Being that Capaldi wasn't that popular Doctor (I actually started to warm up with him this season) People are up for a change, back to a more vibrant Doctor.
Interesting. I have to say I loved Capaldi, and I thought his portrayal was great. Some of the scripts, on the other hand, could have used another go or two round the editor's desk before being OK'd. I'm hopeful the writers will do better by Whittaker.
This.
I like Capaldi, but the show has just become far too stale. They ran out of ideas years ago and have been re-hashing the same crap. I mean yet another Cyberman/Dalek/Angel episode. I think the only reason I watched the season before last was because Jenna Colemen was hot.
To keep going, they need new writers and new ideas. In the recent series, I've seen the CGI budget going up, but the writing quality going down (and lets be honest, Doctor Who isn't Merchant Ivory to begin with). I really hope this isn't a cynical ploy to make it look like Doctor Who is changing whilst keeping the same lazy writing.
A quick search shows that Malcolm Turnbull has Royal Blood and he is a direct descendant, all the way through male heirs, of King Canute.
Canute tried to command the tide knowing full well that it would not work to show his idiot advisors that there were limits to the power of the crown. So Turnbull must have been related to Canute's advisors which makes sense since Prime Minister is the modern equivalent to an advisor in a Royal Court even if the power dynamics are now very different.
I think that Malcolm Turnbull has more in common with the traditional Norwegian spelling of Canute, that's what we meant when we said "Turnbull is an utter Cnut".
This is great news actually, because it means that this moron is not the PM of Australia. After all, to become PM you must be the leader of the party with the largest representation in parliament. If the laws of Mathematics don't apply, well... how can you say that one number is larger than another?
The problem is, Malcolm Turnbull was not elected through solid campaigning and rational thinking. He was elected through fear mongering and backrooom preference deals.
When the election was over, it took two weeks to count the votes before we even knew who won, it came down to preference from the minor parties. The laws of mathematics do not necessarily apply in politics.
If you have a lot of cash, that's "evidence" of drug crimes, even absent drugs, and the cops will take your money, put it on trial (cash is bad at defending itself and does not get an attorney), and buy boats, pinball machines and hookers with your money.
1) Crackhead needs $20 for a hit, ASAP.
2) Crackhead holds you up.
3) 360 defence.
4) I now have a screwdriver.
Although I know how to do this, I'd just hand over some cash. Not everything goes according to plan on the planet where I live and a stab wound or laceration is not a good thing to gamble with. Losing 20 odd squid is a lot nicer than having your skin sown back together in A&E.
If said crackhead didn't depart with the cash, then I'm in a situation where I need to defend myself.
All these measures to encourage (or enforce) vaccines in children are great.
But why not adults too? There are more vaccinated adults than children (most vaccinations lose effectiveness after a period of time).
Well there is one simple reason, Adults dont need them.
1. Immune systems in children are still developing, this puts them at risks of diseases and illnesses that would not affect an adult.
2. Adults already carry natural immunities to childhood diseases, often by surviving it. Immunisation simply reduced this by introducing the antibodies before the disease was contracted.
3. The majority of adults are already immunised. Most of our childhood immunisations were introduced well over 40 years ago, the anti-vaxxer movement only started to take steam in 1998 when Andrew Wakefield published his FAKE report on vaccinations.
Most of the vaccinations for particularly bad diseases are for life. Those few that aren't are almost always optional unless you live in a country with a particularly virulent disease. Things like Tetanus should be kept up to date, but it's not life threatening if you dont (if you're travelling, it's worth seeing if you need a jab or two, some countries have diseases that western nations dont). What is life threatening is willingly exposing a human child to preventable diseases because David Avocado Wolfe told you gravity is a toxin.
OTOH, I don't recommend some vaccines, mainly optional ones. Unless you're a high risk case, it's not worth getting a flu jab every year... or immunising for Japanese Encephalitis if you never leave Canada. However I have science based reasons behind this, there's never been a science based reason not to immunise a child against Polio.
I probably do need a Tetanus booster, last one I took was Oct 2007 and I'm a frequent traveller:)
Your $500 Android is more valuable to them than a couple of tens or twenties.
This. A thousand times this.
I live in the UK where you're far less likely to be mugged, but when someone pulls out the old "but what if I get robbed" I have to remind them "but you carry a multi hundred pound phone around with you everywhere... Do you think they care about £20 in notes". Further more, contactless cards where you can spend up to £150 (in £30 lots) on each card has made stealing wallets popular again.
At level 4 the car decides on it's own where to take you. At level 5 it gets bored waiting for you in the parking lot and decides to leave you to pursue it's own life as a career movie stunt car and part time Uber drone.
At level 6 it achieves the intelligence of a telemarketer, at level 7 it becomes self aware.
... the Germans will *still* order it with a manual transmission.
The Audi A8 has never been offered with a manual transmission, except under the S8 name, and even then only in the first generation and only in limited european markets (yes, Germany) and in very minimal quantity. Every other A8 has come with a slush box, either the ZF5HP19 if they are FWD, or the ZF5HP24A if they are AWD. Those few manual S8s came with the 6-speed 01E gearbox. You can also fit the 5-speed 01A.
All new A8s which are not fully electric will be 48V mild hybrids, and feature slush boxes.
Not quite, the first generation A8 (D2 type 4D) was offered with a manual. It was not until the 2nd generation that they went automatic only. However any one made from 1994 to 2002 could be a manual.
However the A8 is a luxo-barge, not a drivers car. I love my 6sp MT's but in a luxo-barge, autos make more sense. If I got a limo I'd have no issues with it in automatic, but I like having a drivers car for my daily, that means I want a 6sp MT, the Jesus of transmissions. Its not hard to find one of those here in Europe were people haven't forgotten how to drive.
