She does a lot of what a caddy does, so not deceptive imo. Just a technicality if even that…..

….after finally looking it up, I found I’m wrong twice.

1) singular of caddies is caddie, not caddy
2) it’s simply someone who is an attendant for someone playing golf (or it’s derivatives), so carrying the clubs/disks is apparently not a requirement.

I can admit I was w-w-w-wrong

157 Republican representatives just voted against legal interracial marriage, and all Republican senators are expected to vote against it if they allow it to get to a vote, which they have said they won’t, they intend to just filibuster, killing it.

Lemme guess, it’s because Democrats are racists.

Same vote against same sex marriage.

These are the same people who just voted AGAINST identifying and removing Nazis and violent racist extremists from the military and federal law enforcement.

Would love to hear your spin on this. How will you contort reality to pretend this isn’t blatant support for returning to the racist laws and segregation, the total acceptance of white supremacy and removal of rights for non whites of the 50’s?

Next they’ll be voting to invalidate the 15th amendment on some made up technicality. Hide and watch.

I recall questions like that on the sat. I also took it in boarding school…but in Hawaii. We had an SAT prep class where I brought up questions where two or more answers were technically correct, and I’m sure they warned me more than once that I could sabotage myself if I wanted to, it wouldn’t bother them one bit, but they were looking for the closest, least inclusive answer. I did manage a 1290…not great, but not terrible (unless you ask my parents, who both scored 1580)…I guess maybe I listened for once.

So here's a question I find interesting: did the Secret Service technically kidnap Trump, if he didn't want them to take him where they took him? I mean, totally the correct call for them to make, but it looks like the president assaulted his own Secret Service after they kidnapped him. Which is so very, very fucked.

Clearly not. I gave you the professional definition directly from master class. You disagree with them too.

https://www.dictionary.com/browse/cgi
Any “computer generated image”.

You do disagree with the established definition, and you have every right to be wrong. I have every right to contradict you.

Because your argument is not professional, logical, technically correct, or rational, I’m not picking up on that.

You have no idea what my CGI experience might be. My brother was offered a job at Lucas Ranch (before ILM, before Pixar). I’ve been exposed to computer generated images and the terminology surrounding them since the 80s.

I’m also not trying to use the definition you and your close office mates might have decided is correct among yourselves, I’m using the definition you can find in any dictionary or classroom. You aren’t giving any definition nor any citations to back it up.

Edit: PS- again, what sales pitch?!

Lol.

Tell that to the makers of “a scanner darkly”.

This wasn’t a color corrected crop of a still photo, it was a complete change of a short film.

Technically any digital photo is cgi, but that’s a red herring…this was digitally altered video, a much higher bar.

If the term is so meaningless, why argue against it?

You exaggerate to the point of hyperbole, which indicates you know you’re wrong. This argument isn’t about any still image ever digitized, it’s about a video digitally altered so much that it no longer resembles the original. Just because it’s a simple process doesn’t change that it’s an image generated by a computer.

This is the problem with generalities: there is almost always an exception. This happened to me a while ago: The grocery store I go to can get busy and has a pretty small parking lot, so it is often full. It is also one-way only so the lanes are narrow. I was loading my groceries into my car, and another car was waiting for my spot. When I finished, I went to return the cart, but the driver of the other car rolled down the window and told me not to bother, and that she will take the cart herself.

Now, I could have ignored her and returned the cart, which according to the video would have been the "correct" thing to do, but that would have simply lengthened the time the other driver had to wait (as well as the cars behind her since they couldn't go around her), for no real benefit other than to return the cart. Instead, I pushed the cart out of the way, got into my car and left. Even though it was technically "wrong" for me to have done this, I feel it was the correct thing to do in that situation.

If that were even a remote possibility, you might be correct, but it’s like saying the best solution to California drought is a 1/4 mile wide powered water pipeline from the Mississippi, possibly technically correct on its face, but in no way a feasible solution.
With 49% of Congress dedicated to nothing more than stopping the other 51% from getting anything done, getting 66.7% in both houses to agree that water is wet is asking way too much. Getting an amendment for something actually contentious is an obvious impossibility, and a ridiculous suggestion as a solution, even if it is the proper legal remedy.
Increasing the number of justices and re-litigating, while a cheap move, is the only feasible way to reinstate women’s rights Federally. The right wouldn’t hesitate if they were in a similar position.

