If you take the time to read them, it's quite easy to see that there's a fundamental difference between Genesis (really just the first quarter or so of it) and the rest of the Torah. The parts that read like a mythology are a fairly small percentage overall; once you get past the first section of Genesis, there's mostly just a few brief stories. The last part of Genesis (how the small tribe of Israel fled from the famine in their homeland to settle in Egypt) and the first part of Exodus (a slave revolt a few hundred years later) are the major historical sections, though the rest of the journey from Egypt back to Canaan is scattered through the rest of the Torah. The rest of Exodus is laws and a very lengthy description of the construction of the portable tabernacle. Leviticus and Numbers are mostly just laws and rituals. Deuteronomy is mostly a speech by Moses shortly before he dies, which includes some repetition of earlier laws and some new laws.
So no, the Torah isn't really a history book, it's more of a law book ("torah" literally means law). Yes, Genesis includes some creation stories, but the rest of the Torah includes things like how much you owe your neighbor when your ox kills his sheep.
Nouns ending in -ics like mathematics, physics, politics, or ethics, mean "a body of facts/information relating to X". The Latin suffix -ica, and it's Greek equivalent, denote a plural, but the Greek suffix -ikos is singular.
For most such words, there is no singular form that lacks the ending -s. There is no singular noun "mathematic" or "politic", and the singular noun "physic" is related to medicine (as in "physician"), not physics. There is, however, the singular noun "ethic".
Except "X" here is the roman numeral. It's pronounced "iphone ten s." Too bad, because if they'd named it logically, they could have advertised "these go to eleven!"
I'm sure 5 years from now Amazon and Google will join forces to help me secure my house by "securely" storing my digitial keys to my house and only unlocking it with my phone making me oh-so-much more secure.
I think you're vastly overestimating how secure a regular door lock is.
It looks like it's just third-party authentication, similar to how many sites, including Slashdot, allow authentication using a Google or Facebook account. So in theory, the general idea isn't any less secure than other third-party authenticators, but it's going to depend a lot on the technical details.
Does a cloud of mist that one inhales qualifies as "food"?
No, but if you look at the list of things the FDA is empowered to regulate, it pretty much falls into anything related to human health. Even cell phones and condoms, neither of which are food (for most I hope).
When it comes to the FDA, "drug" also includes medical devices, which is why they have authority over things like condoms (which have a primary purpose of preventing the transmission of disease).
If you want to revive the 1930s gangster era resulting from prohibition, but 10 times worse because nicotine is 10x more addictive, go ahead.
Most organized crime already existed before Prohibition. They got a little extra revenue from alcohol sales, but it's misleading to say that organized crime was a result of Prohibition.
Too bad neither of my state senators voted for it but then one really can't expect much out of Amy Klobuchar. At least my Representative in the House voted for it.
I admit that I haven't read much of the bill, and so this may be unfair stereotyping, but when there's a bill that regulates large companies and only one Republican between both the House and Senate votes against it, I get suspicious of what the bill will really do.
...an unelected, anonymous staffer is the antithesis of a representational republic
Trump was elected president. Trump selected his staff. Are you suggesting that Cabinet Secretaries and other high-level Executive staff should be elected instead of being appointed by the president?
And this Congress is going to throw out the hobby horse they've been riding to more conservative judges, more pollution all around, more money for their donors? I don't think so.
You don't think Pence will do those things exactly the same way?
Either way, if it does come to the 25th, Trump's supporters are going to go *nuts* about a coup if it succeeds and Pence takes the oath. Never mind buying popcorn, I'm going to be buying stock in popcorn *suppliers*.
Nah, they'd be fine with it. While Pence won't get the extreme nutjobs excited about open racism finally be acceptable again, he would be far more effective at actually accomplishing their goals.
Presidential staffers don't exercise the 25th ammendment, that is Congress.
Minor clarification: it's the Vice President and Cabinet ("principal officers of the executive departments") who must invoke the 25th Amendment, and then Congress approves it by a 2/3 vote if the President disagrees. If Congress wants to remove the president, it's just a normal impeachment process.
single payer & higher taxes for wealthy both poll in the Mid to high 70s. The only reason they seem to be "left" ideas is that so few people vote. Less than 20% of Americans are Republicans and 52% of those support single payer, for example.
Being popular doesn't make an idea centrist, it just means a majority of people support a "left" idea. There's nothing wrong with that; there are plenty of "left" and "right" ideas that are popular.
I do agree that low voter turnout is a problem. I'm not sure what the best solution is, though. Sure, having candidates that don't suck would work, but I'm not holding out much hope. Making it easier to vote would definitely help; more poll locations so that people don't have to wait in line for hours and/or required time off on election days so that people don't have to lose money (or get fired) just to vote would be good. I'm just not sure if mandatory voting (and fines for not voting) would be effective enough.
They should do this to Wal-Mart also, unless the information I have regarding their employees not being paid enough and therefore having to take government benefits to get by is inaccurate. Don't just single out Amazon. Do it across the board.