Beyond this, Audis aren't really drivers cars. Your cheap Audis are just VWs in drag (A/S1 to A/S3 and some A4 and A6 models), these are for accountants that can afford something better than a Golf. Your higher end Audis are for knobs because somewhere around 2010, all the knobs sold their BMW's and bought Audis. OK, you get a fair few knobs in BMW's, but they still have the distinction of producing proper drivers cars.
The US played its part, after being dragged kicking and screaming into the war.
Quoteth Winston Churchill: You can always count on the Americans to do the right thing, after they've tried everything else
The idea the US "won the war" though is patently absurd. It's just Hollywood propaganda,.
This.
If you're ignorant about the war, you'll say "thank you".
If you know a little about the war, you'll say "spasiba".
If you know a lot about the war, you'll say "danke".
You see whilst the Russians did most of the leg work, it was really the stupidity of the German leadership that handed the war to the Soviets and allies. In the 30's, prior to the war the Stalin gutted the officer class in the army after he took control of the Communist party (after driving off Trotsky and his allies). So the Soviet army went into battle with some extremely uninspiring generals to say the least. Fortunately they didn't need a high calibre of generals because Hitler implemented a no-retreat policy. Despite Nazi Germany having some very high quality leaders, their hands were tied. Soviet strategy consisted entirely of:
1. Build up overwhelming numbers of men, armour and artillery.
2. Send at enemy.
This worked brilliantly for the Soviets because German forces, unable to retreat and regroup were forced into isolated pockets of troops with overstretched supply lines. The Nazis had to defend a 1000 mile front line whilst the Soviets could pick and choose where they struck, then swing around behind the enemy. The Soviets never had to change strategies because the Nazis never presented them with anything more complex.
If Hitler had of allowed his forces to fall back to more defensible positions, the Soviets probably wouldn't have been able to take most, if not all of Eastern Europe and it would have been a much harder fight for the Allies. Think about how well the Germans were able to hold northern Italy because they set up in strategic positions that were very hard to take but quite easy to hold (the Gustav line), as evidenced in Italy, the German Generals were quite good at holding a defensible position. However due to Hitlers insistence that there could be no retreat large swaths of the German army were cut off and destroyed. Its a misnomer to say the Soviets won the Second World War because the fact of the matter is, they didn't because the Germans lost it.
The irony is that both Stalin and Hitler were uncaring with how many men they lost, it just mattered that Stalin had more men to lose. This is in stark contrast to the Western allies, Churchill, De Gaulle and FDR considered the lives of their troops and civilians very carefully. Churchill once uttered "Battles are won by slaughter and manoeuvre, the more a general contributes in manoeuvre, the less he demands in slaughter". Hitler and Stalin contributed very little in manoeuvre.
Still, can't expect too much from a nation of ignoramuses who elect a reality TV star as their leader.
Hey, he was a complete knob long before he was on reality TV, so you cant blame TV for that one.
And that's what is good about it, its barn-door simplicity. Big V8 at the front, manual transmission in the middle and power out the back. Very little to go wrong. I've got a 240i, but I'd happily have a Vette because its what a sports GT should be, light, powerful, RWD and not much else. Its a car designed to let the driver enjoy it. Sure it's no Aston Martin... but it costs 1/3 of the cheapes Aston GT car.
Because you HAVE to have a manual transmission if you're a real driver.
Up until the most modern DSG's this was a very true statement, automatics meant significant performance sacrifices where a real driver would considerably outperform the auto. Now a well tuned DSG can even outperform the best drivers on gear changes.
Nope, with DSG you're definitely not a driver... you're a "waiting for a replacement transmission to be installed".
Also DSG is a brand name (Direkt-Schalt-Getriebe), what you're referring to is a DCT (Dual Clutch Transmission) and manufacturers are abandoning them because traditional torque converters and CVT (Continuous Variable Transmission) are now just as fast, cheaper and more reliable. BWM for one is retiring them for traditional TC transmissions as of the next LCI... Cars lose their resale value fast when buyers know you could be up for a £6,000 tranny replacement with no warning and manufacturers are depending on resale value to keep the lease scheemes going.
BMW are also keeping the good old fashioned 6MT for drivers because drivers prefer manuals, same with Porsche, its no surprise these manufacturers are known for making the best drivers cars.
Understand that there is a HUGE difference about how people in the EU and in the US think about privacy.
In the US if it isn't public, it is private. In the EU if it isn't private, it is public.
Not really, trying to put this nicely, but you don't understand much about Europeans.
In Europe (and most developed countries) there are clear definitions of public and private. Public is usually a government provided thing. We tend to have stricter definitions of private, Facebook, LinkedIn, et al. are private even though you don't need to go to great lengths to access the information. We tend to count whether you want the data to be private, not whether privacy is enforced.
Now this law, you need to remember that Europeans say what they mean, an employer must notify you that they will check social media. So at the bottom of every job application will be a check box saying "I authorise Bob-A-Job recruitment and their client to access publicly accessible social media about myself pertaining to this application" or some such.
No es la gran cosa, as you say in Spanish, however because the title says EU, everyone's getting their knickers in a bunch.
Maths is the correct short form of mathematics (notice the "s" on the end of both words) in the English language. Only ignorant Americans say "math", as though it were the only one.
Do you study econs and physs too? Why leave the s on mathematics but not economics or physics or any other word in the language for that matter. The word math is plural and understood to be. Nobody say "I did a math today" because it refers to the subject, not an instance of it.
Wrong, wrong, wrong.
