvantage of being fixed, but the advantage of being fixed as well: the roof builds up over top of that part, containing insulation (You don't want your heat to radiate back out) and all the elements of a roof. It can be used for just space heating, or used as an isolated minor thermal mass and collector for a basement-stored thermal mass used to drive thermal equipment (water heater, space heating, sterling generator, thermal cooling, etc.). The disadvantage is weight--it's going to be a big piece of 2 inch thick concrete on your roof--and the complexity of insulated plumbing.
Direct heating and thermal cooling reduce the number of transformations and increase efficiency of utilizing collected solar power. Solar energy used for space heating comes in as thermal energy (light) and is moved as thermal energy to space heat at near 100% efficiency. Solar energy used for cooling comes as thermal energy and is used to drive a thermal air conditioner (like those natural gas ACs that are all the rage now). Solar energy used to generate electricity is piped through a sterling engine to achieve 38% energy extraction as electricity instead of 19% or less.
And then you need to consider mass core geothermal plants, non-disruptive hydroelectric (as opposed to disruptive), wind, quantum-newtonian-oscillation generators, and of course the storage mechanisms like FTL gasodiesel manufactured from atmosphere using excess electricity.
Electric ranges don't produce adequate heat transfer to the cookware, either. Electric ovens have lower relative humidity--gas produces water as a combustion product.
Thorium Pebble Bed Reactors are stable, but low density. It's like comparing batteries to super capacitors: batteries hold more, but output less power at once; supercaps can output more power, but hold less. PBRs use less-dense fuel so need to cycle out fuel more often, plus they don't produce as much heat per volume and thus produce less power output. Less energy density and less power output.
It's kind of like how a carbon-zinc battery is less likely to violently explode than an alkaline battery, a lithium polymer battery, or a lithium ion battery. Lithium ion batteries have more energy density and higher output than rechargeable LiPo, NiMH, or NiCd. NiCd won't explode as easily or violently as Li+, but it won't power your laptop for more than 20 minutes either without a 15 pound battery.
Again Go proves superior: Memorizing Go openings is a start. Learning why they work the way they do is required.
In Go, your opening is strong for a reason. Somebody plops a stone in the middle of it, or does an approach out of turn, you have an advantage or at least are no worse off than if you played a standard opening. Fast players just play standard openings and get into midgame--Koreans like to do this. The Japanese like to analyze their opponent, the board, and form a long-term strategy based on standard openings, often not even following the standard more than 2 or 3 moves. Standard openings like Ni Ren Sei and San Ren Sei are only a few moves (Ni Ren Sei is black on two adjacent corners, white on two adjacent corners, black's move--which is usually approach, or strengthen, sometimes split).
In Go, your opponent can do more than just move a piece toward you in a bumbling and foolish manner. He can jump right into the middle of your opening and screw it up. Mid-level players do this a lot: a slightly stronger opponent will disrupt a weaker opponent because he can make a position off the disruption, and the weaker opponent does not know why he is playing the Low Chinese other than because it is a correct opening--and thus makes a really screwy position responding poorly.
Go is about concepts. Memorizing Joseki is often advertised as a good way to start; it is a poor way to continue. Joseki study is done to learn why: to learn about variations, about how a joseki is strong, about why a korean Jung-Sek is formed differently from a similar looking Japanese Joseki--what was the goal?
Life and Death is often by rote... for the simple shapes. Vulnerable points. Recognizing the shapes before they come.
Go on 9x9 is very similar to Chess neurologically: it's a tactics game. I'm bad at it. I hate chess for emotional-political reasons: it is technically inferior to Go, being that it is tactical, and thus I cannot stomach nor can I support wasting my time on such an inefficient pursuit. Someone has been reasoning, correctly, that I should practice Chess to gain additional, non-domain tactical exercise so as to improve my Go playing. I have been, incorrectly, resistant.
Go in 13x13 is strategically different to Go in 19x19. On a 13x13 board, abstract strategy and tactics both apply simultaneously: control of a corner exerts strong influence over another corner, and you can develop very quickly. Strategic moves must also be tactical.
Go in 19x19 is, early on, strategic: the stretch of influence is too big, and only vague tactical considerations are helpful because of too much variation. Early play accounts for strategy alone: it accounts for providing a position that has strong but non-specific tactical value for all variations. As the board develops, tactical situations arise: the strategy employed provides a variety of tactical responses to tactical approaches. This exercises, both separately and conjointly, the full utilization of abstract strategic thinking and logical tactical computation.
Thus Go 9x9 and Chess are both tactical calculation; Go 13x13 is strategic-tactical or tactical depending on position, weakly exercising abstract reasoning and more strongly exercising tactical calculation; and Go 19x19 exercises the full breadth of abstract strategic thinking, blended thinking (including feedback looping tactics into strategic impact and strategy into tactical options), and direct tactical thinking (when the immediate position is only a win-lose proposition, not a resultant strategic position proposition).
I am better at Go 13x13 because I can cover the weaknesses in my abilities while abusing the weaknesses in my opponent's abilities. It is an easy game for me because I start with the option of using whichever mode of thinking I'm better at in the current position, and retain that until it's too late to really swing the game. 9x9 relies on tactical calculation, while 19x19 relies on effective use of the greatest breadth of mental skills based on what's on the board more than what I feel like I can handle at the time; I like 19x19 because it forces me to grow and learn.