Can’t think of your own goodbye slight? Come on, I believe in you, you can think of something yourself.

Not true, you used to praise them…especially Yertle….but your memory has never been your strong suit.
Not Cheney? Or did you just forget who to hate?
Sad for you the (anti) freedom caucus that I know you love is likely going to be ineligible to hold office…Cawthorn only escaped by redistricting the plaintiffs out of his district and technically invalidating their lawsuit….another is probably in the pipeline. MTG’s was given the green light in court yesterday….bye Felicia.

You might be shocked to hear….Pelosi….and any others over 70. That should be forced retirement time, for judges and presidents too….no control over a society when you won’t have to see it deal with the consequences of your actions, says I.

Senima and Manchin too… neither of which have ever been Democrats, they’re secret Q nut jobs and on the take big time.
Edit: literally minutes after writing that I found Senima’s latest poll numbers in her district….17% approval, 75% disapproval! It looks like I’ll get that wish at least.

Also, Al Frankenstein needs to be replaced…re-placed back in office. He should never have left. He wasn’t just funny, he’s smart as fuck and knowledgeable too.

A dollar has value if you can buy shit for a dollar.

Gold likewise has no exchange value if you cant exchange it for goods and services. Its rare and chemically stable and good for memorial coins, has many technical uses and looks cute, but otherwise it hardly matters what symbol for money you choose. There is 200 years of experience with fiat money and gold and silver standards and fiat money has been better, not just usually better or better in some scenario, universally better.

Symbolic money is practical and facilitates quicker turn around prevents deflation makes speculative runs on currency harder and smoothes the economic bumps in the road in general.

GDP is just a metric. Not a bad one but not the actual goal.

USofA is teh most developed. Should have used growing. Deflation in an economy that is growing kills growth.

Restarting countries not only get to ignore their debts, they immediatelly start borrowing again.

The only countries that dont borrow are countries no-one will lend to and countries so rich in some silly resource they can float high in the international currency system without borrowing. Borrowing is good for bussiness.

What is outrageous idiotic bullshit? Believing pegging the value of your paper note to some hoarded luxury makes it a better representation of the mean value of goods and services bought and sold? I could do without gold except for the jacks on my audio cables (just kidding). It does not matter what I exchange for food and gas, if it gets me food and gas, its good money.

Money is what you can pay taxes with. Do they take gold?

If you insist your dollar has the value of some weight of gold how does that influence the willingness of someone else to sell you shit? Unless they specifically intend to buy gold at a fixed price they dont care. They are going to use your dolar to buy some other shit from someone else. So if you take the actual currency out of the equation, when you decide on buying and selling shit you are intuitively comparing that decision with all the other decisions about buying and sellin that you know of. The currency is just a good way to count the measure of usefullness of a product or service and compare among many. Pebbles, bottletops, dollars, gold, pearls, all just a number.

A dollar could be backed by gold or it could not, this has zero impact on the transactions made. What matters is how many transactions are made, at what value, and how much money is available to the entire marketplace in a given period of time. Transactions quickly pass the ability of a gold standard to keep up. If you want a gold standard you have to slow transactions down because you dont have the money for them.

This is why markets need some regulation, otherwise someone might sell the universe twice and then default on one. But a gold standard, at least the type of gold standard I believe was talked about in this thread as a miracle cure, would be too limiting.

Yay!! We're in MY WORLD right now! HIPAA is the reason I get paid what I do, but the real nuts on my sundae is THIS little motherfucker:

https://www.techtarget.com/searchsecurity/definition/Federal-Information-Security-Management-Act

You don't even remotely understand how esoteric and convoluted this goddamn thing is, and how hard your pee-pee will get whacked if you fuck up implementing it. I have to do audits against this shit. There's THOUSANDS of questions and the auditors will not tell you the criteria for passing. I've had audits come back that looked like a 2nd grader submitting her paper, "Frogs are neat!" to the Harvard Review Board and yet passed, and I've had audits with two ultra-specialized misses on them that got the whole audit disqualified. I spend more time on documentation -- and the endless, ENDLESS paperwork that comes along with that shit -- than actually doing the technical stuff.

tl;dr: I like turtles.