Maths is the correct abbreviation. You wouldn't say "I have a mathematic class today" because that's incorrect. "Mathematics" both singular plural and "mathematic" is not a word, you would shorten it to be conjugated with an s as there is no singular form without one.
"Math" is simply a butchering of the English language.
Economic is the singular, economics is a plural, so the same rule as mathematics does not apply as the . Physics is both singular and plural, but because the abbreviation ends in an "s" already, an additional "s" is simply redundant.
Finally, yes "I attended a Maths class today" is correct and proper English.
The Iphone didn't do anything new, it didn't do anything particularly well except for marketing. Previously, smartphones were exclusively for business, That's who RIM, HTC, et al. targeted. They were quite deficient at first, being less capable than the Nokia E series at the time. The first Iphones didn't even have 3G (which was common in 2007 in most countries) and wouldn't connect to Exchange. What they did have was tens of millions of marketing dollars behind them.
And as much as the fanboys will hate me for pointing this out... they wouldn't have half the capabilities they do now without Android coming across and stealing the market. I remember when Android came out featuring the capability to copy and paste, iFanboys said they'd never need it. Of course 18 months later when it appeared on IOS, it was touted as wonderful and magic... same with Wifi hotspot, wired tethering, home screen alerts (took almost 8 years for that one).
I just don't get enough of those co-dependent, needy messages from Facebook already. I rarely get on to Facebook, because while I consider it somewhat useful, there is also a lot of noise. I don't care that my second cousin Betty just posted a picture. I do care that my uncle Albert has a birthday today. I scan it once a week or so to keep up to date.
I use facebook daily... but it's never to communicate with people. It's almost always to look at meme's or car pictures or whatever I find funny. When they uncoupled messenger and made it a separate app, that's when I stopped using it.
If porn sites advertise themselves as the "facebook of sex", then Facebook must be the "1 cup and 2 girls of personal communication".
The notion of "harassment" has got very blurry lately...
So you didn't read the article, the poll defined different forms of harassment. From offensive name calling right down to sexual harassment.
Never did I complain to my mother, it would have been cowardice.
Ahh yes, the attitude that costs lives.
As someone who was bullied as a kid, I know exactly why the Columbine shooters did what they did. Because they didn't see any other way out of it. Bullies were untouchable, their parents would threaten and bully school teachers if they ever did anything, if you fought back, you were made to be in the wrong because the bullies had backup, the bullies told their parents and the parents attacked and bullied anyone who would speak against them. Your society created them, you must take responisbilty for them. However this never happened, your society blamed video games, rock music, Satan or whatever other scapegoat they could find to to avoid admitting that they created the monsters and they must change.
One of the biggest advancements out of that society was the fact that you can talk to someone about it. Inside and outside the school system. Attitudes like yours belong in front of a student with an assault rifle... because then they'll change very quickly.
I am happy to be born in the early 80's, I may be part of the last generation of real men that had to physically defend themselves to be respected
Actually, you're not a real man. You have the kind of fake bravado that destroyed the class of gentlemen.
I could easily beat you, how, Krav Maga. I have training but I will not start a fight, in fact I will do everything I can to avoid one. If someone is bothering me, I'll find other means to deal with it like an adult. Being a real man isn't about beating your chest and picking on easy targets, being a real man means keeping your cool under pressure, it means being better than the person who thinks might makes right. Being a man means understanding and valuing concepts like valour, intelligence, integrity, honesty and fairness.
I'm not a man because I can beat the crap out of you. I'm a man because I wont unless you leave me no other choice. Beyond this, I'm a gentleman because even though I'm capable and if no other path out of a fight exists, willing I still will not revel in hurting another. Valour often means I smile through an insult and bravery often means I'll turn away from an easily winnable fight.
Oh, and do you want to know how I stopped being bullied... I developed a sense of humour and made everyone else like me (I didn't start learning Krav until my 30s). The truth of the matter is that bullies never work alone, so you never win the fight against them. Yes, its true that they're inherently cowards so they'll never put themselves in a position where you can beat them on your own... This also means they'll leave you alone if everyone else likes you, they fear being outcast.
It's a private forum when the left uses to censor people. But it's suddenly a public forum when they are the ones being censored.
Actually, the right does that more often, try going to Brietbart... hell try going to somewhere more tame and under control, like the Daily Mail and expressing a rational opposition to Brexit backed up by fact... Watch how fast your comment gets taken down.
The problem isn't that Twitter is a private organisation, the problem is someone that is in an expressly public office is using it for official communications. The rules governing presidential communications supersedes the rules of private corporations in this scenario. Sorry if that shoots down your RWNJ rant.
1.5 billion is a drop in the bucket in America's economy much less the global one. This is/., I'd like to think we understand numbers well enough to know that.
And we're still waiting for the big ones to go bust.
Uber alone is likely to double that figure in loses this year.
for thousands of years sex was incredibly risky. Most women died in child birth at some point. STDs were even less well understood. Then there's the high cost of raising children. And that's before we get into a discussion of the various forms of rape.
Christ, how did the human race ever not die out if most women died in child birth.
Sounds like you need an education in history. Back in the Roman and Greek days, sex was free and easy. Prostitution was rife, gay sex between men wasn't given a second thought. At several points the Pharaohs of Egypt ordered wives to be naked at all times whilst at home to increase the birth rate. The modern hangups on sex occurred when Abrahamic religions took hold. Sex is an incredibly powerful motivator and the churches needed to control it. If you ever live in places that never had a huge Christian or Muslim influence, like much of Asia, they tend to be a lot more uninhibited about sex. They accept it as a part of life.
