According to that page, there are more English speakers in Seattle than there are in the entire sub-continent of India.
But, why let facts get in the way of the American bashing. America itself consists of nearly 60% of all native speakers of English and just over half of all speakers globally. And that's precisely the same page that you allege claims otherwise.
Of course you have that right. The 5th amendment only applies to self incrimination. They can force you to testify about other things that wouldn't result in self incrimination. So, if you were on trial for tax evasion, you might be required to answer some questions about how you kept your records, but not the ones that would result in self incrimination. And they wouldn't permit you to leave the stand just because you hit one question for which the 5th applied.
That's certainly possible, however you want to be mindful as any language, mother tongue included, will get forgotten if you don't use it. How long you can go without using will depend upon how thoroughly you learned it in the first place and likely other factors.
But, you do want to make sure exercise it a bit from time to time, just to keep it as firmly embedded as possible. What you're describing sounds like you still have a lot of it there, but access is the issue rather than forgetting it.
Precisely. I saw the same thing when I went to a Starbucks in Guangdong province. I could order in English and in Mandarin, but my brain wanted to do both at the same time. I was ultimately able to order, but I would have gotten my point across better by pointing and grunting.
More recently I was having trouble getting take out from the local supermarket, because the woman working behind the counter spoke Chinese to a colleague, which temporarily caused me to revert to my typical ordering pattern from when I was in China. Trying to override that and order in English just made it worse.
Indeed, people forget about that. I'm effectively a first generation immigrant because of that. My last arriving ancestor came to the US from Germany over a hundred years ago, but it wasn't until my Dad's generation that they stopped speaking German fluently. My Grandfather's working papers were even in German.
This is both my greatest point of pride about the US and one of my biggest concerns about the country. As long as it's dealt with in a mature way, it's a great resource to power our future.
Sometimes it's an innate gift, most of the time though it's just a lot of work. Basically the process works differently for some people than it does for others, and if you're using the wrong methods, you could easily think that you have no talent, when really what's going on is that the method isn't compatible with your particular brain composition.
I've personally struggled a great deal with vocabulary. I wouldn't typically have too much trouble with grammars, but the spelling and vocabulary would take tons of work to learn. It turns out that I'm more of a right brained visual person, so if I want to learn a language, I have to do it backwards. Stare at the words written in multiple colors until they stick, and focus on picking up my vocabulary from written texts and TV.
Also, once one has the idea that they suck at something, it can become a self fulfilling prophesy that may or may not be true.
True, but American English is the predominant form of English at this point. So, learnt and spelt are technically acceptable words, but as things go increasingly in the direction of American, you'll see fewer and fewer people accepting it as the correct words.
This isn't obvious to people who haven't been in that situation and it's a phenomenon that deserves more attention.
What's more, you're completely full of it, if you're suggesting that this level of ease is normal. The people I've met that know 8 or more languages, all had to put in a substantial amount of time doing, time which they didn't have available for other tasks.
The first time that I personally encountered this was at Starbucks in China, where I couldn't decide whether to use English or Chinese and was barely able to blurt out comprehensible words in either language.
As for the 1st world, what does that have to do with anything? Part of the reason why the 1st world is the 1st world is the efficiencies inherent at being able to conduct business in just one language. The time it took you to learn those extra languages didn't just get spontaneously generated, you made choices to use your time in that fashion. In the 1st world, we generally use that time and energy on school and work.
Don't get me wrong, I think that the government should pay the assessed value when they need to seize land, and that they should pay for the cost of replacing sidewalks, or in this case investigating the caverns, but the reality is that people don't want to pay the cost of that via taxes, and most people will never be directly affected by it.
The answer ultimately, is to catch as many of them as possible, and give them medical treatment, or at least monitoring. And in cases where that doesn't work, you send them to prison or the hospital until a resolution has been reached.
Despite what people think, the reality is that people in prison generally require treatment and frequently have brain damage or other abnormalities. You can increase the penalties all you want, but at the end of the day, that isn't going to deter anybody that isn't thinking about the consequences of their actions. At best you're housing and storing them separate from society, you're not actually preventing crime like that.
But, that wasn't what the GGP was arguing about. He's arguing about the advice that he quoted. And except for a minority of people, who probably aren't harmed by doing it themselves, it's sound advice for everybody.
There's also the issue of the view finder. If you're using an EVF it's not an issue, but with OVFs, the view you're getting is still as jerky as it was without stabilization, which can make it a challenge to frame what you like. Sure, it cuts down on some of the blurriness, but you lose out on a lot of the benefits.
