There has been a huge push by the 'enlightened' to view the latin (and tangentially, French) origins as 'pure' and the german origins as 'impure'. It's the same reason that a taboo was created with regard to ending sentences with prepositions, it was something not done in latin, but due to the germanic structure of English, some sentences do sound and appear better when ended with a preposition. We aren't speaking Latin (or French), so a lot of the rules are just appeals to tradition. A tradition started as a mild cultural cleansing.
What's interesting about this is that in England, the upper class see french/latin derived words as pretentious a lot of the time. Anyone who uses toilet or serviette over loo or napkin is looked down on. If you want to seem posh in England, stick to anglo-saxon words. The fucking Fulfords would approve.
Now, why anyone should look upon the English aristocracy as an aspirational model is another question...
That is interesting - I was way out in my estimate. I actually originally put 20% and revised it down too.
Maybe it's my strange mind, but this could easily be made into a profitable street game. You get the punter to pick heads or tails, and say that for his 10 pound/dollar/euro bet you'll pay back 50 if he hits over 60 of his choice.
I was thinking that this could be dropped to lower amounts of coin flips, ie. 10, or even 4, but I'm not sure if this would work. Actually, thinking about the 4 flip scenario, with the punter requiring 3 of their choice... you've got a 1/4 chance of them hitting it (I think), which isn't that low.... I guess larger numbers centralise the spread and make it a little less intuitive.
This case is NOT equivalent to "Given 2 children, given at least one is a boy, what are the odds both are boys?"
I said "I have 2 children, and one of them is a boy. What is the chance I have 2 boys?". The question I asked _is_ equivalent to that one of yours. My question did _not_ ask the gender of the second child, it asked the gender of both children.
Of course it is directly implied by my question that I meant at least one is a boy... had I meant only one is a boy, the answer would have been obvious - 0%. You just read my question wrong and assumed it did not fit.
Who the fuck modded parent down? Seriously... this is very relevant and relatively pertinent. I've not complained about modding before, but you've got to be kidding me.
To be honest... this is only affecting a very small proportion of the population. It's not a big conspiracy, but it is symptomatic of IP protection nowadays. The original rights holders are aiming to profit off of a tiny segment of the market, which will provide little to no profit in actuality - they know this. The amount of money involved here will be very small.
The problem is that authors and companies now seek absolute control over all their works, and this was not the case (as much) in the past. The more we acknowledge the IP owner's rights to do as they please, the less control we are going to have.
This is a minority market to visually impaired people - it's not a profiteering pirate ring. I don't want to sound patronising, but things like text to speech keep those with impairments able to choose easily. Restricting them only fucking hurts those who will use them, who are sometimes the most at need of access to them. It smacks of "mine mine mine" to me, with no consideration of the consequences.
So who thinks a _touchscreen_ is a decent choice for someone visually impaired? Something that relies on hand eye coordination, with no physical feedback?
I know I'm probably going to be proved wrong in a minute by the blind iPad fanbois.
I didn't say it didn't subtract value - I'm not a Steam apologist. However, the secondary PC game resale market now is basically dead in the water due to CD-keys - without them, you can't do much at all online. It doesn't matter that you legitimately bought the game second hand, games publishers generally won't honour that purchase with a new online prescense.
What I'm basically saying is that if you want to play online, resale of PC games has basically been crapped on already... it's exactly the same in the console market too.
You or your teacher don't understand statistics - it's very unlikely that you'll get 50 heads and 50 tails when flipping a coin 100 times. It's the most likely result, but there are 99 other possible results, some of which are very nearly as likely as 50/50. Someone else can do the maths if they want, but as an estimate, I'd guess that you've got a 1 in 15 or so chance of hitting an exact 50/50 distribution.
Simple statistics _is_ sometimes confusing though... For example, nearly everyone gets this wrong : I have 2 children, and one of them is a boy. What is the chance I have 2 boys?
To be fair, Steam does actually add value too. I hate having to remember where all my CDs and DVDs are to play, or just in case I need to reinstall at some point in the future. If your computer goes caput, and you've lost or destroyed your original media, you're out of luck (unless you can prove you bought it, then pay a nice fee for replacement media and wait a couple of weeks if you're lucky). With steam, you can just re-download.
