If that's the selling price to military, probably includes licensing/chips for secure comms, as well as testing & certification to some arbitrary mil spec.

and while it's way cheaper than a Hellfire missile, this thing wouldn't take out a tank, and likely not even armored car. might be enough to penetrate the tank of a fuel truck though...

Let's see now, you messaged me repeatedly in a short time frame then with no mind that there was no realistic way that I would know such, precipitously instabanned a member empowered to confer this particular invocation and that action based not upon failure to adhere to prescribed policy but on your own arbitrary basis.

Either you have not read, or having done so and fail at retention, or feel specially empowered to perform invocations above your station. In any case you have exceeded your bounds.

Please, will someone levy the same upon this member rightfully until admin(s) may rectify the matter.

I remember this to be a serious infraction.


CC: @dag

CC: lucky760

Worth it for the fiddling around when the song ends.

LOL at "Im gonna miss that" after a totally arbitrary length theatrical pause for a guitar effect.

Hahaha.. Cancels out. OK, yep. It's basic math here not a complex collision simulation...

Did you even read this bit,

"The partial rollover presents an additional injury risk beyond what the standard crash test criteria are intended to measure"

I'm only discounting some things it because it's irrelevant to the point which is you stating rolls or "flops" are better than an arbitrary situation that generally doesn't exist and certainly isn't the other option to a roll in this test.

I've got zero issue with the action in the video. Citizen rights are inviolate. However, the action shown is one piece of a huge apparatus and body of work ENABLING the flaunting of American laws and regulations. That is the hero of this video's actual JOB. Obstruction justice. Hiding of illegals. I get the alleviation of suffering, but I just can't get around the somewhat arbitrary application of the "any means necessary" ethical construct. Out of curiosity, would you support this gentleman if he used his citizenship rights to aid these illegal immigrants in entering this country in the first place?

It doesn't matter, none of it matters. Treason, fraud, sexual assault, ... He is immune from any repercussions because of partisan brand identity. The political brain-washing of the masses began a long time ago to consolidate the interests of the ones who are already in power and already possess the wealth. They learned that we're all susceptible to confirmation bias and they used it to bifurcate us into two distinct groups, around a pile of arbitrary "issues". The current criminal in office is arbitrary, the branding is all that matters. God fearing, gun supporting, working class, racists would never vote against their "C"onservative brand and so they will always vehemently support the representative of that brand.

It's concerning that the all pretenses and facades have been torn down because the president is an unsophisticated buffoon who lacks the intellectual capacity for subtlety. But what was revealed behind the facade is not surprising. Just the same power hungry, wealth elite manipulating the uneducated to vote against their own interests...same as it ever was.

This I agree. ST is indisputably more science based than SW, and deservedly earned that respect. It's fun to argue whether warp drive can/can not exist and all that, but to just compare the different warp speed of different ships, across different classes is kind of pointless, as the numbers are arbitrary to begin with, no?

Say, if the video instead compares Mach speed between F-15/16/18/22 etc. and argue which fighter got the more advanced engines (accounting for weight/speed/aerodynamic profiles factors) then I see the point...

Most places have a no vulgarity, no hate speech, no sex rule applied across the board, which is fine....

I look at it differently. In a business, especially any creative business, the decision to pursue or participate in a particular transaction/venture should heavily prioritise individual freedom of choice. On the whole, I'm on board for requiring that business not decline service to people based upon attributes they are born to. Even there however, gender segregated spas are something that I still think should be allowed. That's not an arbitrary choice, up here in Canada a spa is under fire for declining access to a spa based on someone having a penis.

More succinctly, I think everyone should have as much right to think, do or act however they like. Equally though, people should have the right to not participate in other people's lifestyles as well.

I don't know, it seems pretty arbitrary to me either way. Actually the best argument for it IMO is that if you only have sex with one person, you aren't going to know if it's good or terrible. You won't have anything to compare it to and therefore something to make your life more unhappy if you think it's bad; one less issue to divorce for as well. Similarly, maybe if you were poor and couldn't afford fancy food, consciously avoiding ever trying the things you couldn't regularly afford so you would never be unhappy with not having it. It would be a question in the back of your mind, but not a source of unhappiness.

It would also have been nice to have some interview questions about how the sons are taught and treated by the same parents.

Youtube are consistently inconsistent. As much as I admire some youtubers and think making short films would be a great way to make a living, I am so glad my income is not dependent on the increasingly arbitrary whims of google.

For example, Brady Haran of Numberphile made a video about "derangements", a concept in combinatorial mathematics. Fairly dry stuff unless you're a math geek. YouTube flagged the video and even when he submitted it for "manual review" it was still deemed inappropriate for advertisers.....

although the problem has apparently since been resolved. Nothing to do with Brady also having an immensely popular podcast where he complained about it, I'm sure. (For the record, Hello Internet is awesome!)

So basically, the examples at the end reinforce her point at the beginning: fade-outs are a cop-out, an anti-ending. They function reasonably well in cases where the artist has no idea how to actually end the song. That seems particularly true with pop songs, where there really isn't a particular message or story in place, it's just some danceable nonsense - what's the logical conclusion to that?