Which is rather unfortunate. I've got a Canon lens with optical IS built in and I can really tell the difference, I can go from being unable to frame a shot, to being able to get a reasonably sharp image, when I turn on the IS. It's a shame that it comes with the nasty drawback of requiring the hardware in each lens that I need stabilized.
The part that's wrong is the part hof that where you use snark to cover over the fact that the advice is the best for virtually everybody.
Things don't typically make people happy, and most people don't like spending time cleaning and organizing. Now, you might be one of the people that can pay others to do it for them, has a huge house and or loves organizating, but you're in the minority there. Most people are better off getting rid of things that just take up space. The replacement cost of a lot of these things is low enough that you can just buy, borrow or rent a new one if you need it for a few days.
OTOH, if you're using something so often that it's more expensive to acquire a temporary copy, then you're likely using it often enough to make storage and organization worthwhile.
And your point is? I've had far more trouble with those stupid CFLs than I ever had with incandescent bulbs. You pay more for them, you have to pay even more if you want one that can handle dimming properly, and now they're wanting you to also pay for an extra chip that has nothing at all to do with lighting the area.
The difference here is that I can replace a regular light bulb for less than a CFL and I'll be able to replace a CFL for less than one of these monstrosities with a WiFi chip built in. What's more, normal CFLs aren't a security risk to people breaking into them from off site.
Theoretically, the energy that's spent in manufacture of CFLs is made up for over the long run. In practice, they've had reliability issues. Most of the early ones I tried burned out well before they made up for the extra cost or expenditure of energy to produce.
Which makes far more sense that wi-fi bulbs. I think this article is evidence that there's a bubble forming in the tech sector again. Or really, that it's already formed.
WAP built into lamps might make some sense, but building them into the lightbulb makes precisely zero sense. What would probably make the most sense would be building it into the socket, so that it could be easily replaced, but not require replacing whenever the bulb goes out. The bulbs themselves tend to be rather fragile, whether incandescent or fluorescent, they're the part of the set up that needs to be replaced the most frequently.
Not that I necessarily disagree, but the people who post on quackwatch aren't necessarily qualified to evaluate the things they're complaining about. Which if there's no body of data on it at all is to be expected, but you also find people using logical reasoning to argue against research papers as well without even working in a similar field of expertise.
Also, bear in mind that neurotherapy is a much more recent development than biofeedback is, and it's going to be a while before it's really settled. It's just been within the last 20 years or so that imaging technology for the brain has advanced to the point where you could really study the changes in brain function with regard to various therapies.
If we apply the standards that some of the idiots on quackwatch use, there would be no medicine because nothing would live up to their concerns.
I'm not so sure about that, the cars already cause the ground to vibrate a bit. Absorbing some of that and converting it to electricity would be a net win. Especially in places like Athens where the vibrations are damaging ancient buildings.
Not possible. The only way that would be possible is if you've got millions of individual power cells that the car is charging from as it goes. With the cells turning on and off in response to the signal.
So, I guess it's technically possible, but the likelihood of getting a device like that to function would be pretty much nihil.
A better move would be to just charge a tax based upon the distance driven and the type of vehicle, knowing approximately how much juice the vehicle would be using to cover the distance on average.
But, I see serious problems with this, we get a lot of flooding around here, which would reek havoc on a system like this, even when the flood waters are only a quarter inch deep. We sometimes get as much as 5" of rain in a 24 hour period, which would require the system to be shut down, even when it's still safe to drive.
People dispute the assertion because they're illiterate. None of the people responding to the post bothered to read it for comprehension.
We don't typically take away a persons house that they built themselves because of concern that they're not having to build a new one over few years. We do tax that, but we also tax the royalties that people make on the house.
Same goes for the landlord, we don't force them to tear down their building at regular intervals to prevent them from coasting on the profits of a prior business deal, we tax them in a similar way to what we tax royalties.
In none of these cases is the person who did the work breaking even or making a profit during that first 5 years, it's generally amortized over decades for a reason.
The key difference here is that a copyright item can exist permanently and sometime way after the profits have been made make them turn it over again. But, it's because we want to enlarge the public domain that we do it. And the term of the protection is so long, that the original owner isn't even alive when that happens.
No, it's because the constitution was never intended to be interpreted literally the way that POS constitutionalists like some of the conservatives on the court seem to think.
Making it literally interpretable would result in a constitution that was thousands of pages long, and pretty much impossible to comprehend by anybody at all. The constitution says what it says, and it's up to the court to establish what exactly it means.
It sucks sometimes, but it means we don't have to hold a constitutional convention every time we need a minor tweak made to the constitution.
Slashdot Mirror
According to that page, there are more English speakers in Seattle than there are in the entire sub-continent of India.
But, why let facts get in the way of the American bashing. America itself consists of nearly 60% of all native speakers of English and just over half of all speakers globally. And that's precisely the same page that you allege claims otherwise.
