If you get a job you get a high school diploma. If you don't get a job you enter the High School Dropout statistic instead.
This way statistics can more easily point to the fact that getting an education (which can be really expensive with student loans etc.) is the only way to get a job. Stay in school, kids!
The house burning down is not a direct result of burning out.
If you burn out, your productivity suffers. When your productivity suffers enough, you get fired. When you get fired, you stop getting money. Maybe combined with the burnout, getting fired sends you into a depression spiral. Even without depression and lingering burnout, the job market is NOT good, so it will take time to get a new job that pays anything. Without money coming in, it becomes hard to impossible to pay the mortgage, so the house goes. Without a stable address, getting a new job gets even harder. And so on.
I think you're overestimating how many people wouldn't be able to get a proper license for having their gun in the first place, and of those who remain, the ability to organize and NOT blow each other's brains out over a difference in opinions beyond having tons of guns.
I haven't even listened to rap music to know that. The Desert Eagle is the totally OP handgun in so many shooters I've lost count. Max Payne took it up a notch and let you dualwield Desert Eagles.
More like 15, if you consider nine months from conception to birth, and the kid being more likely to be more than three months past his/her birthday than not.
Person tries to empathize with pain described by imagining what it would feel like.
Perception of pain IS REDUCED.
Objective expression of empathy becomes reduced as a result, but subjectively, seen from the people in the test? They probably didn't feel less empathic.
I am reminded of an old comic strip in which Mickey Mouse on one of his many adventures got tossed into the future, around year 3000 or so. Among other things, exercise bikes now came with an engine so you wouldn't over-exert yourself.
What if Facebook gets absolutely FLOODED with false reports, making it so it is physically impossible for them to sift through the reports in 24 hours from receipt? They need to either make it so a report means stuff gets removed without oversight (bad) or they need to check everything manually that an algorithm says MIGHT be illegal (costly), OR leave the potentially illegal stuff up for more than 24 hours (even more costly).
Imagine a massive botnet filing reports on ALL PAGES ON FACEBOOK at the same time. They WILL get a bunch of correct hits or this law wouldn't exist in the first place, but it's going to ruin Facebook to hire enough people to check all of their data in 24 hours.
So because it has gone well so far, just keep doing it? How does that theory work for playing Russian Roulette?
I didn't see the article you refer to, so I'll take the numbers at face value. That sounds great.
But what if the next degree hotter means 3% more arid areas and 4% more forest, then the next one is 7% more arid and 1% more forest...
Can we at least agree that at some point, the heat across the globe - if it continues to go up and only up - will cause more arid areas than vegetative ones?
To play devil's advocate for a moment, the future is the hardest thing to predict.
It is entirely possible that the 120 days was a 'first wave' kind of deal, to see around day 100 how far they'd gotten, if they needed more time with another decree etc. Perhaps some of the measures they wanted to put in place during those 120 days would be in response to how the affected countries responded, if they found other means of getting to America and so on. Obviously those measures are REALLY hard to get done if you don't have the necessary data due to no ban having been in place.
I don't recall the details of the case and can't be bothered to read up on it, but according to the summary it's a drug investigation. It's a pretty far leap from there to national security.
Also, four years. If nothing's happened yet based on the information in those emails it's VERY unlikely anything is going to happen ever. That alone should rule out a national security issue.
Car insurance is mandatory in European countries as well, mostly because if you total someone else's car it's unlikely that you can afford to buy them a new car WITHOUT insurance.
I'm European, so my answer isn't "Yes" or even "Hell yes", it's "Why the hell SHOULDN'T it be a requirement that you know how to handle a lethal weapon before you get to have one?"
You should get caught driving an uninsured car with no license, then make that argument in court. Let us know how that works out for ya.:-)
By your logic, flying is a right, not a privilege. Anyone should be able to get into the pilot seat of an airplane if they can afford to buy one, safety of everyone else be damned.
Remember. Your freedom to swing your fist ends at the tip of my nose. Same thing goes for breaking the rules about when and how you may drive.
Slashdot Mirror
What are you talking about? It's a perfect plan!
If you get a job you get a high school diploma.
If you don't get a job you enter the High School Dropout statistic instead.
This way statistics can more easily point to the fact that getting an education (which can be really expensive with student loans etc.) is the only way to get a job. Stay in school, kids!
It's the classic question all over again: Do you work to live, or do you live to work?
The house burning down is not a direct result of burning out.
If you burn out, your productivity suffers. When your productivity suffers enough, you get fired. When you get fired, you stop getting money. Maybe combined with the burnout, getting fired sends you into a depression spiral. Even without depression and lingering burnout, the job market is NOT good, so it will take time to get a new job that pays anything. Without money coming in, it becomes hard to impossible to pay the mortgage, so the house goes. Without a stable address, getting a new job gets even harder. And so on.