The DRM on steam isn't too intrusive generally, and you can play offline too. It's not perfect, some people have had nasty problems with it, I'll admit though.
The US had been helping kill Japanese (Flying Tigers ring a bell? Great unit, but it bears reminding that they were mercs!) in substantial numbers well before December 7th.
From Wikipedia: The group first saw combat on 20 December 1941, 12 days after Pearl Harbor
Violent crime was not responsible for the quadrupling of the incarcerated population in the United States from 1980 to 2003. Violent crime rates had been relatively constant or declining over those decades. The prison population was increased primarily by public policy changes causing more prison sentences and lengthening time served, e.g. through mandatory minimum sentencing, "three strikes" laws, and reductions in the availability of parole or early release. These policies were championed as protecting the public from serious and violent offenders, but instead yielded high rates of confinement for nonviolent offenders. Nearly three quarters of new admissions to state prison were convicted of nonviolent crimes. Only 49 percent of sentenced state inmates were held for violent offenses. Perhaps the single greatest force behind the growth of the prison population has been the national "war on drugs." The number of incarcerated drug offenders has increased twelvefold since 1980. In 2000, 22 percent of those in federal and state prisons were convicted on drug charges.
Almost 1/4 of those in prison in the US are there on drugs offenses. Over half are there for non-violent offenses. Your tax dollars are paying for this madness.
When I said that diesels were less sensitive to water I was not talking about the fuel intake. Diesels can be run _underwater_ easily with a fuel and air supply.... petrol engines cannot anywhere near as easily.
There's a massive difference between some of the modern performance diesels and the old chug chug will work through anything engines. Once you submerge most cars, they'll die now, whatever their powerplant.
The lifeboat can only hold 10 people. There are 40 crammed in, and the boat is sinking. Either we kick out 30 to save 10, or all 40 die.
Firstly, _wrong_. The lifeboat can easily hold 40 people. Claiming that we need to get rid of 3/4 of the world population is stupid.
Your analogy assumes that the earth can only support us in the west being consumers, and implies that the problem lies with others seeking similar lifestyles to ours.
The more equal people get, the more they will have to put up with their waste in their own back yard. The only reason we in the west have the products at rock bottom prices that we do now is because others in shitty conditions are willing to produce for us. Once they get close to our standards of living, there's no way cheap exported pollution will continue.
The consumer culture currently is based upon the disparity of wealth.
The only time "literally" had any meaning was when differentiating from a common hyperbole and literal truth.
Ok... you made a cogent point claiming that the word literally was redundant, then used the word literal in your very next sentence. Either you just put it in for effect, to emphasize its redundance, or you accidentely used it because the sentence parsed better than if you had not (note - the sentence _does_ parse better with it in IMO).
YMMV... I find it useful, and it's way less clumsy than "really did" or "actually".
ps. Mod who modded my previous post troll... are you literally retarded? It was no troll.
I'm sorry, but if that's how you talk to cops, you kind of deserve whatever happens to you.
I was going to write a well thought out insightful rebuttal to this point... but I can't quite get past "what the fuck are you saying?". People have the right to speak to police basically how they want (with few valid exceptions). People like you who kiss the cop's ass every time they look at you mean are part of the problem. If police expect everyone to treat them as if they were on a pedal stool, then they will treat those that don't worse.
People don't generally end up being beaten that are complying with the orders they've been given. Sure it happens, but it's hardly a common occurrence.
So your advise is to just cross your fingers, and say "yes sir" or "no sir" as appropriate, then hope that you're not one of the few people that is beaten anyway? YOU ARE PART OF THE PROBLEM.
World overpopulation is a temporary problem. Nearly every indigineous Western population is experiencing population decline, and many western populations have been seeing this for 100 years or so. The richer people get, the better educated people get, the less they have children. The number one best way to decrease population growth currently is to make sure people have more money, and make sure they're decently educated.
That being said, world population is forecast to continue growing until about 2060, when it'll hit about 9 billion, then start declining. We've the technology _now_ to feed 9 billion people (note - very very few people die of starvation now - malnutrition is often caused by diseases)... the trouble is the impact on other species.
I'd love the world population to be reduced drastically now, if there weren't people that would be culled in the process. As much as having a lower population is beneficial IMO, there is no way to achieve it without unacceptable cost.
