In blackjack, you will be making more bets per unit of time than in craps. The pace is just slower if you are only betting the pass line+odds, which is the lowest-house-advantage way to bet.
I did read the link that you sent, and I found it to be an interesting read. It helps me, having never been addicted to any substance more habituating than caffeine, understand what smokers go through when they try to quit. It's interesting that you met someone who still wanted a smoke after 5 years. My father, after he quit (30 years ago), couldn't be anywhere near cigarette smoke because the smell offended him so much (in a revolting way, not a craving way). He certainly doesn't have cravings now.
I had a roommate in college smoked a lot of marijuana. It went far beyond wake'n'bake. He was stoned 100% of the time. In class, out of class, whatever. He even had to take a few bong hits before going to bed, which I found to be tremendously wasteful (how can you even enjoy that sweet mary-jane it if you're asleep?).
One day, I made an offhanded, un-insightful comment to him, and promptly forgot about it. Fast forward about 10 years. Out of the blue, I get a call from him and he says, "Slashdot Parent, do you realize that what you said has been with me all these years?" My response: "I don't really remember ever saying anything profound to you, but hopefully it wasn't too disturbing."
After a few rounds of back and forth, him surprised that I couldn't remember what I said to him, and me assuring him that I'm not smart enough to say something profound, he finally relented and revealed the words that he couldn't erase from his brain--not through a lengthy marijuana habit, not through several iterations of trying to quit using various methods, not through the acid, shrooms, nor any other assault on his brain: One day, on my way out of our dorm room to go to class, leaving him to smoke weed alone, I took one look at him, and one look at his makeshift bong, smiled, and said before walking out the door, "And they say this stuff's not addictive."
The fact that you had zero difficulty quitting pot should tell you something. Yup. It tells me that I had zero difficulty quitting pot. Impossible to extrapolate my personal experience onto the entire toking world.:)
I know, and I'm sure you know as well, people who had monumental difficulty quitting pot. More difficulty than quitting caffeine (with physical withdrawal symptoms) and certainly more difficulty than quitting Orange Juice.
All I'm saying is that the absence of physical withdrawal symptoms doesn't mean that it's any easier to break the compulsive behavior. You can get caught up in semantics all day long, but the fact still remains that a lot of folks have a lot of difficulty breaking their marijuana habits.
Oh, and the OJ thing is just silly. I don't know anyone who drinks OJ compulsively. Don't get me wrong, I like OJ a lot, but if I don't have a glass in the morning, it's not like I walk around all day Jonesing for OJ.
P.S. I smoked weed only as a teenager. Still had zero difficulty quitting.
Because the number is way higher than what people experience IRL. Huh? The study said that 1 in 5 teenagers experienced unwanted sex talk from other teens or any sex talk (wanted or unwanted) from an adult, while online.
Are you trying to tell me that only 20% of teens experience unwanted sex talk from other teens or any sex talk from adults IRL? I would guess that the number is closer to 100% offline.
it isn't addictive (unlike coffee or alcohol it has no physical withdrawal symptoms, although it is habituating, like orange juice) I smoked plenty of pot in my day and I had absolutely zero difficulty quitting, however, I would hesitate to compare compulsive marijuana use with compulsive orange juice consumption.
I know plenty of former stoners who had a hell of a time quitting--some needed group therapy in order to quit their compulsive marijuana use (like for alcoholics). I know of no 12-step orange juice cessation programs.
Marijuana definitely lends itself to compulsive use, and it's totally ridiculous to say that "it isn't addictive" just because of the lack of physical withdrawal symptoms. Case in point: I get addicted to caffeine from time to time. When I become addicted, I suffer physical withdrawal symptoms (headache, tremors, irritability, etc.) if denied my caffeine fix. I have, however, never had any difficulties overcoming the withdrawal symptoms and quitting until my body gets back to normal. It's way easier for me to go off caffeine (despite the physical addiction that I suffer) than it would be for a stoner to go off of marijuana.
