What? That's nothing. You should'a seen 'em egg on the Spanish-American war. (Which by the way, our modern ironclads totally r0x0r3d their antequated wooden galleys)
There is a penalty for journalists who fail to do their job properly. It's called a 'pulitzer' (take that hearst)
But you can't blame them. They're not content to sit on the sidelines and tell people things they didn't know. (unless they're reporting about starving people or something) They want to be part of the story. Just watch a press conference on c-span. The reporters come up with some of the most lame-brained ideas*, which sound even stupider because they have to phrase their suggestions as questions.
*and that's saying something since the other people in the room are politicians.
That's rediculous. If Hitler himself had written a review of various paintings, its value would be independant of his desire to kill jews. It would probably still be worthless based on descriptions of his own art, but it would have nothing to do with the fact that he was also a monster.
I move that we actually change the "prefered" usage of the term RAID to RAID array or similar to enhance the redundancy involved. This is the one circumstance where repeating terms in the acronym is actually appropriate.
--
Now, how do i indicate that this was not intended as sarcasm without the statement itself appearing sarcastic...
because "med school" is a decade of building a massively cross-referenced relational database within the mind of the new doctor and training fine motor skills in the sawboneses. Further this is exactly how you want the vast majority of "human-technitions" to be. Very few people are imaginative enough to expand their field whatever it may be. Those people we call Doctors.. of Philosophy. People who doctor you are doctors of medicine.
Ok, but if it's even vaguely interpretable as unconstitutional, a high-priced lawyer with a catchy jingle like, "if x don't ____it, you must aquit" will surely get the evidence thrown out of court. Of course the next question is, If the wiretap leads to other evidence, that probably wouldn't have been found without the knowledge gained from the tap, is the other evidence also tainted enough to get thrown out? What if it would've been found out, but now there's no way of knowing? The loophole might be that you talk about everything illegal you're doing if it's being tapped so that any evidence gathered after that point is thrown out for being related to the illegal tap.
There's an old saying, goes something like, "90% of hunches are based on evidence the detective got illegally" or somesuch. Unless you're talking about lawyer shows. then ALL of the hunches are based on illegal evidence. (but the bad guys were really bad y'know, so they had it coming.)
Does this compare 12 months of 2004 to 9 months of 2005 we've had? or is it comparing similar time periods. 'cause if it's the former, there's still a quarter of 2005 left to average in there that's famous for "cheezy horror flicks". Also, there are some small sample size issues especially wrt. IMDB. as well as selection effects: within the past year, they require membership for even viewing the comments, this has caused me to visit IMDB less and less as i find it annoying to click an interesting comment, be told i must log in, log in, end up at the main page, enter the back history for my browser being careful not to go to the login page, find the movie page, click on the comment again, find out it was just another pointless diatribe as to what minute point about the movie was "the best ever"/"sucked the big one" followed by alternating points of view with as much reasoning. so with a sample size of 1, IMDB rates much lower than last year. Yes, I realize the irony of this post.
Passengers in modern aircraft only have two things to worry about.
1) where am i going to put my head while I sleep so i don't get a kink in my neck or have to smell Mr. breathing is enough effort to cause him to sweat who should've bought two seats sitting next to me?
2) what do I do if that funny looking plastic thing pops down in front of me?
(which works even if the bag isn't inflating? anyone an EMT deal with O2 wanna chime in as to why the bag wouldn't inflate?)
Well yes, but then even with bernouli effect, you'd be directing air downward just from a control volume point of view. It's my understanding that at low speeds, it can make sense to design wings to generate bernoulli lift, but as speed increases, the drag resultant from the needed curves makes it horribly inefficient.
There were eight Bernoullis. and the bernoulli 'effect' is physically real. It doesn't say anything about catching up or whatnot. It is simply that the energy in a streamline is constant at any point in that streamline. This whole catching up thing sounds a like high school physics text 'virus' to me.
You can produce lift simply from a curved wing design provided there isn't 'boundary layer separation.' So IF the streamlines meet again after the wing, you can calculate how much lift this would provide. It's not much, but it's not zero.