I've become increasingly aware of fade-outs over the years when listening to older songs, and I suspect it's due to their relative rarity today. In the past they were so standard as to be the expected default, so I never noticed them. They irritate me now: "I don't know what to do with the ending, guess I'll just repeat this last bit an arbitrary number of times while slowly making it quieter." The example she gives of Holst's "Neptune" is in my view the somewhat rare case of a fade-out being used for the right reason, to convey a particular idea, or meaning, or feeling.

When used as the default in lieu of coming up with a real ending to the song, I hate the fade-out. When it makes sense in context, they're fine. I don't often run into the latter.

I got distracted by all the blinking lights. Where is he... the Death Star control room? Frankly, I'm mildly jealous that my work place does not look as awesome as that.

As to the test itself, it's way too basic. I would expect any beginning programmer to be able to write that with only a few hours training. You could make it slightly more challenging by adding some arbitrary restrictions like "don't use a for loop" (i.e. use recursion) but those are pointless academic wankery.

I actually wrote tests and hired a coder earlier this year. This test wouldn't have got you an interview, never mind a job.

You want to impress me? Start out by writing a test that verifies the output. I don't care if it works, I want to know you can PROVE it works. While you're at it, if I see a console.log or a printf or a cout or any kind of output in your algorithm (unless it's just there for debugging)... instant fail. Learn to separate presentation from logic.

Finally, if you REALLY want to impress me, make it scale. 100 numbers? Meaningless. 1 million? 194ms on my machine.
Write me a version that can do several billion and take advantage of whatever threads/cores are available,

and what angle would that be?
YOU said mike ward was "rightly sued" for basically calling a kid ugly,and i asked for you to explain how this is a legal matter.

or is it your contention that because mike ward "punched down" instead of "punching up" IS the legal precedent?

what if he spoke on how ugly patton oswald is?
or ridiculed michael j fox's parkinsons?

would THAT be acceptable?
or would that be acceptable,but just in poor taste?

and you still haven't addressed how this young boys reputation has been ruined.from what i have been reading it was not his reputation,but how mike wards joke had become semi-popular and the kids in his school started busting this young boys balls to a degree where school was becoming an anxiety riddled event for the young man.

why aren't his school mates also being fined?
i mean,if we are going to bring in the state to handle every and all social issues..let us at least be fair.

and what about the people in the audiences that found the joke funny?
aren't they contributing to the continuation of this young mans suffering in school?

see,i think you are viewing this as a bullying situation (my assumption),and you are viewing this young man as a victim.a victim to bad jokes done in poor taste,and maybe you are correct,but jokes are subjective..NOT objective..and there is no tangible evidence that this young mans reputation has been affected.

it is the INTENT of the joke that should be scrutinized,and that is something that is also subjective and an issue we all deal with on an individual basis.the legal system should NEVER be used to decide such arbitrary and subjective material,because now you setting precedent and punishment based on "feelings",and this tactic can be easily abused.

so you may "feel" mike wards jokes are offensive and damaging,and that in your country mike ward should be executed for his crimes (fascist much?).

but remember...that pandoras box door swings BOTH ways,and the abuse can come from a direction that you,and i for that matter,would be appalled in its application.

and to even suggest that this is not a free speech issue is incredibly naive'.
if you think being charged in a civil case,and having to show in court multiple times to defend "joke" with the possibility of even MORE financial hardship,will not affect how a comedian approaches his routine and the jokes he writes,you are simply NOT thinking this whole situation through and the unintended consequences of situations such as these.

this is most certainly a free speech issue.

let me give you a hypothetical,but using the same parameters.

the wesboro baptist church goes to protest an abortion clinic,and are met with counter protesters.

the counter protesters begin to chastise and berate the westboro people.ridicule their stance on abortion and their religion.so much so that one of the younger westboro children becomes distraught,and anxious and begins to cry.someone films the exchange and posts to youtube,and it goes viral.

now the young westboro kid is being harassed in school,being picked on and being called names.the young kid is so vexed and humiliated that he avoids school at every step and is having self esteem issues.

so much so that the westboro church decides to sue the counter protesters in court.

what do you think the outcome should be?
should they even be allowed to sue?
and if so,should the young westboro kid receive damages?
or should those counter protesters receive the death penalty in your country?

do you see what i am saying?
you getting what i am laying down?

because free speech means that you are free to express yourself,but you are NOT free from offense,and offense is subjective.what offends YOU might not offend ME,and vice versa.

free speech means you are free to express every little thought that pops into your pretty little head and share with the world,and i am free to ridicule you relentlessly if i so choose.

and i will.
with gusto.

I think that was covered by the bit about vanity sizing. If a store can make more money by lying to women, they have no incentive to use a system based on physical measurement.

Honestly, I think men fall victim to the same trick when our clothing sizes are based on an arbitrary scale not clearly linked to physical measurements. I bet what was sold as a "medium" men's t-shirt 50 years ago doesn't resemble what Walmart labels a medium today.

It's an issue where only government regulation could give us truth in advertising.

When I was younger and indoctrinated into that Baptist church I always though Satanists were simply worshippers of death and misery and evil. That's what the members of the church taught me. But this is a beautiful thing. It's nothing more than a commentary on the dangers of arbitrary power invoked by religion.

I just wish I had the powers of critical thinking when I was younger. Although, really I just wanted to be in the church because there were cool girls there and I wanted to fit in so they'd like me.