I'm not talking about the poor, I'm talking about those who were middle and upper middle or the chidlren of middle / upper middle, seeing "oh fuck, shit I'm going to be poorer than my parents"
No offence, but that's utter bollocks. It is not only logically absurd, it is psychologically farcical.
If you're the sort of person who bases their idea of happiness solely on how much money you've got, you're the sort of person who will do something about making money, not top yourself. Virtually anyone can do two jobs and live a frugal lifestyle if they're really that bothered just about acquiring money.
That very clearly and unambiguously says that suicide rates are lower among areas that are less poor and/or experiencing less strife.
No need to read between the lines, it is a simple statement that leaves little room for interpretation.
The numbers speak for themselves 42 percent are attributed to a relationship problem. Only 16 percent were financially based - although I wonder how they differentiate. In my neck of the woods, there have been several suicides that were both relationship based as well as financially based. This was in nasty divorce cases where one of the ex-partners was financially decimated.
The point is that if you're really rich and you have to give half your wealth to your ex-wife/husband, you're still fairly rich. If you're just coping financially and have to give half your wealth to your ex-wife/husband, you're then suddenly poor.
For every movie that is made, one or more shell companies are created. The shell companies pay the movie studio, and each other, and all of these "costs" are subtracted from any revenue the movie generates, even though these "costs" are literally nothing more than taking money out of your left pocket and put it into your right pocket.
But surely the right pocket has then made a profit?
Given it's received national media coverage in multiple countries, not hearing about it means you've failed to keep track of current affairs.
Well if it's mentioned in passing on the web site of the Daily Express in England and Scotland, I suppose that's technically "national media coverage in multiple countries".
Going back in time and killing your ancestor, an alleged paradox, isn't. You can't violate the Law of Causality no matter how hard you try. It would _instantly_ cause you to cease to exist. Ergo, there is no paradox.
You're missing the point of the paradox, which is that by killing your ancestor you would never have existed at all, so therefore you couldn't have gone back in time to kill your ancestor, so therefore your ancestor must still be alive, so therefore you can go back in time to kill him and so on in an infinite loop.
All fish, large and small, not just the criminal fish. This sort of law is incapable of discerning criminality.
Random real world example: Mom+pop store puts weekly revenue in the bank. Bank gets ornery when they make more than $10k/week, because "suspicious transaction reporting" paperwork. Mom+pop store doesn't know why, but obliges bank by splitting deposits. Gov't agent swoops in, "structuring", and liberates mom+pop from their hard-earned, prosecuting them besides for money laundring and mail fraud. Just one example.
Even if they drop the case --but curiously neglect to give back the money-- that's already easily enough to destroy years of hard honest work. Being a law-abiding citizen makes you much more vulnerable to that sort of thing, since it's so much harder to recover from. Even if you have "nothing to hide". It makes one wish to sit on a large stash of ill-gotten loot to make the pain go away.
It illustrates the problem: The government pretends to be able to discern whose money stinks worse.
Bullshit, any legitimate business would far rather deal in electronic money. Cash in large quantities is simply a security risk.
Of course, for the libertarians on slashdot, evading tax is counted as an act of heroism rather than a crime, hence the curious nostalgia for cash transactions.
Yeah, I may be missing something, but I don't follow TFA's argument that because it will love all life it will think monster truck shows are disgusting. Is the idea that monster trucks are a form of life, and that having them in shows is akin to old-fashioned performing lions in circuses or something?
If/when some sort of machine "AI" comes into existence, it will not mean that all other machines at that point transform into mini-AIs.
Avengers were a team with male and female character. Superman and Batman are lone heroes.
Traditionally many of those adventure movies had a checklist of 12 plot features. It was describedf on this site many postings ago. Things like:
The Hero, The sidekick, The mentor, The foe, The girlfriend, The departure, The secret weapon, The first failed attempt, The lost buddy, The final success, The journey home, The celebration
You can fit movies like Star Wars and The Hobbit into this checklist.
That sort of reductionist structuralism tells you nothing useful at all though. It's like all those "there are only X basic storylines" gags. They are unable to explain why one film or book is great, while another with a similar structure is utter crap.
You could map the broad outline of a Jane Austen novel against a generic Mills & Boon romance and say they are basically the same, but it would be meaningless.
Gosh, who'd have thought a film about God handing out the Ten Commandments could be turned into a morality story instead of the lighthearted rom-com it originally was.
This again. There's no need to get all Paranormal Activity on poor Einstein; the term he used was 'spukhafte Fernwirkung', which is not 'spooky action at a distance', it's much better translated as 'ghostly action at a distance'.
Could you please explain how 'ghostly' is less paranormal than 'spooky'? In my opinion, 'ghostly' is more magicky than 'spooky'.
