...and then someone will capitalise on all those customers lost, and provide an alternate they can palate...then they will get too big, make a drastic change or such to lose their group.. and a new alternate will emerge.
It's almost like it's happened before.
So you're claiming they haven't gained more customers, and so the congestion is entirely the amount downloaded, and not that downloading increased, coupled with there now being many more users fighting for that same finite bandwidth?
Is Verizon's argument that Net Neutrality is bad because they cannot ransom special groups? "allow ISPs to create Internet "fast lanes" for companies that can afford to pay for speedier service" [Emphasis mine]
Next SciFi movie special: Having a crisis of morality, a technician at a biological research facility attempts to destroy the last samples of a virulent strain. Improperly doing so, an ancient plague is revisited upon the world. Can a small town sheriff, his plucky daughter, and the random love interest survive this new apocalyptic world?
I've seen studies go either way. I've seen claims that women CAUSE more accidents (random braking etc) that they themselves don't get INTO the accident, but effect the people they had cut off etc (claims by traffic cops). I've watch women apply makeup while making lane-changes on 6-lane highways, or declare they waited long enough to cross a highway "they'll just have to stop". Personally come across as many accidents caused by hesitation as by aggression.
tl;dr: Both genders have their share of incompetent morons.
I'm aware that they'd have to, which was why my question is if the government was fine with this scenario. Companies like Boeing do have presences in other countries, and I doubt the United States would appreciate Boeing complying with giving potentially sensitive information over, just because it is court-ordered in a country they do business in. Yet now, morally, they have no leg to stand on (not that they'd care in the first place).
I'm more thinking of how companies will have to twist with this, how it would effect international corporations and trade, and primarily how international agreements are pretty much a trading of concessions: belligerence like this pretty much sets it back.
Does this mean that the US Gov is fine with those same companies turning over all their data to China if a Chinese official decides he wants it? Wonder what other companies this fun can extend to.
As much as I really really really hate the argument...it does also come in the flavour of "think of the children"
I give no damn about some lazy ass who wants to bloat their waistline while rotting their teeth out... but watching bratlings drinking soda containers larger than their head, then later yelled at for being hyper..and then even later yelled at for being moody when they crash out...rinse repeat...
Though banning 44 oz just would mean they'd buy 22oz twice... idiots can be nothing if not determined.
'Asymptotes never cross zero'. Doesn't mean they don't get damned close, and doesn't mean it's a happy existence. If they dole out 1 address per year we can avoid having to change from IPv4 for millennia!!
Doesn't that prove the point then? The argument (well the point raised a few levels up) was that lacking empathy (i.e. being born without) was a trait, and so a psychopath could not be skilled in empathy. Having an off-switch for said implies you still have it, only choosing when to have it active, which could allow for them to be skilled in empathy.
Premise: Do unto others before they do unto you You acknowledge an action you wouldn't like done to you..but you aren't doing it to you, you're doing it to them, and since they aren't material to effects on you, you don't care. You can be aware a gunshot hurts and still shoot someone. Empathy isn't a barrier to cruelty. I'd imagine sadism would require decent amounts of empathy to actually enjoy it (emotional sadism more so than physical).
It's a Cantonese saying "Anything that walks, swims, crawls, or flies, with its back to heaven is edible.", used in South China. It backdates to the 1800s. It's been referenced in some cookbooks (e.g. "The Chinese Kitchen" by Eileen Yin-Fei Lo), and is known/used by some Chinese, and not others.
Cue supposition based on some searching: the area traded heavily with the West during that time. Take the exotic delicacies and dishes concocted by chefs, add in a language/culture barrier,good old prejudice, and the loss of context in repetition...I can easily imagine it's a Western generalisation/mild slur that got repeated and adopted and over time became adopted as a regional motto of sorts (i.e. isn't 'known' in the Mandarin areas, just the Cantonese south).
Slashdot Mirror
...and then someone will capitalise on all those customers lost, and provide an alternate they can palate. ..then they will get too big, make a drastic change or such to lose their group.. and a new alternate will emerge.
It's almost like it's happened before.
alt.binaries.erotica.*
Is angels a species or position then? Is falling a bureaucratic thing, a holy impeaching? Some biological response to ethical violation?
"No True Angel would rebel against God" =P
It's not acceptable, because it's not accepted? *blink*
*pictures a few hundred years ago someone making the same statement with the labels reversed, to defend child brides.
Use of AWACs dates to WW2 with them hooking up radar units on Avengers[TBM-3W]. Was a bit late to see action though. EC-121 was the awac for Vietnam.