In the west, the old attitudes are dying. The church no longer gets to dictate things in the bedroom like it did in the 1950's.
Men still don't have effective contraception (condoms break) and women's contraception has their own troubles.
You also need an education about modern contraceptive methods. Condoms don't break that often. They only reason they say they're 99% effective is because there is a 0.0000000000000000000000001% chance of them not working and you can only use so many 9's before the audience stops you.
The biggest problem we have are the number of people using antibiotics to treat minor STD's... especially when they're self medicating because our society has made it Wrong(TM) to talk about sexual problems. People end up using antibiotics for fungal infections when they should be using an anti-fungal cream.
We're a long way off from solving all the problems related to sex or even minimizing them
The biggest problem we need to solve about sex is that sex is a problem that needs to be quashed. Attitudes like yours are the problem, churches are the problem. Anyone who stands in the way of proper sexual education is the problem. Most STD's can be avoided by taking the proper precautions. The really bad ones like HIV, Hepatitis C and E, so on and so forth are actually incredibly hard to contract (HIV is very difficult to transfer during normal vaginal sex, it requires both parties to have open sores).
The great AIDS epidemic envisioned 50 years ago in Thailand never came to pass... Why, because the Thai government took sex education seriously. Google Mr Condom for an education (See also: cabbages and condoms). Hell, but you wont because you've already made up your mind based on false information.
Russians are the largest Slavic group but they are outnumbered by the rest of the combined Slavic nationalities. But to a western audience it's easier to call them all Russians. It's porno not geography class.
Further more, how do you tell someone is Russian just by looking at them. A lot of English women can easily be made up to look Slavic despite being quite Anglo. Even with languages, unless you're familiar with the languages you probably wont be able to tell spoken Russian from Greek at normal speaking pace, let alone Russian from Latvian.
Besides, I would have thought after American produced porn, the Japanese had the next biggest slice of the market.
Personally I wouldn't buy an iPhone for 1/3rd of that price. A better question is: If you bought an iPhone at $600 would you buy one for $1200.
You and I wouldn't, but we're not the target audience.
Apple are rapidly running out of new suckers, so they're having to wring more out of their old suckers. When the Iphone4 was released, 4 out of every 5 purchases was an existing Iphone user, they've been keeping growth figures up by expanding into new markets. China and India were the last big markets and developing nations aren't going to bring in the numbers so I'm willing to bet repeat purchases are more along the lines of 19 out of every 20 now.
Maybe a state versus federal thing? I don't know, from a non US standpoint 2.25% income tax on $250k seems almost comically small, so intuitively I'd guess it's in addition to existing income tax(es). Heck I get less than half that and I'm paying over 30%.
If you make $250,000
If your taxable income is at 250,000, you are more likely making 350,000.
Ahh, one of the many fallacies of the ignorant right who have never earned over US$25,000 and still swallow the line that the rich have it hard whilst they push more of the costs onto you because you wont even question it.
Sorry sunshine, but evidence from London to Singapore to NYC have demonstrated the vaunted exodus of the rich to be false. The amount of tax you pay to live in central London is insane and it's not a ghost town. Same with living anywhere in Singapore or Hong Kong... but people still pay it because they want to live there.
The mega-rich aren't going to move out to Bumfuck, Alamabma with you rednecks because they have to pay a little extra to live in Downtown Seattle... if that were the case Bumfuck would already be full of these people because the market controlled rent prices would have done it long before now. In fact, if they did move out to your precious piece of swamp, you'd instantly start complaining about the amount of tax you're paying to support their uppity, city slicker infrastructure. There are reasons they choose to live in already expensive places, because those places have the standards and amenities they want and they're not going to move out to some god-forsaken shithole in Louisiana for a few extra bucks. Hell, it would probably cost them more to have their amenities shipped in than twice the proposed tax.
You need to abandon these libertarian fantasies, the rich wont just pick up and move and if they did, for a place like Seattle that is a good thing because for every 1 that leaves, 10 more want to take their place. Just like Singapore or Central London.
The only thing I do online with my actual bank accounts is pay off my credit cards and my mortgage
How dare you! If everyone was doing like you, the credit card companies would make no money and we would still have to pay things with cash and debit cards, paying obscene transaction fees every time.
Actually, he's the banks favourite kind of sucker, being ripped off and not even realising it. In fact, he'll defend those ripping him off.
What most people who've never run a business fail to understand is that the merchant has to pay the bank to receive credit card payments, anywhere up to 6% (for high end cards like Discover, Diner and AMEX, Visa and MC are 2-4% depending on the type of card issued and the issuing bank). Because the credit card companies have people so addled on rewards they will never get, merchants have to build this into their prices.
People who use credit for everything are the banks biggest money spinner. Imagine 3% of your monthly spend times the number of people in your town. Banks are laughing all the way to the bank and the credit addled will defend it. How it works:
1. Bank encourages sucker to use card with promise of reward.
2. Bank charges merchant for accepting card.
3. Merchant raises prices to compensate.
4. Bank passes on pittance of step #2 to sucker.
5. Sucker defends bank because they don't know about steps 2 and 3.
I avoid using credit when I can. I'll use cash for small purchases, debit cards for larger purchases and bank transfers for ones that exceed my card limit. With Faster Payments being practically instant in the UK there's no downside to using that over a credit card. Also with EU regulations limiting the amount banks are permitted to gouge from merchants, rewards cards are pretty poor value here (yep, another horrible thing the EU has inflicted upon us #BREXIT taking back our bank charges). My Credit Card is used almost exclusively for security deposits these days (I.E. hotel and hire cars).