Defining addiction strictly in terms of physical dependence seriously underestimates the stoner's compulsion to use marijuana. I bet I could go off caffeine longer and with significantly less effort than you could go off pot. Of course, you could probably go off sex much longer than I could go off of caffeine...;)
In a criminal trial (such as the one in TFA, which can result in imprisonment), all the jury decides is whether the prosecution has proven their case that the defendent is guilty. The judge then decides the penalties, based on guidelines, precedents, and his/her own judgement This is not true in all states. In some states, the sentence is decided by jury.
you know how many delinquents my daughter has to deal with daily at school because the parents out there are useless? [...] Little tommy wants to shave 1/2 his head and dress like a pothead? smack the shit out of him. [...] Dammit children need to be beaten a LOT more today. You know, there are those that would argue that thuggery is a learned behavior. They might even suggest that thugs learn that violence is how to resolve disagreements, when disagreement with their parents is met with violence...
Ummm, no. First of all, your "hits" are quoting an NAACP chapter's president, who certainly would not be able to speak for NAACP as a whole.
Secondly, those are not endorsements for Paul's presidential campaign. They are just saying some NAACP chapter president doesn't think Ron Paul is a racist. Big difference.
Thirdly, I'm not sure NAACP could even endorse a presidential candidate, as they are a non-profit. Can non-profits make political endorsements? I'm not sure that they can.
Kindly find me a link where the national NAACP Leadership Council endorses Ron Paul for President of the United States of America, or kindly refrain from making smart-assed comments.
If you want the answer so badly, get off your butt and do the investigative journalism yourself. He is the one seeking my vote. If he wants me to vote for him, he can answer the questions.
So, nuff said about the newsletters, mmmkay? I love how that's the answer any time anyone dares to ask about the newsletters.
Maybe people would quit asking if Ron Paul came forward and answered: 1) Who wrote the articles in question. 2) Why Paul permitted their publication in his name. 3) Ron Paul's position on the content of the articles. 4) What was done about the situation.
Why is that so hard? You'd think he'd want to set the record straight and put the whole mess behind him. But instead, we get, "Don't bring up something that happened decades ago. Don't ask who wrote them. Don't investigate them." etc.
Well, that attitude is just inviting speculation and more questions.
I'm also pretty sure Ron Paul wouldn't be endorsed by the NAACP if they thought those letters contained even a hint of truth. I was not able to find any evidence that the NAACP has endorsed Ron Paul as its presidential candidate of choice.
Why do people allow the public Internet to brute-force accounts on their systems? There are plenty of ways to cut off IPs who have too many failed login attempts. Or, you could do what I do:
There are things that you really need a great deal of training to understand, that expert witnesses cannot really stress to a jury. Then you need a better expert witness who has better communication skills. How hard can it be?
Prosecutor's Expert Witness: "MMC Monster did X, when he should have done Y." Defense's Expert Witness: "Well, doing X was reasonable at the time because of Z. Hindsight being 20/20, we see X caused harm, but doing X conforms with industry best practices, and 90% of cardiologists would have done the same thing."
In reality, the point is moot. No malpractice claim against you is ever going to go to trial, unless you have a slam-dunk, airtight defense. Your malpractice insurer will say, "Settle and we'll pay. Take this to trial, and you're on your own, big guy."
No. A shop is not private property in the same sense as your home. It is a place of public accommodation, and as such is required not to discriminate on the grounds of race, color, religion, or national origin. Cite?
I'm pretty sure public accommodation applies only to the disabled.
Prosecutoers want victories, and piling on is one way to help cut a deal. That's something that's always bothered me. The old, "Well, you know that barfight you started? Well, since you kicked that guy in the nuts, you are being charged with felony sexual assault, but if you just agree to plead guilty to misdemeanor battery, we'll recommend you only get 10 days in jail." How is someone supposed to get a fair trial this way?
A barfight is not sexual assault, but under the definition, I supposed it could be construed that way. Would you want to take the chance? Register as a sex offender for life? Never be able to get a job or apartment again as a convicted felon?
