Wrong again. Decamp (not that you will ever catch that word escaping my lips) is to break up a camp. Not to depart from a camp. This was actually the original meaning of the word "deplane", to make something cease to be a plane.
Sorry, nope. "Deplane" is intransitive as used here. You can dethrone a king, but a king doesn't dethrone.
You get out of a car. You get off of a train or a boat, or a hot air balloon. What's wrong with those? Or should we now start expecting "decar" or "detrain"? "Dehotairballoon"?
Oh, I'm quite familiar with this particularly gruesome neologism, and I'm most certainly not the only one that has a problem with it., as I have just learned. But maybe you should check your own grasp of the English language before looking stuff up in the dictionary to lecture others.
Let's see, to delouse is to remove lice from hair. To decapitate is to remove the head (latin: capit). To defoliate is to remove leaves (latin: follium). But to "deplane" is to get off of a plane. Did we derun of sayoids in the English speakism? Or are the previous sayoids de-languaged by some thinly-neurated jargon multiman?
One of the main problems here is that people are given these technologies without understanding them completely. When I was working in the US, I made a big fuss once at my workplace about sending sensitive documents in unencrypted emails and was treated like I was hysterical and unreasonable. I managed to coerce the morons in charge to do this, but the incident was turned into a laughing matter from that point on.
It's hard to convince drawer-minded bureaucrats to change their behavior when there aren't any regulations, created by other drawer-minded bureaucrats, that specify how it is that they should actually behave. I mean, god forbid, they might need to resort to independent thinking and resolution.
Gentle handling. Also, they had a control for this using injection of the stress-related hormone corticosterone, which failed to produce the changes they saw with sleep deprivation. This is in Science, they don't muck around too much there.
If you can formulate an objective measure for "sloppy thinking" and/or "depth of thought", I will apply with you for a grant from the NSF to do the study, and then write the paper together. One thing though - you will have to convince me that there's a chance you can convince them to cough up the cash.
Until then, I'm going with feeling here.
People who are encouraged as kids to be sloppy about their writing tend to emerge from adolescence sloppy about their thinking too. This is a cliche but it is, unfortunately, quite an accurate one. There are exceptions to every rule, of course, but where I live there is a generation of people who can't spell or read efficiently and this is reflected in how shallow their thoughts are.
Your leaders, sir, have been put there by voters. One of those voters may even have been you. So don't put the blame on them. In democratic and pseudo-democratic countries, leaders are just reflections of their populaces.
Oh, and just to make sure you don't think this comes from some partisan BS, the other side would have done precisely the same thing.
Not entirely zero sum. Theoretically, if these contraptions make people more conscious of their driving, thinking "oh wait, big brother's watching so maybe I'll cut the stunts" etc., this might actually lead to a reduction in their accident rates. Which means insurance companies pay less, have larger margins, and in an efficient market, this means they can afford to lower prices.
Also, as some posters here demonstrated, people who agree to put this thing in their cars are usually safe drivers. So if an insurance company attracts them by dangling low prices in exchange for outing themselves as nerdy drivers, they can reduce their accident rates, thus their margins, and the lower prices might even end up increasing their profits.
The US fight in the Pacific probably saved many lives elsewhere in Asia, the surrounding archipelagos, and Australia. We were allied with just about every other country fighting Japan.
If everyone had just surrendered to the Japanese, there would have been much fewer deaths in the Pacific theater in WWII. The point of fighting that war was not about saving the quantity of lives, but the quality of them.
Slashdot Mirror
He's running for President.... well at least this version can finish a sentence.
Wrong again. Decamp (not that you will ever catch that word escaping my lips) is to break up a camp. Not to depart from a camp. This was actually the original meaning of the word "deplane", to make something cease to be a plane.
You get out of a car. You get off of a train or a boat, or a hot air balloon. What's wrong with those? Or should we now start expecting "decar" or "detrain"? "Dehotairballoon"?
