This memory (dance competition) will be lost now, because it was not recorded.
You think you have it bad, consider all those camera-less sad sacks who existed before the 19th century, who could never record any memories at all. I mean, I assume they couldn't. I guess nobody will ever know for sure.
I suppose a lot of people deal with tragedy through humor, but I sure wouldn't want to be a surviving family member and read some of the comments posted so far.
Seriously, it amazes me how people can fail to understand the gravity of this kind of situation.
I think the singular rule that stopped hijackings of substantial significance was enacted far later than the other provisions that represent a significant step backwards for freedom.
What stopped hijackings is the fact that the 9/11 hijackers crashed their planes.
The danger is in who gets to define what constitutes reckless driving
That's another issue from what makes car insurance different from health insurance. I would agree that one problem with this scheme is that someone might be an aggressive but safe driver, whereas someone else might drive passively but still get into a lot of accidents. As for basing insurance rates on what kind of car you drive, they already do that. Some cars get into more accidents than others because of the kind of people who buy them (eg, corvette drivers are more likely go out in a fiery blaze of glory than drivers of chrysler pacificas). I'd be surprised if they don't also use your credit score, assuming that's legal.
Now extend this logic to health care. Why is it okay to preach universal health-care and group insurance where low-risk cover the bill for high-risk, but the same isn't true for auto insurance? It's a slippery slope!
Presumably the insurance industry will argue that you can decide not to drag race through a school zone whilst huffing shoe polish, but you can't decide not to get cancer, unless you can (by not smoking), in which case your insurance does go down (relative to smokers).
When was the last time you actually counted as high as 507? I'm not talking about counting to 100 five times and then another seven, but actually counting each number from 1 to 507?
Seems like it would take a while. How many numbers is that, exactly?
Once they have these minor inconveniences ironed out I look forward to printing my own hand grenades
Apparently, you can already make a hand grenade. It's called a Liberator.
Is this the same federal govt that developed movies and campaigns saying that smoking pot would cause you to go insane, kill and rape people?
From the perspective of reducing your eventual jail sentence, doing the killing before the raping actually seems relatively sane, insofar as at that point, presumably all you're guilty of is desecrating a corpse.
What are they charged with? "Molesting under age pixels"?
It'll be even more interesting when they're able to simulate the rest of the 10-year and mass produce the results. Would that be an unspeakable abomination or a means of preserving real 10-year-olds from predators?
Look, we all know everyone speeds. 5-10 MPH over the speed limit is socially acceptable and tacitly condoned (it's rare to get pulled over by the cops for that, unless they want to bust you for some unrelated reason). But this is entirely different – it seems to be a clear case of reckless driving. On most interstates, you can do 75 MPH no problem, and on the better ones, 85 MPH is reasonable during the daytime if there is no inclement weather. There are a few interstates where you can safely do 90-100 MPH, but these are not all that common, and even then, extreme caution is required. I don't see any possible way that someone could safely average nearly 100 MPH on a cross-country road trip. Safety comes by going with the flow of traffic, and this driver must have been blowing past the majority of other cars during most of his trip. It's amazing that he made it there in one piece.
I know, right? What we really need is to be impressed by how safely someone drives across country. Like if he never failed to use his signal blinker a single time, never ran a yellow light, and stopped at every single stop sign no matter what. He could video the whole thing and make a two-hundred hour documentary that people could watch in lieu of getting their license revoked after their third speeding ticket.
This. Not only that, this is a clear case where he SHOULD be, if not arrested, at least fined heavily. This is clear cut reckless driving; speed limits are posted to keep the public safe. Stunts like this should not be pulled at the potential expense of other drivers on the road. We're all beholden to the same laws, whether you're trying to break a record or not.
Unless he posts GPS data (maybe he did), how can he be arrested? Theoretically, he could have been traveling the speed limit through any given state that might want to arrest him.
Amazon opting to be flat, effectively at 0% margin, is a game other businesses don't have the will to do
This is baffling to me. Why doesn't Walmart compete with Amazon? Walmart has the cash to fight it out with them, and they certainly have the incentive, but it seems like they're getting beaten badly. Their site sucks relative to Amazon's. If it were just a question of a relentless desire to expand and dominate, it seems like there would be more competition between them. Is it really just a question of taxation? Does Walmart compete effectually in states where Amazon gets taxed?
(and yes, I also think that every non-vegetarian should be willing to butcher an animal)
But what if there are extenuating circumstances? Like let's say the animal came from a broken home.
Living on Earth may be expensive, but it includes an annual free trip around the Sun.
