Space flight isn't constantly plagued with problems. They've had a run of bad luck in the last year and a half, but prior to that they were running ahead of their expected averages.
They're doing OK - don't knock them. Some things go spectacularly well, and some pretty badly, but most go acceptably.
There is redundancy. There's LOTS of redundancy. About half of the levels of redundancy have currently failed, and they're down to the last half. The *nauts have currently around 4 options they can try before they abandon ship.
In NZ it is (or at least used to be) free to write to your MP. I had thought that was a thing that came to us via English law, since that's the basis of our law.
There are all sorts of things insurance companies would love to discriminate against, even though you individually may not have a bad record.
The problem with this argument is that if you individually have a good record, it's in your interest to have the insurance company know that by excessive monitoring.
I instinctively feel that that level of monitoring is wrong, but I think the original poster was looking for coherent arguments to convince the hoi polloi.
At that time, was there any evidence to suggest it might have been deliberate? If I had been president, I would certainly have continued what I was doing. I probably would also have instructed my speechwriters to start working on some sympathy & strength speech, since the president is supposed to react to that kind of thing.
Head for the nearest bunker? Ground all aircraft in the US? Nuke the world? I think any of those'd be an overreaction with the data available at the time.
Whether or not the guy's an idiot, his actions during that time do not constitute evidence of it.
So are the states allowed to decide the method they'll use for vote counting? Could invidual states switch to run-off or stv or some other counting method than plurality?
I heard this story also, but it was in South Africa. It would be considered a man-trap and therefore illegal most places (probably including South Africa.)
It appears to be true (scary!)
http://www.snopes.com/horrors/robbery/carjack.asp
I think that was translated to me as 'keep your chin up'. That's only a vague memory, though, so I might be wrong. It doesn't seem to quite cover the concept, does it?
My interpretation: there was an interesting signal, so Dan Wertheimer said so. 'Interesting' may be a technical term amongst the SETI research community, which is the context in which he was speaking. We all took it to mean something else. Now he's clarifying. They are still continuing to observe the signal, in the sense that next time they get data from that bit of the sky, they'll look at it to see what's up - NOT in the sense that all telescopes will be trained on that part of the sky from now until they've figured out why the odd signal.
Just because it's the only current candidate, doesn't mean it's the only remaining candidate. Candidates come and go, probably fairly frequently.
We all got overexcited, and he's trying to bring us down again.
I'm looking forward to the next bit of data they get from that point in the sky. Unfortunately, it will probably be ultimately boring and probably won't be announced, so I'll die still curious. C'est la mort.
Kuroi = black, written with the kanji for black plus the kana for 'i'
But that's because if you're using the concept of blackness as an adjective, it needs the 'i' at the end to indicate that it's a type 1 adjective, not because you don't have a complete concept without using two characters. It's like saying that the particle 'wa/ha' is part of the word, instead of indicating the subject of the sentence (or is it object? It's been a while).
It works in hearing, too. If your name is mentioned in the middle of a sentence, you can frequently remember the beginning of the sentence, even if you weren't paying attention to that conversation until your name came up.
now I sometimes have trouble speaking to people in English because English doesn't have a word for the concept I'm thinking about
What sort of concepts?
(I learned Japanese a long time ago; so long that I have forgotten much of it except for emergencies and occasional flashes of memory. Hopefully this will stimulate one of them.)
It would be quite interesting to know how many other languages have words for concepts that are unique to that language, and how many words are shared between a few languages but not common to most. It would probably say a fair bit about the differences in culture.
I wonder if Esperanto tries to add new words for concepts that come up in other languages?
This has nothing to do with infinitives, split or otherwise. Infinitives are the form of the verb, 'to x'. Splitting an infinitive involves putting the 'to' on one side of a word or phrase, and the 'x' on the other. HTH.
I would say 'I don't know where to hang that picture' or possibly 'I don't know where to hang up that picture'.
Further, I would say 'Is he going to help his friends move out?'
Perhaps this is a difference between dialects, but your sentences seemed really odd to me - not so much that I could point to a violated rule, but enough to make me uncomfortable reading them.
I think it's legitimate for someone to feel that invading Iraq was wrong, regardless of the scale of the wrong. If they then refused to participate, they would be acting honourably in my view.
I'm not saying that invading Iraq is on a par with the holocaust. I'm saying that you must have and follow your own moral compass. Being conscripted solely for the reason of doing something that you feel is morally wrong, is something you should resist. Preferably through legal means first, but by refusing to obey orders if necessary - even if the majority in your society has decided that you must obey.
Isn't the point of the US constitution to protect the minority from the tyranny of the majority?
Are you saying that it's never honourable to refuse to participate in something that you consider morally wrong? Does your duty to your country always make any action it demands of you right? Can you not like many of the attributes of your country, but want to change that one, and so remain there and try to change it?