You have two laptops, one of which has Windows installed, the other Linux. You give two Tesla drivers a laptop each and one of them drives to Mars. The one who switches on the laptop and finds it has Windows is the loser.
If you're going to commit a crime, make sure you spread as much random DNA around as possible. Grab an ashtray full of cigarette butts and a plastic bag full of used disposable coffee cups on the way and scatter all those other people's DNA samples all over the scene before you flee. Drown that crime scene in other people's DNA.
Better to torch the entire crime scene and in so doing destroy all DNA on site. You're overthinking it, son.
Nuke the entire site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.
Then again in the UK you get 25 days minimum plus national holidays by law, and I'm up to 30 days with the option to buy an extra 5.
No, the minimum in the UK is 5.6 weeks = 28 days including bank holiday, but a good employer will give you 23-25 days PLUS eight days bank holiday.
Correct. For a long time here in the UK any half-decent employer has given you 20 days + 8 days bank holiday as a minimum anyway. So the legal minimum is just enshrining in law what is normal.
Sorry, my mistake, it's another blatant interference with the Will Of Parliament from crazed EU officials trying to destroy the British way of life, which will be cancelled once we reach the Sunlit Uplands of Brexitania.
He had to sign a paper saying he understood that he had to remain alert with his hands on the wheel to even get the feature turned on
If Tesla just admitted up front that you had to drive with your hands on the wheel and remain alert at all times, that would be fine. It is the way they simultaneously try to sell it as practically self driving while denying legal liability that is so annoying.
Slashdot Mirror
there are many reasons why having phones in class is a good thing: shooters, terrorists, medical emergency
All those should be covered by the responsible adults running the school. Seriously.
fights
I fail to see how the ability to video fights on your phone and post them on YouTube is some sort of fundamental human right.
*for example my grandfather used to ride a horse to school at 7am every morning *after* milking the cows and helping with odd-jobs around the farm.
A horse? You flash git.
I'm not talking about the poor, I'm talking about those who were middle and upper middle or the chidlren of middle / upper middle, seeing "oh fuck, shit I'm going to be poorer than my parents"
No offence, but that's utter bollocks. It is not only logically absurd, it is psychologically farcical.
If you're the sort of person who bases their idea of happiness solely on how much money you've got, you're the sort of person who will do something about making money, not top yourself. Virtually anyone can do two jobs and live a frugal lifestyle if they're really that bothered just about acquiring money.
That very clearly and unambiguously says that suicide rates are lower among areas that are less poor and/or experiencing less strife.
No need to read between the lines, it is a simple statement that leaves little room for interpretation.
The numbers speak for themselves 42 percent are attributed to a relationship problem. Only 16 percent were financially based - although I wonder how they differentiate. In my neck of the woods, there have been several suicides that were both relationship based as well as financially based. This was in nasty divorce cases where one of the ex-partners was financially decimated.
The point is that if you're really rich and you have to give half your wealth to your ex-wife/husband, you're still fairly rich. If you're just coping financially and have to give half your wealth to your ex-wife/husband, you're then suddenly poor.
According to the article you posted: The original trilogy did make a profit, they just hid it.
People always say things like this, but surely the tax authorities would be quite interested if it was actually true?
The accounting is all one big scam these days.
I has always been that way.
For every movie that is made, one or more shell companies are created. The shell companies pay the movie studio, and each other, and all of these "costs" are subtracted from any revenue the movie generates, even though these "costs" are literally nothing more than taking money out of your left pocket and put it into your right pocket.
But surely the right pocket has then made a profit?
You sure know your Disney action figures.
Given it's received national media coverage in multiple countries, not hearing about it means you've failed to keep track of current affairs.
Well if it's mentioned in passing on the web site of the Daily Express in England and Scotland, I suppose that's technically "national media coverage in multiple countries".
Yes, you are old. Iâ(TM)m 36 and Iâ(TM)m old
I'm over 50 but at least I can post a fucking apostrophe.
Back when Galileo was talking about "orbits" and such, I'm sure he had the same pushback -- "you IDIOT, how stupid ARE you?".
This is known as the "they laughed at Einstein" argument and it's total bollocks.
Going back in time and killing your ancestor, an alleged paradox, isn't. You can't violate the Law of Causality no matter how hard you try. It would _instantly_ cause you to cease to exist. Ergo, there is no paradox.
You're missing the point of the paradox, which is that by killing your ancestor you would never have existed at all, so therefore you couldn't have gone back in time to kill your ancestor, so therefore your ancestor must still be alive, so therefore you can go back in time to kill him and so on in an infinite loop.
All fish, large and small, not just the criminal fish. This sort of law is incapable of discerning criminality.