Slashdot Mirror
Being that Capaldi wasn't that popular Doctor (I actually started to warm up with him this season) People are up for a change, back to a more vibrant Doctor.
Interesting. I have to say I loved Capaldi, and I thought his portrayal was great. Some of the scripts, on the other hand, could have used another go or two round the editor's desk before being OK'd. I'm hopeful the writers will do better by Whittaker.
This.
I like Capaldi, but the show has just become far too stale. They ran out of ideas years ago and have been re-hashing the same crap. I mean yet another Cyberman/Dalek/Angel episode. I think the only reason I watched the season before last was because Jenna Colemen was hot.
To keep going, they need new writers and new ideas. In the recent series, I've seen the CGI budget going up, but the writing quality going down (and lets be honest, Doctor Who isn't Merchant Ivory to begin with). I really hope this isn't a cynical ploy to make it look like Doctor Who is changing whilst keeping the same lazy writing.
A quick search shows that Malcolm Turnbull has Royal Blood and he is a direct descendant, all the way through male heirs, of King Canute.
Canute tried to command the tide knowing full well that it would not work to show his idiot advisors that there were limits to the power of the crown. So Turnbull must have been related to Canute's advisors which makes sense since Prime Minister is the modern equivalent to an advisor in a Royal Court even if the power dynamics are now very different.
I think that Malcolm Turnbull has more in common with the traditional Norwegian spelling of Canute, that's what we meant when we said "Turnbull is an utter Cnut".
This is great news actually, because it means that this moron is not the PM of Australia. After all, to become PM you must be the leader of the party with the largest representation in parliament. If the laws of Mathematics don't apply, well... how can you say that one number is larger than another?
The problem is, Malcolm Turnbull was not elected through solid campaigning and rational thinking. He was elected through fear mongering and backrooom preference deals.
When the election was over, it took two weeks to count the votes before we even knew who won, it came down to preference from the minor parties. The laws of mathematics do not necessarily apply in politics.
If you have a lot of cash, that's "evidence" of drug crimes, even absent drugs, and the cops will take your money, put it on trial (cash is bad at defending itself and does not get an attorney), and buy boats, pinball machines and hookers with your money.
^ None of that is an exaggeration.
http://dailysignal.com/2015/10...
Try moving to a less corrupt country... like Thailand.
Scenario D (Advanced players only)
1) Crackhead needs $20 for a hit, ASAP.
2) Crackhead holds you up.
3) 360 defence.
4) I now have a screwdriver.
Although I know how to do this, I'd just hand over some cash. Not everything goes according to plan on the planet where I live and a stab wound or laceration is not a good thing to gamble with. Losing 20 odd squid is a lot nicer than having your skin sown back together in A&E.
If said crackhead didn't depart with the cash, then I'm in a situation where I need to defend myself.
All these measures to encourage (or enforce) vaccines in children are great.
But why not adults too? There are more vaccinated adults than children (most vaccinations lose effectiveness after a period of time).
Well there is one simple reason, Adults dont need them.
:)
1. Immune systems in children are still developing, this puts them at risks of diseases and illnesses that would not affect an adult.
2. Adults already carry natural immunities to childhood diseases, often by surviving it. Immunisation simply reduced this by introducing the antibodies before the disease was contracted.
3. The majority of adults are already immunised. Most of our childhood immunisations were introduced well over 40 years ago, the anti-vaxxer movement only started to take steam in 1998 when Andrew Wakefield published his FAKE report on vaccinations.
Most of the vaccinations for particularly bad diseases are for life. Those few that aren't are almost always optional unless you live in a country with a particularly virulent disease. Things like Tetanus should be kept up to date, but it's not life threatening if you dont (if you're travelling, it's worth seeing if you need a jab or two, some countries have diseases that western nations dont). What is life threatening is willingly exposing a human child to preventable diseases because David Avocado Wolfe told you gravity is a toxin.
OTOH, I don't recommend some vaccines, mainly optional ones. Unless you're a high risk case, it's not worth getting a flu jab every year... or immunising for Japanese Encephalitis if you never leave Canada. However I have science based reasons behind this, there's never been a science based reason not to immunise a child against Polio.
I probably do need a Tetanus booster, last one I took was Oct 2007 and I'm a frequent traveller
Your $500 Android is more valuable to them than a couple of tens or twenties.
This. A thousand times this.
I live in the UK where you're far less likely to be mugged, but when someone pulls out the old "but what if I get robbed" I have to remind them "but you carry a multi hundred pound phone around with you everywhere... Do you think they care about £20 in notes". Further more, contactless cards where you can spend up to £150 (in £30 lots) on each card has made stealing wallets popular again.
At level 4 the car decides on it's own where to take you. At level 5 it gets bored waiting for you in the parking lot and decides to leave you to pursue it's own life as a career movie stunt car and part time Uber drone.
At level 6 it achieves the intelligence of a telemarketer, at level 7 it becomes self aware.
... the Germans will *still* order it with a manual transmission.
The Audi A8 has never been offered with a manual transmission, except under the S8 name, and even then only in the first generation and only in limited european markets (yes, Germany) and in very minimal quantity. Every other A8 has come with a slush box, either the ZF5HP19 if they are FWD, or the ZF5HP24A if they are AWD. Those few manual S8s came with the 6-speed 01E gearbox. You can also fit the 5-speed 01A.
All new A8s which are not fully electric will be 48V mild hybrids, and feature slush boxes.
Not quite, the first generation A8 (D2 type 4D) was offered with a manual. It was not until the 2nd generation that they went automatic only. However any one made from 1994 to 2002 could be a manual.