If we let literally mean metaphorically, what will we use when we actually mean literally? I know language evolves, but when you lose meaning you lose something.
What gets me is that BSOD used to be basically an insult hurled at Windows... I've run Windows most of my life, and not seen many (a couple were spectacular software failures, the others were hardware issues). I literally spent years cleaning up those systems. Wait, what?
Personally with the option of power or co2, I'd go for power... Power wins every time.
Erm... basic laws of thermodynamics disagree with you. The kinetic energy you gave that extra 80lbs does not magically increase somehow when you are coasting.
Also, like another poster said - 80lbs is a bit under 40 kilos.
You'll get more oversteer in a FWD when you put weight in the back. The only reason to put weight in the back is to prevent oversteer caused by the rear driving wheels slipping under acceleration. When braking or cornering, weight at the rear can only increase oversteer. The heavier the rear end is, the more likely it's going to overtake the front. That being said, weight in the rear can make very front heavy cars feel a little less skittish, which unnerves some people... but driven at close to the limit, weight addition is almost always bad.
The old Skyline straight 6 could be tuned to oblivion... I don't know about the new Skyline's potential, but that's pretty strong to start with. Any Mitsubishi Lancer Evo engines can be tuned _well_ over 500 bhp.... and that's a 2 litre 4 cylinder.
Crotch rocket bikes _are_ impressive... some deliver over 1bhp per kilo (2.2lbs) in standard form. You've got to be seriously trying to get close to that in a car.
What about large non-obese people? I weigh 110 kilos or so, partially because I'm 6'6", partially because I've done a physical job for a while. Technically I'm overweight (but not obese) but BMI does not scale well to tall people - I was really skinny when I was younger, and was exactly on the BMI boundary for overweight (2 metres, 100 kilos.... easiest BMI ever to calculate).
If you really just object to people who cost you more just because that's the way they are then you might want to go after all those people with wheelchairs next.
Slashdot Mirror
There has been a huge push by the 'enlightened' to view the latin (and tangentially, French) origins as 'pure' and the german origins as 'impure'. It's the same reason that a taboo was created with regard to ending sentences with prepositions, it was something not done in latin, but due to the germanic structure of English, some sentences do sound and appear better when ended with a preposition. We aren't speaking Latin (or French), so a lot of the rules are just appeals to tradition. A tradition started as a mild cultural cleansing.
What's interesting about this is that in England, the upper class see french/latin derived words as pretentious a lot of the time. Anyone who uses toilet or serviette over loo or napkin is looked down on. If you want to seem posh in England, stick to anglo-saxon words. The fucking Fulfords would approve.
Now, why anyone should look upon the English aristocracy as an aspirational model is another question...
Anonymous Coward: you're in favour [sic] of porn during kid's prime time
Just to let you know, favour is the correct English spelling.
That is interesting - I was way out in my estimate. I actually originally put 20% and revised it down too.
Maybe it's my strange mind, but this could easily be made into a profitable street game. You get the punter to pick heads or tails, and say that for his 10 pound/dollar/euro bet you'll pay back 50 if he hits over 60 of his choice.
I was thinking that this could be dropped to lower amounts of coin flips, ie. 10, or even 4, but I'm not sure if this would work. Actually, thinking about the 4 flip scenario, with the punter requiring 3 of their choice... you've got a 1/4 chance of them hitting it (I think), which isn't that low.... I guess larger numbers centralise the spread and make it a little less intuitive.
This case is NOT equivalent to "Given 2 children, given at least one is a boy, what are the odds both are boys?"
I said "I have 2 children, and one of them is a boy. What is the chance I have 2 boys?". The question I asked _is_ equivalent to that one of yours. My question did _not_ ask the gender of the second child, it asked the gender of both children.
Of course it is directly implied by my question that I meant at least one is a boy... had I meant only one is a boy, the answer would have been obvious - 0%. You just read my question wrong and assumed it did not fit.
Do we have to go over this again, retards?
They're (generally) a hell of a lot better than text to speech.
Who the fuck modded parent down? Seriously... this is very relevant and relatively pertinent. I've not complained about modding before, but you've got to be kidding me.