Oh, I'm quite familiar with this particularly gruesome neologism, and I'm most certainly not the only one that has a problem with it., as I have just learned. But maybe you should check your own grasp of the English language before looking stuff up in the dictionary to lecture others.
Let's see, to delouse is to remove lice from hair. To decapitate is to remove the head (latin: capit). To defoliate is to remove leaves (latin: follium). But to "deplane" is to get off of a plane. Did we derun of sayoids in the English speakism? Or are the previous sayoids de-languaged by some thinly-neurated jargon multiman?
Sounds about right.... "What will be the weather tomorrow? Let's ask the Trump campaign and proceed by further elimination".
Is the space weather forecasting program one of the things Trump wants to ax to pay for his tax programs?
To be honest, detrending gets rid of most of the correlations there.
"#FloridaMan arrested for attempted impersonation of reactor coolant in order to penetrate nuclear facility"
One of the main problems here is that people are given these technologies without understanding them completely. When I was working in the US, I made a big fuss once at my workplace about sending sensitive documents in unencrypted emails and was treated like I was hysterical and unreasonable. I managed to coerce the morons in charge to do this, but the incident was turned into a laughing matter from that point on. It's hard to convince drawer-minded bureaucrats to change their behavior when there aren't any regulations, created by other drawer-minded bureaucrats, that specify how it is that they should actually behave. I mean, god forbid, they might need to resort to independent thinking and resolution.
... Oh, wait! It's already happening!
Google needs to step in and produce Android for Desktop. The market share is ripe for the picking.
Gentle handling. Also, they had a control for this using injection of the stress-related hormone corticosterone, which failed to produce the changes they saw with sleep deprivation. This is in Science, they don't muck around too much there.
This, in a nutshell, is why your first foreign language is the hardest, then things get easier (especially if you stick to one family, e.g. European).
If you can formulate an objective measure for "sloppy thinking" and/or "depth of thought", I will apply with you for a grant from the NSF to do the study, and then write the paper together. One thing though - you will have to convince me that there's a chance you can convince them to cough up the cash. Until then, I'm going with feeling here.
People who are encouraged as kids to be sloppy about their writing tend to emerge from adolescence sloppy about their thinking too. This is a cliche but it is, unfortunately, quite an accurate one. There are exceptions to every rule, of course, but where I live there is a generation of people who can't spell or read efficiently and this is reflected in how shallow their thoughts are.
Comet impacts lasted 32,000 years and writing /. stories took 50 seconds.
In Kazakhstan, we just use ducks.
Laser light is collimated and therefore much more dangerous to your retinae.
... as I said, reflections of their populaces.
Your leaders, sir, have been put there by voters. One of those voters may even have been you. So don't put the blame on them. In democratic and pseudo-democratic countries, leaders are just reflections of their populaces.
Oh, and just to make sure you don't think this comes from some partisan BS, the other side would have done precisely the same thing.
Now go and get yourself a serious government.
Not entirely zero sum. Theoretically, if these contraptions make people more conscious of their driving, thinking "oh wait, big brother's watching so maybe I'll cut the stunts" etc., this might actually lead to a reduction in their accident rates. Which means insurance companies pay less, have larger margins, and in an efficient market, this means they can afford to lower prices. Also, as some posters here demonstrated, people who agree to put this thing in their cars are usually safe drivers. So if an insurance company attracts them by dangling low prices in exchange for outing themselves as nerdy drivers, they can reduce their accident rates, thus their margins, and the lower prices might even end up increasing their profits.
The US fight in the Pacific probably saved many lives elsewhere in Asia, the surrounding archipelagos, and Australia. We were allied with just about every other country fighting Japan.
If everyone had just surrendered to the Japanese, there would have been much fewer deaths in the Pacific theater in WWII. The point of fighting that war was not about saving the quantity of lives, but the quality of them.
If you smoke enough pot, as the authors of this cheap attempt at attention-grabbing surely must have, you start seeing double and 5V turns to 55W...
This is how they "stay under the radar". Smells like a publicity stunt.