It sounds like that case is taking in a lot more air than it's putting out, resulting in high pressure and unstable airflow. I would expect those fans to fail pretty frequently.
Um, no. 'V' is used as both a vowel and a semi-vowel in Classical Latin, just like 'I', and this is a semi-vowel instance. In Classical Latin, the 'V' would sound like the 'u' in 'quit' or in 'suave', and to our ears 'vagina' would sound very like 'wa-gee-na'. It's not technically a consonant, but it's not really a full vowel either, and the Roman poets counted the 'va' as a single syllable.
In Ecclesiastical Latin, the 'v' becomes a full consonant, and the word would be pronounced va-jee'-na.
You know, this type of comment is one of the most irritating that I see on slashdot. I didn't ask what sources I can find with Google; I can do that on my own, thank you very much. I asked what sources you have.
The sources that I have seen up until now are simply not terribly convincing. For example, the one you linked to is not peer-reviewed, contains no references or data, and was written by a member of a political think tank whose education consists of a B.A. in biology and political science.
You're right; it would be inacceptable for the government to do this sort of thing. Stanford and Harvard are not governments but, as you pointed out in your earlier post, businesses, and they have financial interests to protect, both their own and those of their other, non-cheating customers. This sort of thing is the reason that companies always reserve the right to terminate consumer contracts in their ToS.
I mean, if a cockroach, who has no more than six brain cells, can figure out how to hide if you're chasing it, then it should be no problem for a programmer to figure out how to make an NPC do it.
You're right! All we have to do is shrink all the NPCs down to a few centimeters and let them hide in the wall cracks! Problem solved!
How does this in any way restrict what teenagers eat? The school will still let them buy whatever they want, and any parent who uses the system as an excuse to revoke their teenager's lunch money is not a good parent to begin with.
What this does is enable parents to have a better idea of what their teenager is eating, and whether a dietary problem is developing. You're right that there's nothing wrong with an occasional hamburger. Hopefully most parents would also realize that and not throw a fit when their kid decides to swap out the usual salad for a slice of pizza one day.
A lot of people will say something like this, and I think that most will find that if they seriously think back and evaluate it, they will usually find that by "it was of low quality", what they really mean is "it wasn't fried, and it had less fat and/or sugar".
It would be impossible for them to lay down every possible situation or action their applicants might possibly take and note whether it is to be allowed or not. Maybe it seems unfair that they can punish applicants who did something not explicitly prohibited, but it would be unfair to the university if they didn't. Otherwise, it effectively licenses people to manipulate the rules in their favor by bending them as far as they possibly can without breaking them.
Besides, this is all a part of growing up. Initially you don't know what's right and what's wrong, and nobody ever sits down with you and lists out all the things you're not allowed to do. Thus, you occasionally do something wrong without knowing that it's wrong, you get punished for it, and you learn that it's wrong. Eventually, you just learn a sense of whether something is right or wrong, and nobody needs to spell it out for you any longer.
Evidently, these students have yet to reach that point in their maturity
I don't think either of those things are all that obvious. Sensible and unsurprising, yes. But if the research had not been done, would you be able to look me in the eyes and tell me you were absolutely certain that snacking through the day is healthier than a controlled, scheduled diet?
Firstly, as a senator, Padme was a representative of Naboo, not of the queen, in the same way that U.S. senators are not representatives of the governor of the state they hail from.
Seconly, Jar Jar was taking some initiative in an emergency situation. Is that really a fault? Sure, it turned out to be the wrong initiative, but nobody except Palpatine could have known that, and if Jar Jar hadn't been the one to propose it either because Padme had been there or for some other reason, then Palpatine would have just found somebody else to propose the same thing. After all, he obviously had wide support to begin with, or the rest of the senate would never have gone along with it.
This sounds very, very similar to a project idea that I've had boiling in the back of my mind, and I would very much love to be a part of this. Can you let me know what school you're at, and who your research advisor is?
Sure, if you're only emerging one ebuild. What if you're updating deep dependencies, you've already completed 30 out of the 50 ebuilds, and then suddenly it fails to complete the 31st? Those last 20 packages it was supposed to update might still work, but they also might now have broken linkages.
Lockdowns are not appropriate for many systems. If I can force your account to be locked down so easily, then I have a highly effective means of performing a DOS attack.
A system rather like that was employed in the south following the civil war. The law enforcement would arrest black folks on any charge they could come up with, throw them in prison, and then use that as an excuse to force them to work or rent them out to plantations. It was essentially just a way of continuing slavery after the more overt form was illegalized.
I'd rather not see anything like that happen ever again.
Judge Judy isn't exactly the best place to look for legal precedents. The only thing legally binding about her decisions is the contract they sign with both parties before-hand which says they'll settle their disagreement on the show rather than in a real court, and that they'll abide by the decision. The decisions themselves are largely driven by ratings, i.e. by what the masses of laypersons on their armchairs will agree is a good decision, and not by force of law.
Slashdot Mirror
It sounds like that case is taking in a lot more air than it's putting out, resulting in high pressure and unstable airflow. I would expect those fans to fail pretty frequently.