Despite the "clever" name, the proposed bill would apply to any company of sufficient size, not just Amazon (as mentioned, a law targeting a specific person or company is unconstitutional).
Yes, it is. It sets up an easily-attacked target that was not part of the original statement, and in fact barely even exists. The AC's response makes the unsupported assumption that everyone receiving public assistance is only in that situation because they chose to have at least 6 children. That creates a target that is easy to attack, instead of arguing based on actual data.
The democrat party should lean in his direction, but letting the far left of the party drive the bus is a terrible idea.
Sanders is hardly "far left". Single-payer health care and higher tax rates on the upper class are mainstream left-wing ideas. "Far left" would be actual Communist ideas like the general population (as represented by the government) taking ownership of factories, research labs, etc. There are people in the US who support those ideas, but it's such a small minority that they are completely negligible when it comes to elections.
If you think that you're a moderate liberal and that Sanders is far left, then you're really a centrist.
This is a ploy to extract donations from his base for his next reelection run. And that's all it is.
What would be the point? Sanders is the most popular senator in the country. There's pretty much zero chance that he will lose a reelection, no matter how much or little money he raises.
You do realize that slight inflation is pretty good for everyone right?
That's generally true (a strong economy is based on transactions that move money, so you want to discourage people from keeping stacks of cash in their mattresses), what's more important is to have steady, predictable inflation. Most investors want predictable outcomes, not complete chaos. A guaranteed 20% inflation rate would certainly be less than ideal, but it would be better for most people than a rate that could be anywhere between -10% and 10% in any given year.
Today, college degrees aren't meaningless, they are a minimum expectation. Few entry level white color jobs don't have a college degree as a minimum requirement to even get your application a set of eyes.
Good reason for college education to be available for free, unless you can convince a majority of employers to drop the requirement. It's the reason that public education goes through high school; at the time, a high school diploma was considered the minimum for a routine office job.
Slashdot Mirror
The Torah is NOT a history book. Take Genesis...
If you take the time to read them, it's quite easy to see that there's a fundamental difference between Genesis (really just the first quarter or so of it) and the rest of the Torah. The parts that read like a mythology are a fairly small percentage overall; once you get past the first section of Genesis, there's mostly just a few brief stories. The last part of Genesis (how the small tribe of Israel fled from the famine in their homeland to settle in Egypt) and the first part of Exodus (a slave revolt a few hundred years later) are the major historical sections, though the rest of the journey from Egypt back to Canaan is scattered through the rest of the Torah. The rest of Exodus is laws and a very lengthy description of the construction of the portable tabernacle. Leviticus and Numbers are mostly just laws and rituals. Deuteronomy is mostly a speech by Moses shortly before he dies, which includes some repetition of earlier laws and some new laws.
So no, the Torah isn't really a history book, it's more of a law book ("torah" literally means law). Yes, Genesis includes some creation stories, but the rest of the Torah includes things like how much you owe your neighbor when your ox kills his sheep.
Mathematics is plural.
Sort of, not really, it's complicated.
Nouns ending in -ics like mathematics, physics, politics, or ethics, mean "a body of facts/information relating to X". The Latin suffix -ica, and it's Greek equivalent, denote a plural, but the Greek suffix -ikos is singular.
For most such words, there is no singular form that lacks the ending -s. There is no singular noun "mathematic" or "politic", and the singular noun "physic" is related to medicine (as in "physician"), not physics. There is, however, the singular noun "ethic".
On a related note, sacrifice is self-destruction
I think you need to find a better dictionary.
Except "X" here is the roman numeral. It's pronounced "iphone ten s." Too bad, because if they'd named it logically, they could have advertised "these go to eleven!"
So it really was supposed to be called Mac OS 10?
Only if you have a severe speech impediment is "ten" close in pronunciation to 's'.
So instead of the iPhone Excess, we have the iPhone Tennis?
I'm sure 5 years from now Amazon and Google will join forces to help me secure my house by "securely" storing my digitial keys to my house and only unlocking it with my phone making me oh-so-much more secure.
I think you're vastly overestimating how secure a regular door lock is.
It looks like it's just third-party authentication, similar to how many sites, including Slashdot, allow authentication using a Google or Facebook account. So in theory, the general idea isn't any less secure than other third-party authenticators, but it's going to depend a lot on the technical details.
Does a cloud of mist that one inhales qualifies as "food"?
No, but if you look at the list of things the FDA is empowered to regulate, it pretty much falls into anything related to human health. Even cell phones and condoms, neither of which are food (for most I hope).
When it comes to the FDA, "drug" also includes medical devices, which is why they have authority over things like condoms (which have a primary purpose of preventing the transmission of disease).
If you want to revive the 1930s gangster era resulting from prohibition, but 10 times worse because nicotine is 10x more addictive, go ahead.
Most organized crime already existed before Prohibition. They got a little extra revenue from alcohol sales, but it's misleading to say that organized crime was a result of Prohibition.