And similarly you are free to own a firearm - but bringing it anywhere in public is a privilege. Same logic, right?
I think you're overestimating how many people wouldn't be able to get a proper license for having their gun in the first place, and of those who remain, the ability to organize and NOT blow each other's brains out over a difference in opinions beyond having tons of guns.
I haven't even listened to rap music to know that. The Desert Eagle is the totally OP handgun in so many shooters I've lost count. Max Payne took it up a notch and let you dualwield Desert Eagles.
More like 15, if you consider nine months from conception to birth, and the kid being more likely to be more than three months past his/her birthday than not.
You mean like the right to be free to travel? With a lot of restrictions in the interest of the stability and safety of society in general.
Look at how that went down at Waco.
You shoot the guy that tries to take your gun? The SWAT team outside turns your house into Swiss cheese, and you with it.
Pretty sure I'm not retarded, thanks for asking.
Are you capable of reading replies in a discussion in the proper order, though? Because what you're saying after your insult AGREES WITH ME.
Doesn't change the fact that their genes get carried on regardless, which is the whole point of calling it the DARWIN Award.
Perception of pain is reduced by the medicine.
Person tries to empathize with pain described by imagining what it would feel like.
Perception of pain IS REDUCED.
Objective expression of empathy becomes reduced as a result, but subjectively, seen from the people in the test? They probably didn't feel less empathic.
Why not just deliver it as a kind of small, installable game? That's ... essentially what this is in the first place.
I am reminded of an old comic strip in which Mickey Mouse on one of his many adventures got tossed into the future, around year 3000 or so. Among other things, exercise bikes now came with an engine so you wouldn't over-exert yourself.
This is kinda like that.
My goal in life is to BE a passive hedonist, you insensitive clod!
Consider the scale.
What if Facebook gets absolutely FLOODED with false reports, making it so it is physically impossible for them to sift through the reports in 24 hours from receipt? They need to either make it so a report means stuff gets removed without oversight (bad) or they need to check everything manually that an algorithm says MIGHT be illegal (costly), OR leave the potentially illegal stuff up for more than 24 hours (even more costly).
Imagine a massive botnet filing reports on ALL PAGES ON FACEBOOK at the same time. They WILL get a bunch of correct hits or this law wouldn't exist in the first place, but it's going to ruin Facebook to hire enough people to check all of their data in 24 hours.
So because it has gone well so far, just keep doing it? How does that theory work for playing Russian Roulette?
I didn't see the article you refer to, so I'll take the numbers at face value. That sounds great.
But what if the next degree hotter means 3% more arid areas and 4% more forest, then the next one is 7% more arid and 1% more forest ...
Can we at least agree that at some point, the heat across the globe - if it continues to go up and only up - will cause more arid areas than vegetative ones?
Just because a theory has already lost in court doesn't mean a big company can't use it to scare the average citizen.
To play devil's advocate for a moment, the future is the hardest thing to predict.
It is entirely possible that the 120 days was a 'first wave' kind of deal, to see around day 100 how far they'd gotten, if they needed more time with another decree etc. Perhaps some of the measures they wanted to put in place during those 120 days would be in response to how the affected countries responded, if they found other means of getting to America and so on. Obviously those measures are REALLY hard to get done if you don't have the necessary data due to no ban having been in place.
They'll pay it in Bitcoin.
On the other hand I have the freedom to assume that your average mentally ill person is 1) taken care of, and 2) doesn't have access to a firearm.
I like those two freedoms. Do you have those in the US?
When isn't it national security?
I don't recall the details of the case and can't be bothered to read up on it, but according to the summary it's a drug investigation. It's a pretty far leap from there to national security.
Also, four years. If nothing's happened yet based on the information in those emails it's VERY unlikely anything is going to happen ever. That alone should rule out a national security issue.
Car insurance is mandatory in European countries as well, mostly because if you total someone else's car it's unlikely that you can afford to buy them a new car WITHOUT insurance.
I'm European, so my answer isn't "Yes" or even "Hell yes", it's "Why the hell SHOULDN'T it be a requirement that you know how to handle a lethal weapon before you get to have one?"
See also: Cars, planes.
You should get caught driving an uninsured car with no license, then make that argument in court. Let us know how that works out for ya. :-)
By your logic, flying is a right, not a privilege. Anyone should be able to get into the pilot seat of an airplane if they can afford to buy one, safety of everyone else be damned.
Remember. Your freedom to swing your fist ends at the tip of my nose. Same thing goes for breaking the rules about when and how you may drive.