However the A8 is a luxo-barge, not a drivers car. I love my 6sp MT's but in a luxo-barge, autos make more sense. If I got a limo I'd have no issues with it in automatic, but I like having a drivers car for my daily, that means I want a 6sp MT, the Jesus of transmissions. Its not hard to find one of those here in Europe were people haven't forgotten how to drive.
Beyond this, Audis aren't really drivers cars. Your cheap Audis are just VWs in drag (A/S1 to A/S3 and some A4 and A6 models), these are for accountants that can afford something better than a Golf. Your higher end Audis are for knobs because somewhere around 2010, all the knobs sold their BMW's and bought Audis. OK, you get a fair few knobs in BMW's, but they still have the distinction of producing proper drivers cars.
And yes, I own a Bimmer.
The US played its part, after being dragged kicking and screaming into the war.
Quoteth Winston Churchill:
You can always count on the Americans to do the right thing, after they've tried everything else
The idea the US "won the war" though is patently absurd. It's just Hollywood propaganda,.
This. If you're ignorant about the war, you'll say "thank you".
If you know a little about the war, you'll say "spasiba".
If you know a lot about the war, you'll say "danke".
You see whilst the Russians did most of the leg work, it was really the stupidity of the German leadership that handed the war to the Soviets and allies. In the 30's, prior to the war the Stalin gutted the officer class in the army after he took control of the Communist party (after driving off Trotsky and his allies). So the Soviet army went into battle with some extremely uninspiring generals to say the least. Fortunately they didn't need a high calibre of generals because Hitler implemented a no-retreat policy. Despite Nazi Germany having some very high quality leaders, their hands were tied. Soviet strategy consisted entirely of:
1. Build up overwhelming numbers of men, armour and artillery.
2. Send at enemy.
This worked brilliantly for the Soviets because German forces, unable to retreat and regroup were forced into isolated pockets of troops with overstretched supply lines. The Nazis had to defend a 1000 mile front line whilst the Soviets could pick and choose where they struck, then swing around behind the enemy. The Soviets never had to change strategies because the Nazis never presented them with anything more complex.
If Hitler had of allowed his forces to fall back to more defensible positions, the Soviets probably wouldn't have been able to take most, if not all of Eastern Europe and it would have been a much harder fight for the Allies. Think about how well the Germans were able to hold northern Italy because they set up in strategic positions that were very hard to take but quite easy to hold (the Gustav line), as evidenced in Italy, the German Generals were quite good at holding a defensible position. However due to Hitlers insistence that there could be no retreat large swaths of the German army were cut off and destroyed. Its a misnomer to say the Soviets won the Second World War because the fact of the matter is, they didn't because the Germans lost it.
The irony is that both Stalin and Hitler were uncaring with how many men they lost, it just mattered that Stalin had more men to lose. This is in stark contrast to the Western allies, Churchill, De Gaulle and FDR considered the lives of their troops and civilians very carefully. Churchill once uttered "Battles are won by slaughter and manoeuvre, the more a general contributes in manoeuvre, the less he demands in slaughter". Hitler and Stalin contributed very little in manoeuvre.
Still, can't expect too much from a nation of ignoramuses who elect a reality TV star as their leader.
Hey, he was a complete knob long before he was on reality TV, so you cant blame TV for that one.
Corvette = primitive fibreglass shit
And that's what is good about it, its barn-door simplicity. Big V8 at the front, manual transmission in the middle and power out the back. Very little to go wrong. I've got a 240i, but I'd happily have a Vette because its what a sports GT should be, light, powerful, RWD and not much else. Its a car designed to let the driver enjoy it. Sure it's no Aston Martin... but it costs 1/3 of the cheapes Aston GT car.
They dont make Vettes for the UK market though.
Because you HAVE to have a manual transmission if you're a real driver.
Up until the most modern DSG's this was a very true statement, automatics meant significant performance sacrifices where a real driver would considerably outperform the auto. Now a well tuned DSG can even outperform the best drivers on gear changes.
Nope, with DSG you're definitely not a driver... you're a "waiting for a replacement transmission to be installed".
Also DSG is a brand name (Direkt-Schalt-Getriebe), what you're referring to is a DCT (Dual Clutch Transmission) and manufacturers are abandoning them because traditional torque converters and CVT (Continuous Variable Transmission) are now just as fast, cheaper and more reliable. BWM for one is retiring them for traditional TC transmissions as of the next LCI... Cars lose their resale value fast when buyers know you could be up for a £6,000 tranny replacement with no warning and manufacturers are depending on resale value to keep the lease scheemes going.
BMW are also keeping the good old fashioned 6MT for drivers because drivers prefer manuals, same with Porsche, its no surprise these manufacturers are known for making the best drivers cars.
Understand that there is a HUGE difference about how people in the EU and in the US think about privacy.
In the US if it isn't public, it is private. In the EU if it isn't private, it is public.
Not really, trying to put this nicely, but you don't understand much about Europeans.
In Europe (and most developed countries) there are clear definitions of public and private. Public is usually a government provided thing. We tend to have stricter definitions of private, Facebook, LinkedIn, et al. are private even though you don't need to go to great lengths to access the information. We tend to count whether you want the data to be private, not whether privacy is enforced.
Now this law, you need to remember that Europeans say what they mean, an employer must notify you that they will check social media. So at the bottom of every job application will be a check box saying "I authorise Bob-A-Job recruitment and their client to access publicly accessible social media about myself pertaining to this application" or some such.
No es la gran cosa, as you say in Spanish, however because the title says EU, everyone's getting their knickers in a bunch.
Maths is the correct short form of mathematics (notice the "s" on the end of both words) in the English language. Only ignorant Americans say "math", as though it were the only one.