So you're claiming they haven't gained more customers, and so the congestion is entirely the amount downloaded, and not that downloading increased, coupled with there now being many more users fighting for that same finite bandwidth?
I thought it was spelled Rulemaster?
Is Verizon's argument that Net Neutrality is bad because they cannot ransom special groups? "allow ISPs to create Internet "fast lanes" for companies that can afford to pay for speedier service" [Emphasis mine]
Next SciFi movie special: Having a crisis of morality, a technician at a biological research facility attempts to destroy the last samples of a virulent strain. Improperly doing so, an ancient plague is revisited upon the world. Can a small town sheriff, his plucky daughter, and the random love interest survive this new apocalyptic world?
Good news! We found evidence of life on Mars!
Bad news... it'll take 3 years for the relief ships to get there to help the survivors.
I've seen studies go either way. I've seen claims that women CAUSE more accidents (random braking etc) that they themselves don't get INTO the accident, but effect the people they had cut off etc (claims by traffic cops). I've watch women apply makeup while making lane-changes on 6-lane highways, or declare they waited long enough to cross a highway "they'll just have to stop". Personally come across as many accidents caused by hesitation as by aggression.
tl;dr: Both genders have their share of incompetent morons.
Eyja Fjalla Jökull
Isn't that how you summon a Deep One?
I'm aware that they'd have to, which was why my question is if the government was fine with this scenario. Companies like Boeing do have presences in other countries, and I doubt the United States would appreciate Boeing complying with giving potentially sensitive information over, just because it is court-ordered in a country they do business in. Yet now, morally, they have no leg to stand on (not that they'd care in the first place).
I'm more thinking of how companies will have to twist with this, how it would effect international corporations and trade, and primarily how international agreements are pretty much a trading of concessions: belligerence like this pretty much sets it back.
Does this mean that the US Gov is fine with those same companies turning over all their data to China if a Chinese official decides he wants it? Wonder what other companies this fun can extend to.
Three cars, two poles, a building, 100mph..and even then, died later?
*amused* give some credit to the Tesla for him lasting that long
So it's the new 30k oil change then?
As much as I really really really hate the argument...it does also come in the flavour of "think of the children"
I give no damn about some lazy ass who wants to bloat their waistline while rotting their teeth out... but watching bratlings drinking soda containers larger than their head, then later yelled at for being hyper..and then even later yelled at for being moody when they crash out...rinse repeat...
Though banning 44 oz just would mean they'd buy 22oz twice... idiots can be nothing if not determined.
Avianpogenic Global Wandering
Ah, figured. There goes that idea. Still, likely some unconventional uses for them out there.
For fighting an actual fire, I wouldn't want to be so precarious. For rescue work though...and how would it hold up under wet conditions, say, a boat?
'Asymptotes never cross zero'. Doesn't mean they don't get damned close, and doesn't mean it's a happy existence. If they dole out 1 address per year we can avoid having to change from IPv4 for millennia!!
So the argument could be made it wasn't the darkside, but high-intensity light therapy that caused the sudden weight loss?
Doesn't that prove the point then? The argument (well the point raised a few levels up) was that lacking empathy (i.e. being born without) was a trait, and so a psychopath could not be skilled in empathy. Having an off-switch for said implies you still have it, only choosing when to have it active, which could allow for them to be skilled in empathy.
Not following that.
Premise: Do unto others before they do unto you
You acknowledge an action you wouldn't like done to you..but you aren't doing it to you, you're doing it to them, and since they aren't material to effects on you, you don't care. You can be aware a gunshot hurts and still shoot someone. Empathy isn't a barrier to cruelty. I'd imagine sadism would require decent amounts of empathy to actually enjoy it (emotional sadism more so than physical).
It's a Cantonese saying "Anything that walks, swims, crawls, or flies, with its back to heaven is edible.", used in South China. It backdates to the 1800s. It's been referenced in some cookbooks (e.g. "The Chinese Kitchen" by Eileen Yin-Fei Lo), and is known/used by some Chinese, and not others.
Cue supposition based on some searching: the area traded heavily with the West during that time. Take the exotic delicacies and dishes concocted by chefs, add in a language/culture barrier,good old prejudice, and the loss of context in repetition...I can easily imagine it's a Western generalisation/mild slur that got repeated and adopted and over time became adopted as a regional motto of sorts (i.e. isn't 'known' in the Mandarin areas, just the Cantonese south).
Could be waaay off though.