Too bad that little insurrection interrupted them from making that case then, isn’t it?
That was the plan, object, have Pence accept and agree with their baseless already litigated and found legally invalid objections to legally certified electors, then have him accept the fraudulent slates of “electors” with their forged fraudulent documents provided by the RNC without allowing for any new objection, and declare Trump president despite his losing the vote and electoral college by a historic landslide….that’s called stealing the office, and is about as anti democratic as government gets. Even Pence sees that clearly, and he’s as sycophantic as they come.
After the failed coup, that evening the sycophants in their gibbering terror dropped their ploy and objections and let Pence move on.
Must be nice to have no memory, it allows such easy rewrites of history and your positions.

Fortunately, one violent Republican subversion of democracy got in the way of another attempted Republican subversion of democracy by fraud, and put Pence in the position of going along with the president’s mob trying to hang him, or follow the law, and the facts, and not join the coup (because it was clear if he did, he would still be hanged come Jan 21st. His actions and words that day make it clear he was certain the president himself was trying to kill him by any means….that’s why he refused to leave congress with the president’s personal secret service team. He feared assasination by Trump.).

Sorry, these quasi legal manuverings have been litigated, you lost. “Can” and “could” being operative words there….the issue being the validity of the challenges. The rights interpretation of the law and their ability to circumvent it has been rejected universally by the courts, because it is blatantly disingenuous and ridiculous, ignoring precedent and historical interpretation in favor of technical loopholes that might be valid if you just ignore the rest of the law and the requirement for honesty in court….like the ploy you describe above.

I've got a Technics TT that'll play 45's and 33's! It'll also slow or speed up to 8% let's get crazy with it!

Unless they have intent to use them, or have knowledge that that’s what they’re made for, no? That’s what it says in the law, isn’t it?

“ Every person having upon him or her in his or her possession a picklock, crow, keybit, crowbar, screwdriver, vise grip pliers, water-pump pliers, slidehammer, slim jim, tension bar, lock pick gun, tubular lock pick, bump key, floor-safe door puller, master key, ceramic or porcelain spark plug chips or pieces, or other instrument or tool with intent feloniously to break or enter into any building, railroad car, aircraft, or vessel, trailer coach, or vehicle as defined in the Vehicle Code, or who shall knowingly make or alter, or shall attempt to make or alter, any key or other instrument named above so that the same will fit or open the lock of a building, railroad car, aircraft, vessel, trailer coach, or vehicle as defined in the Vehicle Code, without being requested to do so by some person having the right to open the same, or who shall make, alter, or repair any instrument or thing, knowing or having reason to believe that it is intended to be used in committing a misdemeanor or felony, is guilty of a misdemeanor. ”

I have this opinion, (that police (and some prosecutors) will ascribe intent to anyone in possession of any tools, even those with other uses, so they wouldn’t hesitate to do the same for tools that are clearly purpose built breaking and entering tools having been advertised as such and with no other use,) because I watched a friend be arrested in the 80’s for having a screwdriver and pliers in their backpack that the police called “burglary tools”. He did not have a history of burglary. The case was dropped when they instead charged him with <.5 grams of marijuana for some crumbs found loose in the bottom in his backpack and sent him juvie for 6 months. (I think he was on probation, I know the police wanted to charge him with anything….and did.). I was accused of having lockpicks once because I had picked up a few metal brush bits from a street sweeper in a parking lot and police saw me pick them up, arrested, then released me on site when the supervisor showed up and heard their story.

I think the last sentence of that paragraph puts him in danger, since he clearly has reason to believe at least some of the burglary tools he sells to the public are going to be used criminally.

I don’t want to see you give someone advice that could get them in serious trouble, I know you would feel terrible. You might be correct, technically without intent to commit a crime they’re legal to own, but in reality police and prosecutors decide your intent and I don’t trust them one whit.