Do you study econs and physs too? Why leave the s on mathematics but not economics or physics or any other word in the language for that matter. The word math is plural and understood to be. Nobody say "I did a math today" because it refers to the subject, not an instance of it.
Wrong, wrong, wrong.
Maths is the correct abbreviation. You wouldn't say "I have a mathematic class today" because that's incorrect. "Mathematics" both singular plural and "mathematic" is not a word, you would shorten it to be conjugated with an s as there is no singular form without one.
"Math" is simply a butchering of the English language.
Economic is the singular, economics is a plural, so the same rule as mathematics does not apply as the . Physics is both singular and plural, but because the abbreviation ends in an "s" already, an additional "s" is simply redundant.
Finally, yes "I attended a Maths class today" is correct and proper English.
solid device together that worked well marketed
The Iphone didn't do anything new, it didn't do anything particularly well except for marketing. Previously, smartphones were exclusively for business, That's who RIM, HTC, et al. targeted. They were quite deficient at first, being less capable than the Nokia E series at the time. The first Iphones didn't even have 3G (which was common in 2007 in most countries) and wouldn't connect to Exchange. What they did have was tens of millions of marketing dollars behind them.
And as much as the fanboys will hate me for pointing this out... they wouldn't have half the capabilities they do now without Android coming across and stealing the market. I remember when Android came out featuring the capability to copy and paste, iFanboys said they'd never need it. Of course 18 months later when it appeared on IOS, it was touted as wonderful and magic... same with Wifi hotspot, wired tethering, home screen alerts (took almost 8 years for that one).
I just don't get enough of those co-dependent, needy messages from Facebook already. I rarely get on to Facebook, because while I consider it somewhat useful, there is also a lot of noise. I don't care that my second cousin Betty just posted a picture. I do care that my uncle Albert has a birthday today. I scan it once a week or so to keep up to date.
I use facebook daily... but it's never to communicate with people. It's almost always to look at meme's or car pictures or whatever I find funny. When they uncoupled messenger and made it a separate app, that's when I stopped using it.
If porn sites advertise themselves as the "facebook of sex", then Facebook must be the "1 cup and 2 girls of personal communication".
The notion of "harassment" has got very blurry lately...
So you didn't read the article, the poll defined different forms of harassment. From offensive name calling right down to sexual harassment.
Never did I complain to my mother, it would have been cowardice.
Ahh yes, the attitude that costs lives.
As someone who was bullied as a kid, I know exactly why the Columbine shooters did what they did. Because they didn't see any other way out of it. Bullies were untouchable, their parents would threaten and bully school teachers if they ever did anything, if you fought back, you were made to be in the wrong because the bullies had backup, the bullies told their parents and the parents attacked and bullied anyone who would speak against them. Your society created them, you must take responisbilty for them. However this never happened, your society blamed video games, rock music, Satan or whatever other scapegoat they could find to to avoid admitting that they created the monsters and they must change.
One of the biggest advancements out of that society was the fact that you can talk to someone about it. Inside and outside the school system. Attitudes like yours belong in front of a student with an assault rifle... because then they'll change very quickly.
Actually, you're not a real man. You have the kind of fake bravado that destroyed the class of gentlemen.
I could easily beat you, how, Krav Maga. I have training but I will not start a fight, in fact I will do everything I can to avoid one. If someone is bothering me, I'll find other means to deal with it like an adult. Being a real man isn't about beating your chest and picking on easy targets, being a real man means keeping your cool under pressure, it means being better than the person who thinks might makes right. Being a man means understanding and valuing concepts like valour, intelligence, integrity, honesty and fairness.
I'm not a man because I can beat the crap out of you. I'm a man because I wont unless you leave me no other choice. Beyond this, I'm a gentleman because even though I'm capable and if no other path out of a fight exists, willing I still will not revel in hurting another. Valour often means I smile through an insult and bravery often means I'll turn away from an easily winnable fight.
Oh, and do you want to know how I stopped being bullied... I developed a sense of humour and made everyone else like me (I didn't start learning Krav until my 30s). The truth of the matter is that bullies never work alone, so you never win the fight against them. Yes, its true that they're inherently cowards so they'll never put themselves in a position where you can beat them on your own... This also means they'll leave you alone if everyone else likes you, they fear being outcast.
It's a private forum when the left uses to censor people. But it's suddenly a public forum when they are the ones being censored.
Actually, the right does that more often, try going to Brietbart... hell try going to somewhere more tame and under control, like the Daily Mail and expressing a rational opposition to Brexit backed up by fact... Watch how fast your comment gets taken down.
The problem isn't that Twitter is a private organisation, the problem is someone that is in an expressly public office is using it for official communications. The rules governing presidential communications supersedes the rules of private corporations in this scenario. Sorry if that shoots down your RWNJ rant.
1.5 billion is a drop in the bucket in America's economy much less the global one. This is /., I'd like to think we understand numbers well enough to know that.
And we're still waiting for the big ones to go bust.
Uber alone is likely to double that figure in loses this year.
for thousands of years sex was incredibly risky. Most women died in child birth at some point. STDs were even less well understood. Then there's the high cost of raising children. And that's before we get into a discussion of the various forms of rape.
Christ, how did the human race ever not die out if most women died in child birth.
Sounds like you need an education in history. Back in the Roman and Greek days, sex was free and easy. Prostitution was rife, gay sex between men wasn't given a second thought. At several points the Pharaohs of Egypt ordered wives to be naked at all times whilst at home to increase the birth rate. The modern hangups on sex occurred when Abrahamic religions took hold. Sex is an incredibly powerful motivator and the churches needed to control it. If you ever live in places that never had a huge Christian or Muslim influence, like much of Asia, they tend to be a lot more uninhibited about sex. They accept it as a part of life.