The outcome of the Nuremberg trials, where it was determined that following orders does not constitute a defense, puts the obligation on you to make your own moral decisions and follow them - not blindly do what Uncle Sam says.
I don't say whether the war against Iraq was 'wrong' or 'right'. I believe everyone is entitled to their own opinion on the matter.
This sort of argument is a dangerous one that's plagued science for a number of years now: "If there are biological underpinnings for our actions, preferences, and personalities, how can we be responsible for anything?"
But the question itself assumes a connection where none has to exist: Science and ethics aren't connected like that.
It's even more fundamental than that. It doesn't matter whether there are biological underpinnings or free will when deciding how to punish someone. Society can't function when you've got someone freely murdering people. For the community to survive, it must defend itself from the murderer. If (s)he's doing it's because (s)he's ill, and that can be cured in some way, fine. That's a solution that addresses the problem. If not, it doesn't matter whether (s)he's responsible for his/her actions, (s)he's got to go. Maybe nobody is made happy by the necessity, but it's still there.
This rule applies to anyone that does something that harms the community.
Slashdot Mirror
How nervous do you think astronauts are, as a breed?
They're doing OK - don't knock them. Some things go spectacularly well, and some pretty badly, but most go acceptably.
There is redundancy. There's LOTS of redundancy. About half of the levels of redundancy have currently failed, and they're down to the last half. The *nauts have currently around 4 options they can try before they abandon ship.
In NZ it is (or at least used to be) free to write to your MP. I had thought that was a thing that came to us via English law, since that's the basis of our law.
I instinctively feel that that level of monitoring is wrong, but I think the original poster was looking for coherent arguments to convince the hoi polloi.
Head for the nearest bunker? Ground all aircraft in the US? Nuke the world? I think any of those'd be an overreaction with the data available at the time.
Whether or not the guy's an idiot, his actions during that time do not constitute evidence of it.
So are the states allowed to decide the method they'll use for vote counting? Could invidual states switch to run-off or stv or some other counting method than plurality?
Gilmore is not the defendant. He is the plaintiff. So his right to face his accuser doesn't really apply.
It appears to be true (scary!) http://www.snopes.com/horrors/robbery/carjack.asp
I think that was translated to me as 'keep your chin up'. That's only a vague memory, though, so I might be wrong. It doesn't seem to quite cover the concept, does it?
Just because it's the only current candidate, doesn't mean it's the only remaining candidate. Candidates come and go, probably fairly frequently.
We all got overexcited, and he's trying to bring us down again.
I'm looking forward to the next bit of data they get from that point in the sky. Unfortunately, it will probably be ultimately boring and probably won't be announced, so I'll die still curious. C'est la mort.
It works in hearing, too. If your name is mentioned in the middle of a sentence, you can frequently remember the beginning of the sentence, even if you weren't paying attention to that conversation until your name came up.
My brain clearly couldn't be bothered to go through the multisyllabic possibilities.
(But it could be bothered to analyse that fact, and also to post to slashdot... my brain may need to recalculate its priorities...)
(I learned Japanese a long time ago; so long that I have forgotten much of it except for emergencies and occasional flashes of memory. Hopefully this will stimulate one of them.)
It would be quite interesting to know how many other languages have words for concepts that are unique to that language, and how many words are shared between a few languages but not common to most. It would probably say a fair bit about the differences in culture.
I wonder if Esperanto tries to add new words for concepts that come up in other languages?
I've also heard added that it sometimes comes away with the pocket lint.
This has nothing to do with infinitives, split or otherwise. Infinitives are the form of the verb, 'to x'. Splitting an infinitive involves putting the 'to' on one side of a word or phrase, and the 'x' on the other. HTH.
Further, I would say 'Is he going to help his friends move out?'
Perhaps this is a difference between dialects, but your sentences seemed really odd to me - not so much that I could point to a violated rule, but enough to make me uncomfortable reading them.
I wonder what kind of psychological tests you could develop based on which words you had to spend longer on...?
I'm not saying that invading Iraq is on a par with the holocaust. I'm saying that you must have and follow your own moral compass. Being conscripted solely for the reason of doing something that you feel is morally wrong, is something you should resist. Preferably through legal means first, but by refusing to obey orders if necessary - even if the majority in your society has decided that you must obey.
Isn't the point of the US constitution to protect the minority from the tyranny of the majority?
The outcome of the Nuremberg trials, where it was determined that following orders does not constitute a defense, puts the obligation on you to make your own moral decisions and follow them - not blindly do what Uncle Sam says.
I don't say whether the war against Iraq was 'wrong' or 'right'. I believe everyone is entitled to their own opinion on the matter.
Oh, I don't know - 'sarcasm' maybe?
This rule applies to anyone that does something that harms the community.
Nah... you just became disoriented.