Of course you have that right. The 5th amendment only applies to self incrimination. They can force you to testify about other things that wouldn't result in self incrimination. So, if you were on trial for tax evasion, you might be required to answer some questions about how you kept your records, but not the ones that would result in self incrimination. And they wouldn't permit you to leave the stand just because you hit one question for which the 5th applied.
That's certainly possible, however you want to be mindful as any language, mother tongue included, will get forgotten if you don't use it. How long you can go without using will depend upon how thoroughly you learned it in the first place and likely other factors.
But, you do want to make sure exercise it a bit from time to time, just to keep it as firmly embedded as possible. What you're describing sounds like you still have a lot of it there, but access is the issue rather than forgetting it.
Precisely. I saw the same thing when I went to a Starbucks in Guangdong province. I could order in English and in Mandarin, but my brain wanted to do both at the same time. I was ultimately able to order, but I would have gotten my point across better by pointing and grunting.
More recently I was having trouble getting take out from the local supermarket, because the woman working behind the counter spoke Chinese to a colleague, which temporarily caused me to revert to my typical ordering pattern from when I was in China. Trying to override that and order in English just made it worse.
Indeed, people forget about that. I'm effectively a first generation immigrant because of that. My last arriving ancestor came to the US from Germany over a hundred years ago, but it wasn't until my Dad's generation that they stopped speaking German fluently. My Grandfather's working papers were even in German.
This is both my greatest point of pride about the US and one of my biggest concerns about the country. As long as it's dealt with in a mature way, it's a great resource to power our future.
Sometimes it's an innate gift, most of the time though it's just a lot of work. Basically the process works differently for some people than it does for others, and if you're using the wrong methods, you could easily think that you have no talent, when really what's going on is that the method isn't compatible with your particular brain composition.
I've personally struggled a great deal with vocabulary. I wouldn't typically have too much trouble with grammars, but the spelling and vocabulary would take tons of work to learn. It turns out that I'm more of a right brained visual person, so if I want to learn a language, I have to do it backwards. Stare at the words written in multiple colors until they stick, and focus on picking up my vocabulary from written texts and TV.
Also, once one has the idea that they suck at something, it can become a self fulfilling prophesy that may or may not be true.
True, but American English is the predominant form of English at this point. So, learnt and spelt are technically acceptable words, but as things go increasingly in the direction of American, you'll see fewer and fewer people accepting it as the correct words.
This isn't obvious to people who haven't been in that situation and it's a phenomenon that deserves more attention.
What's more, you're completely full of it, if you're suggesting that this level of ease is normal. The people I've met that know 8 or more languages, all had to put in a substantial amount of time doing, time which they didn't have available for other tasks.
The first time that I personally encountered this was at Starbucks in China, where I couldn't decide whether to use English or Chinese and was barely able to blurt out comprehensible words in either language.
As for the 1st world, what does that have to do with anything? Part of the reason why the 1st world is the 1st world is the efficiencies inherent at being able to conduct business in just one language. The time it took you to learn those extra languages didn't just get spontaneously generated, you made choices to use your time in that fashion. In the 1st world, we generally use that time and energy on school and work.
That would involved increasing tax rates.
Don't get me wrong, I think that the government should pay the assessed value when they need to seize land, and that they should pay for the cost of replacing sidewalks, or in this case investigating the caverns, but the reality is that people don't want to pay the cost of that via taxes, and most people will never be directly affected by it.
The answer ultimately, is to catch as many of them as possible, and give them medical treatment, or at least monitoring. And in cases where that doesn't work, you send them to prison or the hospital until a resolution has been reached.
Despite what people think, the reality is that people in prison generally require treatment and frequently have brain damage or other abnormalities. You can increase the penalties all you want, but at the end of the day, that isn't going to deter anybody that isn't thinking about the consequences of their actions. At best you're housing and storing them separate from society, you're not actually preventing crime like that.
What, you mean doWhatImean( X ) isn't a valid way of coding?
But, that wasn't what the GGP was arguing about. He's arguing about the advice that he quoted. And except for a minority of people, who probably aren't harmed by doing it themselves, it's sound advice for everybody.
My son's a photography major you insensitive clod!
There's also the issue of the view finder. If you're using an EVF it's not an issue, but with OVFs, the view you're getting is still as jerky as it was without stabilization, which can make it a challenge to frame what you like. Sure, it cuts down on some of the blurriness, but you lose out on a lot of the benefits.
Which is rather unfortunate. I've got a Canon lens with optical IS built in and I can really tell the difference, I can go from being unable to frame a shot, to being able to get a reasonably sharp image, when I turn on the IS. It's a shame that it comes with the nasty drawback of requiring the hardware in each lens that I need stabilized.