Of course not. You'd just plead guilty to what you should have been on trial for to begin with--minus the chance to actually mount a defense.
Can someone who's actually an MD comment on the method by which an immunity can "wear off"? I'm not an MD, and I certainly don't know the mechanism by which vaccines lose their effectiveness.
I do, however, know that booster shots are required for many vaccines, so it certainly seems like this "wearing off" is a real phenomenon.
What I am saying is, don't be afraid of trying it because of a smear campaign. Go read about it - most of all, try it if you're a smoker that can't quit because OBVIOUSLY taking chantix is NOT AS BAD AS SMOKING ITSELF. Take a deep breath, big guy. Relax.
You're sound like you're wound up tighter than my brother was back when he got his nicotine cravings. He quit via a different method: the girl of his dreams told him she'd dump his ass unless he quit. Ya. He quit.
I never understood why smoking in this day and age is cool and rebellious. Me either. In fact, when I was in high school in the early 90s, it wasn't uncommon for someone to say, "I don't smoke! Not tobacco, anyway." <wink> <wink> <nudge> <nudge>
It would be like joining the Teen age republicans to be cool and rebellious. Heh. Kids do the darndest things. If you let your kids know that that will piss you off... well, I don't have to tell you what will be the results.;)
Slashdot Mirror
What's 35%+19%?
In blackjack, you will be making more bets per unit of time than in craps. The pace is just slower if you are only betting the pass line+odds, which is the lowest-house-advantage way to bet.
Ummm. I'm sorry. Have you looked at a map lately?
Sinai was returned to Egypt decades ago, Rip van Winkle.
I did read the link that you sent, and I found it to be an interesting read. It helps me, having never been addicted to any substance more habituating than caffeine, understand what smokers go through when they try to quit. It's interesting that you met someone who still wanted a smoke after 5 years. My father, after he quit (30 years ago), couldn't be anywhere near cigarette smoke because the smell offended him so much (in a revolting way, not a craving way). He certainly doesn't have cravings now.
I had a roommate in college smoked a lot of marijuana. It went far beyond wake'n'bake. He was stoned 100% of the time. In class, out of class, whatever. He even had to take a few bong hits before going to bed, which I found to be tremendously wasteful (how can you even enjoy that sweet mary-jane it if you're asleep?).
One day, I made an offhanded, un-insightful comment to him, and promptly forgot about it. Fast forward about 10 years. Out of the blue, I get a call from him and he says, "Slashdot Parent, do you realize that what you said has been with me all these years?" My response: "I don't really remember ever saying anything profound to you, but hopefully it wasn't too disturbing."
After a few rounds of back and forth, him surprised that I couldn't remember what I said to him, and me assuring him that I'm not smart enough to say something profound, he finally relented and revealed the words that he couldn't erase from his brain--not through a lengthy marijuana habit, not through several iterations of trying to quit using various methods, not through the acid, shrooms, nor any other assault on his brain: One day, on my way out of our dorm room to go to class, leaving him to smoke weed alone, I took one look at him, and one look at his makeshift bong, smiled, and said before walking out the door, "And they say this stuff's not addictive."
I know, and I'm sure you know as well, people who had monumental difficulty quitting pot. More difficulty than quitting caffeine (with physical withdrawal symptoms) and certainly more difficulty than quitting Orange Juice.
All I'm saying is that the absence of physical withdrawal symptoms doesn't mean that it's any easier to break the compulsive behavior. You can get caught up in semantics all day long, but the fact still remains that a lot of folks have a lot of difficulty breaking their marijuana habits.
Oh, and the OJ thing is just silly. I don't know anyone who drinks OJ compulsively. Don't get me wrong, I like OJ a lot, but if I don't have a glass in the morning, it's not like I walk around all day Jonesing for OJ.
P.S. I smoked weed only as a teenager. Still had zero difficulty quitting.
Are you trying to tell me that only 20% of teens experience unwanted sex talk from other teens or any sex talk from adults IRL? I would guess that the number is closer to 100% offline.