If the US had not built the coalition in Iraq-I, would the rest of the world have martialed forces to do the same? the answer to that question may provide some insight into the Taiwan situation since I seem to recall both clinton and bush II stating in as quiet a tone as possible that the US will not support Taiwan in the event of a chinese attack.
I'm not saying that we should or that the rest of the world wouldn't, but I do think that, if it happened tomorrow, we wouldn't, and how would that affect what everyone does?
Yet, many states have already been doing exactly this. My home state of RI argues that sales tax is a tax on its citizens (and visitors i guess). therefore, they have a right to tax (last I was there 7%) your purchases regardless of where you bought them.
Since the state is so small, anyone in the state could (and often did) drive an hour and a half to Massachusetts and buy things like cars, appliances, etc. for only 5% sales tax. (ah the boon of living in small state country) You're supposed to declare what you've purchased and pay the difference to RI. Of course, nobody did, so the clever legislature monkeys (who had recently voted themselves a salary increase from $300 to $10k) made "deals" with large-ticket businesses just across the border to report you even if you don't.
This has been challenged many times and upheld on the grounds that the tax is applied equally to both in-state and out-of-state purchases. and so isn't an interstate tax at all.
Tricky lawyering no doubt, but then if they can argue about the definition of the word 'is' they can argue pretty much anything.
I'm convinced that the reason Lucas hasn't released the original trilogy is because that's the one that everyone really wants: he can get us to buy all the touched up versions for a while then release the original unre-edited version and everyone will buy all of the episodes all over again. If he goes the other way there'd be less rebuying: "well I've already got a version, why do I need this new version where greedo couldn't hit a barn door with his pistol touching the door."
since that version is not available on DVD, people will have to "make do" with the versions that are. I don't think he came up with this plan until after the first re-release (which was before the laserdisk contract ran out IIRC)
Of course, he might not ever release the originals and really milk it with improved versions. Let me be the ten-thousanth to say, "I'm not buying another episode until the originals are released on DVD" and probably not really mean it.
I move that someone start such a distribution and focus on reliability. Then in six months we can see the headlines, "Unreliable Linux more reliable than Windows"
Introductory college ethics courses seem to be more interested in indroducing the terms of interest and promoting trying to understand all the points of argument rather than refuting or supporting any one specific axiom.
Or at least, that's what my anecdotal experience of one class seems to indicate.
In that class, "utilitarianism" was the name given to the principle of "maximizing 'the good' for as many people as possible" Which if follow logically to its extreme could be used to justify killing a small village if it enables millions of people to live an extra year.
Of course, that's a gross oversimplification and the other principles could also be taken to similar outlandish results, but "taking to the extreme" is one method of analyzing ethical situations.
(Ok, one argument was "refuted" in my class, the "slipperly slope" argument. Despite the fact that it is plainly obvious to exist and everyone I know could probably point out at least one instance where it had favorable results and at least one negative. though they wouldn't agree on which to put in which column.)
You don't need to. Just bring it up slowly. There's actually a lower concentration of dissolved O2 in deep water than there is closer to the surface, so the main problem in sustaining a live one would be avoiding it getting the bends. (which it would get from the other dissolved gasses it would have absorbed at depth) and possibly figuring out what to feed it during that time, though from what I've read, pretty much anything. Might have to keep the o2 concentration down at surface also. and where would you put a ~40ft. seagoing monster? Are there any tanks big enugh?
AC, I remember you. You were arguing 3 weeks ago about how there wasn't enough military involvement in the affairs of a certain southern state after a certain windy day.
The curse of democracy is that the citizens will get what they want, no matter how tyrannical it turns out to be. Fortunately this is balanced by itself: as soon as citizens realize how foolish it was, it can be corrected.
In a democracy, there must be millions of tyrants. Unfortunately, there need only be a few tens or hundreds of crooked advisors.
Re:Dear Mr. Civ Creator
on
Ask Sid Meier
·
· Score: 1
It counts until he gets his acceptance letter. He's got about two or three months of counting left if he applied early.
Slashdot Mirror
worked out pretty well for the frogs, right?