You're in a better situation, but I'd hardly call ingesting a carcinogen a much better situation.
Nicotine is not a carcinogen.
No, but the vapor is. Not nearly as bad as cigarette smoke, of course, but it does increase your risk a little.
...from what little reporting on I have seen seems to indicate that it did roll back some of the Dodd-Frank regulations...
Thanks, that's the answer I was looking for.
In the spirit of, "too big to fail," Equifax is too big for their breaches.
I see what you did there.
Too bad neither of my state senators voted for it but then one really can't expect much out of Amy Klobuchar. At least my Representative in the House voted for it.
I admit that I haven't read much of the bill, and so this may be unfair stereotyping, but when there's a bill that regulates large companies and only one Republican between both the House and Senate votes against it, I get suspicious of what the bill will really do.
...an unelected, anonymous staffer is the antithesis of a representational republic
Trump was elected president. Trump selected his staff. Are you suggesting that Cabinet Secretaries and other high-level Executive staff should be elected instead of being appointed by the president?
And this Congress is going to throw out the hobby horse they've been riding to more conservative judges, more pollution all around, more money for their donors? I don't think so.
You don't think Pence will do those things exactly the same way?
Either way, if it does come to the 25th, Trump's supporters are going to go *nuts* about a coup if it succeeds and Pence takes the oath. Never mind buying popcorn, I'm going to be buying stock in popcorn *suppliers*.
Nah, they'd be fine with it. While Pence won't get the extreme nutjobs excited about open racism finally be acceptable again, he would be far more effective at actually accomplishing their goals.
Presidential staffers don't exercise the 25th ammendment, that is Congress.
Minor clarification: it's the Vice President and Cabinet ("principal officers of the executive departments") who must invoke the 25th Amendment, and then Congress approves it by a 2/3 vote if the President disagrees. If Congress wants to remove the president, it's just a normal impeachment process.
single payer & higher taxes for wealthy both poll in the Mid to high 70s. The only reason they seem to be "left" ideas is that so few people vote. Less than 20% of Americans are Republicans and 52% of those support single payer, for example.
Being popular doesn't make an idea centrist, it just means a majority of people support a "left" idea. There's nothing wrong with that; there are plenty of "left" and "right" ideas that are popular.
I do agree that low voter turnout is a problem. I'm not sure what the best solution is, though. Sure, having candidates that don't suck would work, but I'm not holding out much hope. Making it easier to vote would definitely help; more poll locations so that people don't have to wait in line for hours and/or required time off on election days so that people don't have to lose money (or get fired) just to vote would be good. I'm just not sure if mandatory voting (and fines for not voting) would be effective enough.
500 employees isn't "very few companies," it's a lot of medium sized businesses. And tens of millions of Americans are on SNAP.
And avoiding the tax would be easy, just pay your employees a living wage. A 600-person company full of engineers wouldn't pay anything.
They should do this to Wal-Mart also, unless the information I have regarding their employees not being paid enough and therefore having to take government benefits to get by is inaccurate. Don't just single out Amazon. Do it across the board.
Despite the "clever" name, the proposed bill would apply to any company of sufficient size, not just Amazon (as mentioned, a law targeting a specific person or company is unconstitutional).
That's not a straw man argument.
Yes, it is. It sets up an easily-attacked target that was not part of the original statement, and in fact barely even exists. The AC's response makes the unsupported assumption that everyone receiving public assistance is only in that situation because they chose to have at least 6 children. That creates a target that is easy to attack, instead of arguing based on actual data.
The democrat party should lean in his direction, but letting the far left of the party drive the bus is a terrible idea.
Sanders is hardly "far left". Single-payer health care and higher tax rates on the upper class are mainstream left-wing ideas. "Far left" would be actual Communist ideas like the general population (as represented by the government) taking ownership of factories, research labs, etc. There are people in the US who support those ideas, but it's such a small minority that they are completely negligible when it comes to elections.
If you think that you're a moderate liberal and that Sanders is far left, then you're really a centrist.
This is a ploy to extract donations from his base for his next reelection run. And that's all it is.
What would be the point? Sanders is the most popular senator in the country. There's pretty much zero chance that he will lose a reelection, no matter how much or little money he raises.
You do realize that slight inflation is pretty good for everyone right?
That's generally true (a strong economy is based on transactions that move money, so you want to discourage people from keeping stacks of cash in their mattresses), what's more important is to have steady, predictable inflation. Most investors want predictable outcomes, not complete chaos. A guaranteed 20% inflation rate would certainly be less than ideal, but it would be better for most people than a rate that could be anywhere between -10% and 10% in any given year.
Today, college degrees aren't meaningless, they are a minimum expectation. Few entry level white color jobs don't have a college degree as a minimum requirement to even get your application a set of eyes.
Good reason for college education to be available for free, unless you can convince a majority of employers to drop the requirement. It's the reason that public education goes through high school; at the time, a high school diploma was considered the minimum for a routine office job.