To be honest... this is only affecting a very small proportion of the population. It's not a big conspiracy, but it is symptomatic of IP protection nowadays. The original rights holders are aiming to profit off of a tiny segment of the market, which will provide little to no profit in actuality - they know this. The amount of money involved here will be very small.
The problem is that authors and companies now seek absolute control over all their works, and this was not the case (as much) in the past. The more we acknowledge the IP owner's rights to do as they please, the less control we are going to have.
This is a minority market to visually impaired people - it's not a profiteering pirate ring. I don't want to sound patronising, but things like text to speech keep those with impairments able to choose easily. Restricting them only fucking hurts those who will use them, who are sometimes the most at need of access to them. It smacks of "mine mine mine" to me, with no consideration of the consequences.
So who thinks a _touchscreen_ is a decent choice for someone visually impaired? Something that relies on hand eye coordination, with no physical feedback?
I know I'm probably going to be proved wrong in a minute by the blind iPad fanbois.
I didn't say it didn't subtract value - I'm not a Steam apologist. However, the secondary PC game resale market now is basically dead in the water due to CD-keys - without them, you can't do much at all online. It doesn't matter that you legitimately bought the game second hand, games publishers generally won't honour that purchase with a new online prescense.
What I'm basically saying is that if you want to play online, resale of PC games has basically been crapped on already... it's exactly the same in the console market too.
You or your teacher don't understand statistics - it's very unlikely that you'll get 50 heads and 50 tails when flipping a coin 100 times. It's the most likely result, but there are 99 other possible results, some of which are very nearly as likely as 50/50. Someone else can do the maths if they want, but as an estimate, I'd guess that you've got a 1 in 15 or so chance of hitting an exact 50/50 distribution.
Simple statistics _is_ sometimes confusing though... For example, nearly everyone gets this wrong : I have 2 children, and one of them is a boy. What is the chance I have 2 boys?
To be fair, Steam does actually add value too. I hate having to remember where all my CDs and DVDs are to play, or just in case I need to reinstall at some point in the future. If your computer goes caput, and you've lost or destroyed your original media, you're out of luck (unless you can prove you bought it, then pay a nice fee for replacement media and wait a couple of weeks if you're lucky). With steam, you can just re-download.
The DRM on steam isn't too intrusive generally, and you can play offline too. It's not perfect, some people have had nasty problems with it, I'll admit though.
The US had been helping kill Japanese (Flying Tigers ring a bell? Great unit, but it bears reminding that they were mercs!) in substantial numbers well before December 7th.
From Wikipedia :
The group first saw combat on 20 December 1941, 12 days after Pearl Harbor
From Wikipedia.
Violent crime was not responsible for the quadrupling of the incarcerated population in the United States from 1980 to 2003. Violent crime rates had been relatively constant or declining over those decades. The prison population was increased primarily by public policy changes causing more prison sentences and lengthening time served, e.g. through mandatory minimum sentencing, "three strikes" laws, and reductions in the availability of parole or early release. These policies were championed as protecting the public from serious and violent offenders, but instead yielded high rates of confinement for nonviolent offenders. Nearly three quarters of new admissions to state prison were convicted of nonviolent crimes. Only 49 percent of sentenced state inmates were held for violent offenses. Perhaps the single greatest force behind the growth of the prison population has been the national "war on drugs." The number of incarcerated drug offenders has increased twelvefold since 1980. In 2000, 22 percent of those in federal and state prisons were convicted on drug charges.
Almost 1/4 of those in prison in the US are there on drugs offenses. Over half are there for non-violent offenses. Your tax dollars are paying for this madness.
When I said that diesels were less sensitive to water I was not talking about the fuel intake. Diesels can be run _underwater_ easily with a fuel and air supply.... petrol engines cannot anywhere near as easily.
There's a massive difference between some of the modern performance diesels and the old chug chug will work through anything engines. Once you submerge most cars, they'll die now, whatever their powerplant.
The lifeboat can only hold 10 people. There are 40 crammed in, and the boat is sinking. Either we kick out 30 to save 10, or all 40 die.
Firstly, _wrong_. The lifeboat can easily hold 40 people. Claiming that we need to get rid of 3/4 of the world population is stupid.
Your analogy assumes that the earth can only support us in the west being consumers, and implies that the problem lies with others seeking similar lifestyles to ours.