I know plenty of former stoners who had a hell of a time quitting--some needed group therapy in order to quit their compulsive marijuana use (like for alcoholics). I know of no 12-step orange juice cessation programs.
Marijuana definitely lends itself to compulsive use, and it's totally ridiculous to say that "it isn't addictive" just because of the lack of physical withdrawal symptoms. Case in point: I get addicted to caffeine from time to time. When I become addicted, I suffer physical withdrawal symptoms (headache, tremors, irritability, etc.) if denied my caffeine fix. I have, however, never had any difficulties overcoming the withdrawal symptoms and quitting until my body gets back to normal. It's way easier for me to go off caffeine (despite the physical addiction that I suffer) than it would be for a stoner to go off of marijuana.
Defining addiction strictly in terms of physical dependence seriously underestimates the stoner's compulsion to use marijuana. I bet I could go off caffeine longer and with significantly less effort than you could go off pot. Of course, you could probably go off sex much longer than I could go off of caffeine...
[...]
Little tommy wants to shave 1/2 his head and dress like a pothead? smack the shit out of him.
[...]
Dammit children need to be beaten a LOT more today. You know, there are those that would argue that thuggery is a learned behavior. They might even suggest that thugs learn that violence is how to resolve disagreements, when disagreement with their parents is met with violence...
Or would you rather take back that statement?
Ummm, no. First of all, your "hits" are quoting an NAACP chapter's president, who certainly would not be able to speak for NAACP as a whole.
Secondly, those are not endorsements for Paul's presidential campaign. They are just saying some NAACP chapter president doesn't think Ron Paul is a racist. Big difference.
Thirdly, I'm not sure NAACP could even endorse a presidential candidate, as they are a non-profit. Can non-profits make political endorsements? I'm not sure that they can.
Kindly find me a link where the national NAACP Leadership Council endorses Ron Paul for President of the United States of America, or kindly refrain from making smart-assed comments.
Thank you.
Maybe people would quit asking if Ron Paul came forward and answered:
1) Who wrote the articles in question.
2) Why Paul permitted their publication in his name.
3) Ron Paul's position on the content of the articles.
4) What was done about the situation.
Why is that so hard? You'd think he'd want to set the record straight and put the whole mess behind him. But instead, we get, "Don't bring up something that happened decades ago. Don't ask who wrote them. Don't investigate them." etc.
Well, that attitude is just inviting speculation and more questions.
Care to cite that?
More caffeine input required.
That should have said "No password-based logins are allowed by system policy."
Why do people allow the public Internet to brute-force accounts on their systems? There are plenty of ways to cut off IPs who have too many failed login attempts. Or, you could do what I do:
[casper]$ ssh myserver.com
Permission denied (publickey).
In other words, if you want to log into my server, you need a certificate. No password-based logins are disallowed by system policy.
Prosecutor's Expert Witness: "MMC Monster did X, when he should have done Y."
Defense's Expert Witness: "Well, doing X was reasonable at the time because of Z. Hindsight being 20/20, we see X caused harm, but doing X conforms with industry best practices, and 90% of cardiologists would have done the same thing."
In reality, the point is moot. No malpractice claim against you is ever going to go to trial, unless you have a slam-dunk, airtight defense. Your malpractice insurer will say, "Settle and we'll pay. Take this to trial, and you're on your own, big guy."
I'm pretty sure public accommodation applies only to the disabled.
A barfight is not sexual assault, but under the definition, I supposed it could be construed that way. Would you want to take the chance? Register as a sex offender for life? Never be able to get a job or apartment again as a convicted felon?
Of course not. You'd just plead guilty to what you should have been on trial for to begin with--minus the chance to actually mount a defense.
Really any sweet syrup will do the same thing. Try honey on a spoon next time.
I do, however, know that booster shots are required for many vaccines, so it certainly seems like this "wearing off" is a real phenomenon.
You're sound like you're wound up tighter than my brother was back when he got his nicotine cravings. He quit via a different method: the girl of his dreams told him she'd dump his ass unless he quit. Ya. He quit.