The part that's wrong is the part hof that where you use snark to cover over the fact that the advice is the best for virtually everybody.
Things don't typically make people happy, and most people don't like spending time cleaning and organizing. Now, you might be one of the people that can pay others to do it for them, has a huge house and or loves organizating, but you're in the minority there. Most people are better off getting rid of things that just take up space. The replacement cost of a lot of these things is low enough that you can just buy, borrow or rent a new one if you need it for a few days.
OTOH, if you're using something so often that it's more expensive to acquire a temporary copy, then you're likely using it often enough to make storage and organization worthwhile.
That's called ADHD, and there are effective treatment options for it, to at least keep that down to a manageable level.
It's not typical to leave that many projects unfinished for most folks, but if you have ADHD it's more or less the status quo for most people.
And your point is? I've had far more trouble with those stupid CFLs than I ever had with incandescent bulbs. You pay more for them, you have to pay even more if you want one that can handle dimming properly, and now they're wanting you to also pay for an extra chip that has nothing at all to do with lighting the area.
The difference here is that I can replace a regular light bulb for less than a CFL and I'll be able to replace a CFL for less than one of these monstrosities with a WiFi chip built in. What's more, normal CFLs aren't a security risk to people breaking into them from off site.
Now, they're shaped like light bulbs.
Theoretically, the energy that's spent in manufacture of CFLs is made up for over the long run. In practice, they've had reliability issues. Most of the early ones I tried burned out well before they made up for the extra cost or expenditure of energy to produce.
Which makes far more sense that wi-fi bulbs. I think this article is evidence that there's a bubble forming in the tech sector again. Or really, that it's already formed.
WAP built into lamps might make some sense, but building them into the lightbulb makes precisely zero sense. What would probably make the most sense would be building it into the socket, so that it could be easily replaced, but not require replacing whenever the bulb goes out. The bulbs themselves tend to be rather fragile, whether incandescent or fluorescent, they're the part of the set up that needs to be replaced the most frequently.
Not that I necessarily disagree, but the people who post on quackwatch aren't necessarily qualified to evaluate the things they're complaining about. Which if there's no body of data on it at all is to be expected, but you also find people using logical reasoning to argue against research papers as well without even working in a similar field of expertise.
Also, bear in mind that neurotherapy is a much more recent development than biofeedback is, and it's going to be a while before it's really settled. It's just been within the last 20 years or so that imaging technology for the brain has advanced to the point where you could really study the changes in brain function with regard to various therapies.
If we apply the standards that some of the idiots on quackwatch use, there would be no medicine because nothing would live up to their concerns.
I'm not so sure about that, the cars already cause the ground to vibrate a bit. Absorbing some of that and converting it to electricity would be a net win. Especially in places like Athens where the vibrations are damaging ancient buildings.
Not possible. The only way that would be possible is if you've got millions of individual power cells that the car is charging from as it goes. With the cells turning on and off in response to the signal.
So, I guess it's technically possible, but the likelihood of getting a device like that to function would be pretty much nihil.
A better move would be to just charge a tax based upon the distance driven and the type of vehicle, knowing approximately how much juice the vehicle would be using to cover the distance on average.
But, I see serious problems with this, we get a lot of flooding around here, which would reek havoc on a system like this, even when the flood waters are only a quarter inch deep. We sometimes get as much as 5" of rain in a 24 hour period, which would require the system to be shut down, even when it's still safe to drive.
People dispute the assertion because they're illiterate. None of the people responding to the post bothered to read it for comprehension.
We don't typically take away a persons house that they built themselves because of concern that they're not having to build a new one over few years. We do tax that, but we also tax the royalties that people make on the house.
Same goes for the landlord, we don't force them to tear down their building at regular intervals to prevent them from coasting on the profits of a prior business deal, we tax them in a similar way to what we tax royalties.
In none of these cases is the person who did the work breaking even or making a profit during that first 5 years, it's generally amortized over decades for a reason.
The key difference here is that a copyright item can exist permanently and sometime way after the profits have been made make them turn it over again. But, it's because we want to enlarge the public domain that we do it. And the term of the protection is so long, that the original owner isn't even alive when that happens.
No, it's because the constitution was never intended to be interpreted literally the way that POS constitutionalists like some of the conservatives on the court seem to think.
Making it literally interpretable would result in a constitution that was thousands of pages long, and pretty much impossible to comprehend by anybody at all. The constitution says what it says, and it's up to the court to establish what exactly it means.
It sucks sometimes, but it means we don't have to hold a constitutional convention every time we need a minor tweak made to the constitution.