The more equal people get, the more they will have to put up with their waste in their own back yard. The only reason we in the west have the products at rock bottom prices that we do now is because others in shitty conditions are willing to produce for us. Once they get close to our standards of living, there's no way cheap exported pollution will continue.
The consumer culture currently is based upon the disparity of wealth.
The only time "literally" had any meaning was when differentiating from a common hyperbole and literal truth.
Ok... you made a cogent point claiming that the word literally was redundant, then used the word literal in your very next sentence. Either you just put it in for effect, to emphasize its redundance, or you accidentely used it because the sentence parsed better than if you had not (note - the sentence _does_ parse better with it in IMO).
YMMV... I find it useful, and it's way less clumsy than "really did" or "actually".
ps. Mod who modded my previous post troll... are you literally retarded? It was no troll.
I'm sorry, but if that's how you talk to cops, you kind of deserve whatever happens to you.
I was going to write a well thought out insightful rebuttal to this point... but I can't quite get past "what the fuck are you saying?". People have the right to speak to police basically how they want (with few valid exceptions). People like you who kiss the cop's ass every time they look at you mean are part of the problem. If police expect everyone to treat them as if they were on a pedal stool, then they will treat those that don't worse.
People don't generally end up being beaten that are complying with the orders they've been given. Sure it happens, but it's hardly a common occurrence.
So your advise is to just cross your fingers, and say "yes sir" or "no sir" as appropriate, then hope that you're not one of the few people that is beaten anyway? YOU ARE PART OF THE PROBLEM.
Mod Parent up (we don't fucking know but this theory predicted data better)
World overpopulation is a temporary problem. Nearly every indigineous Western population is experiencing population decline, and many western populations have been seeing this for 100 years or so. The richer people get, the better educated people get, the less they have children. The number one best way to decrease population growth currently is to make sure people have more money, and make sure they're decently educated.
That being said, world population is forecast to continue growing until about 2060, when it'll hit about 9 billion, then start declining. We've the technology _now_ to feed 9 billion people (note - very very few people die of starvation now - malnutrition is often caused by diseases)... the trouble is the impact on other species.
I'd love the world population to be reduced drastically now, if there weren't people that would be culled in the process. As much as having a lower population is beneficial IMO, there is no way to achieve it without unacceptable cost.
If we let literally mean metaphorically, what will we use when we actually mean literally? I know language evolves, but when you lose meaning you lose something.
What gets me is that BSOD used to be basically an insult hurled at Windows... I've run Windows most of my life, and not seen many (a couple were spectacular software failures, the others were hardware issues). I literally spent years cleaning up those systems. Wait, what?
Personally with the option of power or co2, I'd go for power... Power wins every time.
Erm... basic laws of thermodynamics disagree with you. The kinetic energy you gave that extra 80lbs does not magically increase somehow when you are coasting.
Also, like another poster said - 80lbs is a bit under 40 kilos.
You'll get more oversteer in a FWD when you put weight in the back. The only reason to put weight in the back is to prevent oversteer caused by the rear driving wheels slipping under acceleration. When braking or cornering, weight at the rear can only increase oversteer. The heavier the rear end is, the more likely it's going to overtake the front. That being said, weight in the rear can make very front heavy cars feel a little less skittish, which unnerves some people... but driven at close to the limit, weight addition is almost always bad.
The old Skyline straight 6 could be tuned to oblivion... I don't know about the new Skyline's potential, but that's pretty strong to start with. Any Mitsubishi Lancer Evo engines can be tuned _well_ over 500 bhp.... and that's a 2 litre 4 cylinder.
Crotch rocket bikes _are_ impressive... some deliver over 1bhp per kilo (2.2lbs) in standard form. You've got to be seriously trying to get close to that in a car.
What about large non-obese people? I weigh 110 kilos or so, partially because I'm 6'6", partially because I've done a physical job for a while. Technically I'm overweight (but not obese) but BMI does not scale well to tall people - I was really skinny when I was younger, and was exactly on the BMI boundary for overweight (2 metres, 100 kilos.... easiest BMI ever to calculate).
If you really just object to people who cost you more just because that's the way they are then you might want to go after all those people with wheelchairs next.