What? That's nothing. You should'a seen 'em egg on the Spanish-American war. (Which by the way, our modern ironclads totally r0x0r3d their antequated wooden galleys)
There is a penalty for journalists who fail to do their job properly. It's called a 'pulitzer' (take that hearst)
But you can't blame them. They're not content to sit on the sidelines and tell people things they didn't know. (unless they're reporting about starving people or something) They want to be part of the story. Just watch a press conference on c-span. The reporters come up with some of the most lame-brained ideas*, which sound even stupider because they have to phrase their suggestions as questions.
*and that's saying something since the other people in the room are politicians.
That's rediculous. If Hitler himself had written a review of various paintings, its value would be independant of his desire to kill jews. It would probably still be worthless based on descriptions of his own art, but it would have nothing to do with the fact that he was also a monster.
nitpik:
" on 80x386 on a RAID array"
I move that we actually change the "prefered" usage of the term RAID to RAID array or similar to enhance the redundancy involved. This is the one circumstance where repeating terms in the acronym is actually appropriate.
--
Now, how do i indicate that this was not intended as sarcasm without the statement itself appearing sarcastic...
Wouldn't those be charter flights though? and therefore not subject to inspection since they wouldn't be going through the terminal?
Bah, the price tag is insignificant compared to the cost of soda lime and oxygen fills to keep this thing running every night.
because "med school" is a decade of building a massively cross-referenced relational database within the mind of the new doctor and training fine motor skills in the sawboneses. Further this is exactly how you want the vast majority of "human-technitions" to be. Very few people are imaginative enough to expand their field whatever it may be. Those people we call Doctors.. of Philosophy. People who doctor you are doctors of medicine.
Ok, but if it's even vaguely interpretable as unconstitutional, a high-priced lawyer with a catchy jingle like, "if x don't ____it, you must aquit" will surely get the evidence thrown out of court. Of course the next question is,
If the wiretap leads to other evidence, that probably wouldn't have been found without the knowledge gained from the tap, is the other evidence also tainted enough to get thrown out? What if it would've been found out, but now there's no way of knowing? The loophole might be that you talk about everything illegal you're doing if it's being tapped so that any evidence gathered after that point is thrown out for being related to the illegal tap.
There's an old saying, goes something like, "90% of hunches are based on evidence the detective got illegally" or somesuch. Unless you're talking about lawyer shows. then ALL of the hunches are based on illegal evidence. (but the bad guys were really bad y'know, so they had it coming.)
Does this compare 12 months of 2004 to 9 months of 2005 we've had? or is it comparing similar time periods. 'cause if it's the former, there's still a quarter of 2005 left to average in there that's famous for "cheezy horror flicks". Also, there are some small sample size issues especially wrt. IMDB. as well as selection effects: within the past year, they require membership for even viewing the comments, this has caused me to visit IMDB less and less as i find it annoying to click an interesting comment, be told i must log in, log in, end up at the main page, enter the back history for my browser being careful not to go to the login page, find the movie page, click on the comment again, find out it was just another pointless diatribe as to what minute point about the movie was "the best ever"/"sucked the big one" followed by alternating points of view with as much reasoning. so with a sample size of 1, IMDB rates much lower than last year. Yes, I realize the irony of this post.
Passengers in modern aircraft only have two things to worry about.
1) where am i going to put my head while I sleep so i don't get a kink in my neck or have to smell Mr. breathing is enough effort to cause him to sweat who should've bought two seats sitting next to me?
2) what do I do if that funny looking plastic thing pops down in front of me?
(which works even if the bag isn't inflating? anyone an EMT deal with O2 wanna chime in as to why the bag wouldn't inflate?)
Well yes, but then even with bernouli effect, you'd be directing air downward just from a control volume point of view. It's my understanding that at low speeds, it can make sense to design wings to generate bernoulli lift, but as speed increases, the drag resultant from the needed curves makes it horribly inefficient.
a half-liter? you czechlanders sure drink small beers.
There were eight Bernoullis. and the bernoulli 'effect' is physically real. It doesn't say anything about catching up or whatnot. It is simply that the energy in a streamline is constant at any point in that streamline. This whole catching up thing sounds a like high school physics text 'virus' to me.
You can produce lift simply from a curved wing design provided there isn't 'boundary layer separation.' So IF the streamlines meet again after the wing, you can calculate how much lift this would provide. It's not much, but it's not zero.