Random real world example: Mom+pop store puts weekly revenue in the bank. Bank gets ornery when they make more than $10k/week, because "suspicious transaction reporting" paperwork. Mom+pop store doesn't know why, but obliges bank by splitting deposits. Gov't agent swoops in, "structuring", and liberates mom+pop from their hard-earned, prosecuting them besides for money laundring and mail fraud. Just one example.
Even if they drop the case --but curiously neglect to give back the money-- that's already easily enough to destroy years of hard honest work. Being a law-abiding citizen makes you much more vulnerable to that sort of thing, since it's so much harder to recover from. Even if you have "nothing to hide". It makes one wish to sit on a large stash of ill-gotten loot to make the pain go away.
It illustrates the problem: The government pretends to be able to discern whose money stinks worse.
Bullshit, any legitimate business would far rather deal in electronic money. Cash in large quantities is simply a security risk.
Of course, for the libertarians on slashdot, evading tax is counted as an act of heroism rather than a crime, hence the curious nostalgia for cash transactions.
If/when some sort of machine "AI" comes into existence, it will not mean that all other machines at that point transform into mini-AIs.
There is no obligation to be "fair" when fighting injustice.
I disagree. Do not commit injustices to prevent injustice, as you merely perpetuate injustice.
It is a logical fallacy that all injustices are equal.
Avengers were a team with male and female character. Superman and Batman are lone heroes.
Traditionally many of those adventure movies had a checklist of 12 plot features. It was describedf on this site many postings ago. Things like: The Hero, The sidekick, The mentor, The foe, The girlfriend, The departure, The secret weapon, The first failed attempt, The lost buddy, The final success, The journey home, The celebration
You can fit movies like Star Wars and The Hobbit into this checklist.
That sort of reductionist structuralism tells you nothing useful at all though. It's like all those "there are only X basic storylines" gags. They are unable to explain why one film or book is great, while another with a similar structure is utter crap.
You could map the broad outline of a Jane Austen novel against a generic Mills & Boon romance and say they are basically the same, but it would be meaningless.
The 1923 version is basically a morality story
Gosh, who'd have thought a film about God handing out the Ten Commandments could be turned into a morality story instead of the lighthearted rom-com it originally was.
A good bike is like 5 grand.
You appear to have misspelled fucking expensive.
This again. There's no need to get all Paranormal Activity on poor Einstein; the term he used was 'spukhafte Fernwirkung', which is not 'spooky action at a distance', it's much better translated as 'ghostly action at a distance'.
Could you please explain how 'ghostly' is less paranormal than 'spooky'? In my opinion, 'ghostly' is more magicky than 'spooky'.
You have two laptops, one of which has Windows installed, the other Linux. You give two Tesla drivers a laptop each and one of them drives to Mars. The one who switches on the laptop and finds it has Windows is the loser.
If you're going to commit a crime, make sure you spread as much random DNA around as possible. Grab an ashtray full of cigarette butts and a plastic bag full of used disposable coffee cups on the way and scatter all those other people's DNA samples all over the scene before you flee. Drown that crime scene in other people's DNA.
Better to torch the entire crime scene and in so doing destroy all DNA on site. You're overthinking it, son.
Nuke the entire site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.
As long as there is other matching evidence I am more agreeable with the testing, but if the only evidence is DNA match that is just not enough.
No prosecutor is going to win a case based on a single piece of evidence, DNA or otherwise.
Here in Europe we get 120 paid days off per year! What a country!
Europe isn't a country. You must be an American.
It's. A. Joke.
Then again in the UK you get 25 days minimum plus national holidays by law, and I'm up to 30 days with the option to buy an extra 5.
No, the minimum in the UK is 5.6 weeks = 28 days including bank holiday, but a good employer will give you 23-25 days PLUS eight days bank holiday.
Correct. For a long time here in the UK any half-decent employer has given you 20 days + 8 days bank holiday as a minimum anyway. So the legal minimum is just enshrining in law what is normal.
Sorry, my mistake, it's another blatant interference with the Will Of Parliament from crazed EU officials trying to destroy the British way of life, which will be cancelled once we reach the Sunlit Uplands of Brexitania.
Other countries with actual worker rights have been classifying them as regular employees for a taxi service....
This is UberBLACK, which is most definitely not a taxi service, since it's a limo service.
Is there any difference between a taxi service and a limo service, apart from the fact that limos are bigger and more expensive?
He had to sign a paper saying he understood that he had to remain alert with his hands on the wheel to even get the feature turned on
If Tesla just admitted up front that you had to drive with your hands on the wheel and remain alert at all times, that would be fine. It is the way they simultaneously try to sell it as practically self driving while denying legal liability that is so annoying.