Computational analysis is not relevant for wide-play of Go because it's impossible and there are other, more abstract ways to do this. There are even computer algorithms to analyze influence and use this to analyze strategic strengths and weaknesses, then analyze those areas of the board to analyze the strategic position. Humans are better at it, but direct computation isn't the only way to approach the problem.
I'm guilty of not taking my accounting final exams in college. Because my grades were high enough that the dent from completely failing the final netted me an A at just above 90%.
Point still stands: bitcoins aren't going to show up on a boat and net you a phone call demanding you come get this stuff and pay warehousing fees. Stocks cannot be sold unless there is liquidity; and there are a great many stocks that aren't liquid enough to withstand your average day-trader's funds, whereby a NYSE listed security can't handle a $25,000 sell order in a day. Build-a-Bear Workshop can't do it, for example. I've had trouble buying and selling Sinclair Broadcast Group (SBGI), and they own oh... better than 60% of all the television broadcast stations in the United States? Four trading days for a market sell of 5000 shares to go through completely, for a $2 BILLION a year revenue company!
This is actually rather interesting, and is better than soliciting a "Look at this cool link I found!" from the user. I agree with the post--this is basically a giant ass-dance of "We make it move around more so it's harder to hit! That's security!" (that's an arms race, which we live in already; and it's an automated one that we already have software to mitigate--the fucking web browser). He's provided me a source to point and say, "This smart fellow understands and says the same thing I am," since I would look at this shit and go "uh no" and non-savvy management would go "but it says security!"
He misses things like the technology completely fucking up any kind of caching you want to do, or neutering itself to not do that. Also the "changing form field names" thing... it better change them back on the way back in (and how does it track that i.e. from shared IP addresses? Cookies?), because otherwise your web apps are in for a world of hurt!
The previous generation trying to hold onto power, the younger generation trying to become empowered.
That, or the right to go bowling on Tuesdays, it's a tough call.
Fixed.
Pentagon Federal sends me a new CC with a new number when the old one expires.
This is the slippery slope fallacy. What you said was "You do know where fire goes, right? Nero burned Rome!" and argued that we shouldn't have stoves and should eat all meat cold and raw.
Some of us would say "What does this bullshit mean? ...well it's logically inconsistent and insane, and too wordy, and open to interpretation. Let's rewrite it straightforward and without ambiguity that can be exploited by creative interpretation."
The US FTC will probably investigate Network Solutions for this. High-pressure sales tactics will get you fined and barred from ever working in anything financial or sales-related again. This is high-pressure sales and beyond.
You are stuck with stocks until you find a buyer. The thing is a boat doesn't show up at a dock and you have to come get them.
Once you BUY bitcoin, you have bitcoin. Once you BUY GOOG, you have GOOG.
Once you BUY 4000 tonnes Coal, you have a contract for 4000 tonnes Coal. 45 days later, you get a phone call. Somebody starts charging you because you have 4000 tonnes Coal being warehoused at the docks, and you need to pay $40,000/day until you can find a buyer to take it off your hands. That coal physically shows up, just like Bitcoin and GOOG do not.
Stocks are NOT a liquid investment because you cannot buy (most) things with them. They must first be sold. A liquid asset is petty cash; a checking account is liquid; a line of credit has liquidity; bonds are illiquid, stocks are illiquid. Did you not take Economics in high school, or Accounting in college?
No, wrong. CO binds to hemoglobin strongly. Oxygen binds weakly, but stronger than CO2. The partial pressure of oxygen being 0, oxygen will boil out of the blood and be replaced with nitrogen; then you will die. A 100% nitrogen atmosphere WILL remove all oxygen from your blood in roughly 1 second.
Common stock usually carries with it the right to vote on certain matters, such as electing the board of directors. However, a company can have both a "voting" and "non-voting" class of common stock.
Non-voting common stock is now common. But I see preferred stock is also non-voting. Often preferred stock is custom-issued, too, with certain rights attached to it as desired (for example when Warren Buffet negotiated a 7% dividend in Bank of America!).
Again: a lot of stocks are illiquid. Penny stocks are both illiquid and not as regulated, but not unregulated. And trading coffee beans? If the boat shows up at the docks, you need to come get your coffee; when do the bitcoins show up?
said they will not bother to raid properties where persons are using drugs if the property is worth less than $50,000.
Versus
they simply said that they wouldn't expend the resources to send agents if there wasn't property of at least $50,000 value to be seized.
They won't come and arrest you if it isn't profitable. That doesn't mean it's not alright; it just means they won't bother doing anything about it.
Nitrogen can't just "not work". It displaces oxygen in the blood. You would have no oxygen; you may as well be flushed out the airlock of the ISS.
Doctors cannot administer lethal injection or write prescription for the drugs. The hippocratic oath demands they do no harm. This is also why abortion is patently ridiculous: doctors are sworn to do no such thing, explicitly. People argue about legality, but I have to ask who the hell is going to perform all these abortions?
They haven't. It's not a rational thing; it has to be an underlying, instinctive fear. That's why in places where gang crime runs wild the death penalty has no deterrent effect: you executed 1 murderer in several hundred murders involving other murderers. Their daily criminal life is more likely to get them killed than a state execution.
Execution deters people who are impulsed to murder, who let go their convictions to not kill someone, and immediately encounter a fear they're well aware of but have never in their life faced: the fear that they WILL die for this. If you're afraid you're going to die at any time any day, this doesn't make half a difference. If you're well-socialized, you probably don't face that fear a hell of a lot, and when it hits the back of your mind you will stop dead what you are doing.