ITT: QQ on cue/queue
Let's do this for Japanese!
a - a, ka - a, sa - a, ta - a, na - a, ha - a, ma - a, ya - a, ra - a, wa - a
i - i, ki - i, shi - i, chi - i, ni - i, hi - i, mi - i, ri - i, etc...
n -> n
Decipher these words/phrases:
No. It's the word "more", which is confusing when used with percentages.
A word with 6 typos would have "20% more typos" than a word with 5 typos. However, this is in itself disputable, because even if a word has more than one error in it, we often just say "it's a typo" instead of "it has 5 typos in it". For instance, if you transpose two letters by mistake (e.g. "flase"), do you say it has 2 typos in it? I know I don't.
Even if we accept the premise that each incorrect letter counts as one "typo", then you would say that "galse" has "20% typos", not "20% MORE typos".
The poster's logic is this:
"false" has 0 typos in it.
"galse" has 1 typo in it.
Since 1 is 100% more than 0, it has "100% more typos".
However, this is incorrect. 1 is NOT 100% more than 0. (1 - 0) divided by 0 is infinite. For it to be true, "false" would have to have 1 typo in it. Since "galse" differs by only 1 letter, this means that it has 2 typos in it, and therefore "100% more typos". Unfortunately, it makes no sense to say that.
Therefore, the poster's logic is galse.
No, it charges your credit card.
Is this what's known as "vaporware"?
Yeah, but... what's the difference between your avatar and a copy of your avatar? If you simulate multiple copies of the yourself, how do you know which one your "consciousness" is transferred to? Maybe it's one of them. Maybe it's none of them. Maybe it's ALL of them, simultaneously. Of course that seems like it's impossible, but YOU'D never know that (or even be able to know that).
What do you define as the "real" you? How do you know that you're not a copy of the real you? Put it another way: How do you know that you're you? Like the characters in a book, the characters don't know that they're not real (unless the author makes it so). You can try to argue, "But I'm conscious, and I feel that I'm real." However, you can't PROVE it to me. Your avatar's copy can say that exact same thing to me and I wouldn't be able to tell either way.
Given an infinite amount of processing power, you could simulate an unlimited number of copies of yourself and an unlimited number of copies of everyone else. Which ones are "real"?
It was right in front of their eyes the whole time!
Commodore BASIC was bloody horrible even by the standards of the 1980s, but it was my first programming language & I still have a soft spot for it somewhere. I was only a kid though, and my programs were simplistic and crap.
I did this with my C64 when I was around 8. I remember going through the BASIC tutorials in the manual (when home computers came with programming manuals). Later, I would go down to the library and take out books like "Write Your Own Adventure Programs for Your Microcomputer" and "Write Your Own Fantasy Games for Your Microcomputer".
I also had a subscription to Commodore magazine. Still have them in a box somewhere.
Yes. It's obviously a flying car.
Star Trek Into Darkness => Kirk Dates Nonstarters
I don't think you'd get very far on America's Got Talent with a tiny violin.
And here's the rest:
"Oh freddled gruntbuggly"
"thy micturations are to me"
"As plurdled gabbleblotchits on a lurgid bee"
"Groop I implore thee, my foonting turlingdromes"
"And hooptiously drangle me with crinkly bindlewurdles"
"Or I will rend thee in the gobberwarts with my blurglecruncheon, see if I don't!"
Buy more monitors. Maybe you can get a 6-pack.
Not POTatoes? Oh wait, that's already taken.
From the letter itself:
Perhaps you might want to take your job seriously and actually give a sh.t! What's the point in having to deal with you Special Olympics rejects when we should just go straight to Appeals? While you idiots sit around in bathtubs farting and picking your noses, you should know that there are people out here who actually give a sh.t about their careers, their work, and their dreams.
I think it's appropriate that he's speaking in the third person.