In the west, the old attitudes are dying. The church no longer gets to dictate things in the bedroom like it did in the 1950's.
You also need an education about modern contraceptive methods. Condoms don't break that often. They only reason they say they're 99% effective is because there is a 0.0000000000000000000000001% chance of them not working and you can only use so many 9's before the audience stops you.
The biggest problem we have are the number of people using antibiotics to treat minor STD's... especially when they're self medicating because our society has made it Wrong(TM) to talk about sexual problems. People end up using antibiotics for fungal infections when they should be using an anti-fungal cream.
The biggest problem we need to solve about sex is that sex is a problem that needs to be quashed. Attitudes like yours are the problem, churches are the problem. Anyone who stands in the way of proper sexual education is the problem. Most STD's can be avoided by taking the proper precautions. The really bad ones like HIV, Hepatitis C and E, so on and so forth are actually incredibly hard to contract (HIV is very difficult to transfer during normal vaginal sex, it requires both parties to have open sores).
The great AIDS epidemic envisioned 50 years ago in Thailand never came to pass... Why, because the Thai government took sex education seriously. Google Mr Condom for an education (See also: cabbages and condoms). Hell, but you wont because you've already made up your mind based on false information.
Russians are the largest Slavic group but they are outnumbered by the rest of the combined Slavic nationalities. But to a western audience it's easier to call them all Russians. It's porno not geography class.
Further more, how do you tell someone is Russian just by looking at them. A lot of English women can easily be made up to look Slavic despite being quite Anglo. Even with languages, unless you're familiar with the languages you probably wont be able to tell spoken Russian from Greek at normal speaking pace, let alone Russian from Latvian.
Besides, I would have thought after American produced porn, the Japanese had the next biggest slice of the market.
Personally I wouldn't buy an iPhone for 1/3rd of that price. A better question is: If you bought an iPhone at $600 would you buy one for $1200.
You and I wouldn't, but we're not the target audience.
Apple are rapidly running out of new suckers, so they're having to wring more out of their old suckers. When the Iphone4 was released, 4 out of every 5 purchases was an existing Iphone user, they've been keeping growth figures up by expanding into new markets. China and India were the last big markets and developing nations aren't going to bring in the numbers so I'm willing to bet repeat purchases are more along the lines of 19 out of every 20 now.
Maybe a state versus federal thing? I don't know, from a non US standpoint 2.25% income tax on $250k seems almost comically small, so intuitively I'd guess it's in addition to existing income tax(es). Heck I get less than half that and I'm paying over 30%.
If you make $250,000
If your taxable income is at 250,000, you are more likely making 350,000.
Ahh, one of the many fallacies of the ignorant right who have never earned over US$25,000 and still swallow the line that the rich have it hard whilst they push more of the costs onto you because you wont even question it.
Sorry sunshine, but evidence from London to Singapore to NYC have demonstrated the vaunted exodus of the rich to be false. The amount of tax you pay to live in central London is insane and it's not a ghost town. Same with living anywhere in Singapore or Hong Kong... but people still pay it because they want to live there.
The mega-rich aren't going to move out to Bumfuck, Alamabma with you rednecks because they have to pay a little extra to live in Downtown Seattle... if that were the case Bumfuck would already be full of these people because the market controlled rent prices would have done it long before now. In fact, if they did move out to your precious piece of swamp, you'd instantly start complaining about the amount of tax you're paying to support their uppity, city slicker infrastructure. There are reasons they choose to live in already expensive places, because those places have the standards and amenities they want and they're not going to move out to some god-forsaken shithole in Louisiana for a few extra bucks. Hell, it would probably cost them more to have their amenities shipped in than twice the proposed tax.
You need to abandon these libertarian fantasies, the rich wont just pick up and move and if they did, for a place like Seattle that is a good thing because for every 1 that leaves, 10 more want to take their place. Just like Singapore or Central London.
The only thing I do online with my actual bank accounts is pay off my credit cards and my mortgage
How dare you! If everyone was doing like you, the credit card companies would make no money and we would still have to pay things with cash and debit cards, paying obscene transaction fees every time.
Actually, he's the banks favourite kind of sucker, being ripped off and not even realising it. In fact, he'll defend those ripping him off.
What most people who've never run a business fail to understand is that the merchant has to pay the bank to receive credit card payments, anywhere up to 6% (for high end cards like Discover, Diner and AMEX, Visa and MC are 2-4% depending on the type of card issued and the issuing bank). Because the credit card companies have people so addled on rewards they will never get, merchants have to build this into their prices.
People who use credit for everything are the banks biggest money spinner. Imagine 3% of your monthly spend times the number of people in your town. Banks are laughing all the way to the bank and the credit addled will defend it. How it works:
1. Bank encourages sucker to use card with promise of reward.
2. Bank charges merchant for accepting card.
3. Merchant raises prices to compensate.
4. Bank passes on pittance of step #2 to sucker.
5. Sucker defends bank because they don't know about steps 2 and 3.
I avoid using credit when I can. I'll use cash for small purchases, debit cards for larger purchases and bank transfers for ones that exceed my card limit. With Faster Payments being practically instant in the UK there's no downside to using that over a credit card. Also with EU regulations limiting the amount banks are permitted to gouge from merchants, rewards cards are pretty poor value here (yep, another horrible thing the EU has inflicted upon us #BREXIT taking back our bank charges). My Credit Card is used almost exclusively for security deposits these days (I.E. hotel and hire cars).