Um, no. 'V' is used as both a vowel and a semi-vowel in Classical Latin, just like 'I', and this is a semi-vowel instance. In Classical Latin, the 'V' would sound like the 'u' in 'quit' or in 'suave', and to our ears 'vagina' would sound very like 'wa-gee-na'. It's not technically a consonant, but it's not really a full vowel either, and the Roman poets counted the 'va' as a single syllable.
In Ecclesiastical Latin, the 'v' becomes a full consonant, and the word would be pronounced va-jee'-na.
You know, this type of comment is one of the most irritating that I see on slashdot. I didn't ask what sources I can find with Google; I can do that on my own, thank you very much. I asked what sources you have.
The sources that I have seen up until now are simply not terribly convincing. For example, the one you linked to is not peer-reviewed, contains no references or data, and was written by a member of a political think tank whose education consists of a B.A. in biology and political science.
If you have a source for this assertion, I'd be interested in seeing it.
You're right; it would be inacceptable for the government to do this sort of thing. Stanford and Harvard are not governments but, as you pointed out in your earlier post, businesses, and they have financial interests to protect, both their own and those of their other, non-cheating customers. This sort of thing is the reason that companies always reserve the right to terminate consumer contracts in their ToS.
I mean, if a cockroach, who has no more than six brain cells, can figure out how to hide if you're chasing it, then it should be no problem for a programmer to figure out how to make an NPC do it.
You're right! All we have to do is shrink all the NPCs down to a few centimeters and let them hide in the wall cracks! Problem solved!
How does this in any way restrict what teenagers eat? The school will still let them buy whatever they want, and any parent who uses the system as an excuse to revoke their teenager's lunch money is not a good parent to begin with.
What this does is enable parents to have a better idea of what their teenager is eating, and whether a dietary problem is developing. You're right that there's nothing wrong with an occasional hamburger. Hopefully most parents would also realize that and not throw a fit when their kid decides to swap out the usual salad for a slice of pizza one day.
A lot of people will say something like this, and I think that most will find that if they seriously think back and evaluate it, they will usually find that by "it was of low quality", what they really mean is "it wasn't fried, and it had less fat and/or sugar".
It would be impossible for them to lay down every possible situation or action their applicants might possibly take and note whether it is to be allowed or not. Maybe it seems unfair that they can punish applicants who did something not explicitly prohibited, but it would be unfair to the university if they didn't. Otherwise, it effectively licenses people to manipulate the rules in their favor by bending them as far as they possibly can without breaking them.
Besides, this is all a part of growing up. Initially you don't know what's right and what's wrong, and nobody ever sits down with you and lists out all the things you're not allowed to do. Thus, you occasionally do something wrong without knowing that it's wrong, you get punished for it, and you learn that it's wrong. Eventually, you just learn a sense of whether something is right or wrong, and nobody needs to spell it out for you any longer.
Evidently, these students have yet to reach that point in their maturity
I don't think either of those things are all that obvious. Sensible and unsurprising, yes. But if the research had not been done, would you be able to look me in the eyes and tell me you were absolutely certain that snacking through the day is healthier than a controlled, scheduled diet?
Firstly, as a senator, Padme was a representative of Naboo, not of the queen, in the same way that U.S. senators are not representatives of the governor of the state they hail from. Seconly, Jar Jar was taking some initiative in an emergency situation. Is that really a fault? Sure, it turned out to be the wrong initiative, but nobody except Palpatine could have known that, and if Jar Jar hadn't been the one to propose it either because Padme had been there or for some other reason, then Palpatine would have just found somebody else to propose the same thing. After all, he obviously had wide support to begin with, or the rest of the senate would never have gone along with it.
Exactly. I mean, it's not as though any of the thousands of other members of the Senate had any say in the matter.
This sounds very, very similar to a project idea that I've had boiling in the back of my mind, and I would very much love to be a part of this. Can you let me know what school you're at, and who your research advisor is?
Sure, if you're only emerging one ebuild. What if you're updating deep dependencies, you've already completed 30 out of the 50 ebuilds, and then suddenly it fails to complete the 31st? Those last 20 packages it was supposed to update might still work, but they also might now have broken linkages.
Lockdowns are not appropriate for many systems. If I can force your account to be locked down so easily, then I have a highly effective means of performing a DOS attack.
A system rather like that was employed in the south following the civil war. The law enforcement would arrest black folks on any charge they could come up with, throw them in prison, and then use that as an excuse to force them to work or rent them out to plantations. It was essentially just a way of continuing slavery after the more overt form was illegalized. I'd rather not see anything like that happen ever again.
Judge Judy isn't exactly the best place to look for legal precedents. The only thing legally binding about her decisions is the contract they sign with both parties before-hand which says they'll settle their disagreement on the show rather than in a real court, and that they'll abide by the decision. The decisions themselves are largely driven by ratings, i.e. by what the masses of laypersons on their armchairs will agree is a good decision, and not by force of law.