If the US had not built the coalition in Iraq-I, would the rest of the world have martialed forces to do the same? the answer to that question may provide some insight into the Taiwan situation since I seem to recall both clinton and bush II stating in as quiet a tone as possible that the US will not support Taiwan in the event of a chinese attack.
I'm not saying that we should or that the rest of the world wouldn't, but I do think that, if it happened tomorrow, we wouldn't, and how would that affect what everyone does?
Yet, many states have already been doing exactly this. My home state of RI argues that sales tax is a tax on its citizens (and visitors i guess). therefore, they have a right to tax (last I was there 7%) your purchases regardless of where you bought them.
Since the state is so small, anyone in the state could (and often did) drive an hour and a half to Massachusetts and buy things like cars, appliances, etc. for only 5% sales tax. (ah the boon of living in small state country) You're supposed to declare what you've purchased and pay the difference to RI. Of course, nobody did, so the clever legislature monkeys (who had recently voted themselves a salary increase from $300 to $10k) made "deals" with large-ticket businesses just across the border to report you even if you don't.
This has been challenged many times and upheld on the grounds that the tax is applied equally to both in-state and out-of-state purchases. and so isn't an interstate tax at all.
Tricky lawyering no doubt, but then if they can argue about the definition of the word 'is' they can argue pretty much anything.
No, by being so effective at killing people, the main purpose (and the overwhelming purpose for which they are used) is to threaten to kill someone.
Two posts, one of which is correct, one of which is overly simplified. I think he proved your point.
I'm convinced that the reason Lucas hasn't released the original trilogy is because that's the one that everyone really wants: he can get us to buy all the touched up versions for a while then release the original unre-edited version and everyone will buy all of the episodes all over again. If he goes the other way there'd be less rebuying: "well I've already got a version, why do I need this new version where greedo couldn't hit a barn door with his pistol touching the door."
since that version is not available on DVD, people will have to "make do" with the versions that are. I don't think he came up with this plan until after the first re-release (which was before the laserdisk contract ran out IIRC)
Of course, he might not ever release the originals and really milk it with improved versions. Let me be the ten-thousanth to say, "I'm not buying another episode until the originals are released on DVD" and probably not really mean it.
I move that someone start such a distribution and focus on reliability. Then in six months we can see the headlines, "Unreliable Linux more reliable than Windows"
Introductory college ethics courses seem to be more interested in indroducing the terms of interest and promoting trying to understand all the points of argument rather than refuting or supporting any one specific axiom.
Or at least, that's what my anecdotal experience of one class seems to indicate.
In that class, "utilitarianism" was the name given to the principle of "maximizing 'the good' for as many people as possible" Which if follow logically to its extreme could be used to justify killing a small village if it enables millions of people to live an extra year.
Of course, that's a gross oversimplification and the other principles could also be taken to similar outlandish results, but "taking to the extreme" is one method of analyzing ethical situations.
(Ok, one argument was "refuted" in my class, the "slipperly slope" argument. Despite the fact that it is plainly obvious to exist and everyone I know could probably point out at least one instance where it had favorable results and at least one negative. though they wouldn't agree on which to put in which column.)
Perhaps you should find the producers behind, "Coupon: the movie" Which i'm told you also negligently failed to watch.
You don't need to. Just bring it up slowly. There's actually a lower concentration of dissolved O2 in deep water than there is closer to the surface, so the main problem in sustaining a live one would be avoiding it getting the bends. (which it would get from the other dissolved gasses it would have absorbed at depth) and possibly figuring out what to feed it during that time, though from what I've read, pretty much anything. Might have to keep the o2 concentration down at surface also. and where would you put a ~40ft. seagoing monster? Are there any tanks big enugh?
I thought this: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0060666/ was the worst movie ever.
AC, I remember you. You were arguing 3 weeks ago about how there wasn't enough military involvement in the affairs of a certain southern state after a certain windy day.
The curse of democracy is that the citizens will get what they want, no matter how tyrannical it turns out to be. Fortunately this is balanced by itself: as soon as citizens realize how foolish it was, it can be corrected.
In a democracy, there must be millions of tyrants. Unfortunately, there need only be a few tens or hundreds of crooked advisors.
It counts until he gets his acceptance letter. He's got about two or three months of counting left if he applied early.