Oh, lookie... Moderators that disagree. Isn't that cute? I love me some abusive moderators. This is slashdot's strength, ladieez and gentlemen; hiding posts the mods disagree with. C'mon, mod me down some more. No, no, a little to the left. There you go. Ah!
And thus, the "modded TSA" tag was born...
The feeling is mutual. The politicians want to get rid of you.
Nothing like biting the hand that feeds you.
What's worse is that we keep voting for these idiots.
Maybe that's why it doesn't work as well...
There are some people who enjoy going to the same live show multiple times. They relish in what is the same as well as what is different in each performance. A synth is not even close to a live performer. A recording gets mundane to those who go to multiple showings.
There's no reason that a synthesizer has to generate the same performance each time. I'm sure someone will come up with heuristics to give a synthesized performance a "live" feel.
Of course you don't subdue them with impact forces. You use impact to get them down so that you can try to restrain them. And when someone goes on a rampage in short quarters, you use what's at hand. I am not a cop, and I'm relating a real-life incident from an officer that I happen to trust. And the incident was 10-15 years ago, so my memory may be faulty. YMMV.
There's a lot of reasons why you can't point a gun at a cop.
I'd write a Law & Order episode where a suspect reached for a camera, the cop thought it was a gun and shot the suspect. It was dark, the area was poorly lit, and the officer is acquitted. Has it already been done? Well, it doesn't matter now that L&O is off the air.
Ever tried to subdue someone on PCP? Six police with batons sometimes can't slow them down.
Right. That's why cops have video recorders in their cars. That's why cops have flashlights with video recording capability.
Sauce, goose, gander.
Why couldn't the particle stay the same, but the whole universe oscillates around it?
Did Spock come from the future to tell you that you discovered this?
There's nothing particularly difficult about understanding this, and nothing special, or evil about the rich doing it. The vast majority of us peons would do the same given the opportunity. If not for yourself, then for your children. No? Don't you believe in evolution, and survival of the fittest?
You've run afoul of Hume's Guillotine. What "is" (survival of the fittest) does not imply what "ought" to be (the strong preying on the weak).
It should be (expt 2 -14).
If I were to be "worked up" it would be because it is not rational to do the right thing for the wrong reasons. And when I'm told, "oh, well, even if the conclusion of AGW is wrong it still means we need to do such and such" then I become immediately suspicious. I don't like handwaving. The data should stand, or fall, on it's own merits.
The rule on staying alive as a program manager is to give 'em a number or give 'em a date, but never give 'em both at once.
