Wow...dad needs to tighten the bolts on the passenger seat badly! If he wrecked, that seat would just flop forward and crush his kid. MAINTENANCE, people...it matters!!!!

BWA-HA-HA-HA-HA!!!! Your hilarious!
True, I don't need evidence to refute your ridiculous, flip flopping, inconsistent statements, but I offered some evidence anyway! You simply can't accept it, because it proves time and again that you're position flies in the face of logic, reason, and civility.
Most recently I provided evidence that most readers " have the capacity to read these comments and determine for themselves who has failed." and they determined YOU failed. Of course, you discount those that disagree with you (everyone here) in favor of the only one that agrees with you (yourself) and continue to claim backing from (and agreement with) phantoms, somehow 'proving' you're a 'good guy' here. LOL! Just hilarious!
Haters of criminal cops are more often than not thinking individuals, while cops are more often not. A max limit for cops of 110 IQ (and average of <95 IQ) proves that out easily. I'm not surprised that you once again move to insults and non-sequiturs when proven wrong....again and again and again. That is what infants do....throw tantrums and shout "NO-NO-NO-NO-NO-NO-NO your a meanie and a doodie head" with eyes smashed shut and fingers in ears while thinking they're winning a debate.
LMFAHS!

Perhaps this is the era of throwaway blockbuster fluff because studios are responding to the reality of ratings and market... because a mediocre movie at PG13 is a surer bet than a possibly amazing, possibly a flop R movie. Now, after PG13 has sunk in a while, the studios are no longer cutting back R movies to be PG13, they simply are not funding the R movies to begin with.

How is the oscar Rs example flawed? He just showed the numbers... the majority of oscar winners in the time since 84 were R-rated.

Can anyone figure the odds of one of these two men winning with a flush

There are 1,712,304 possible boards. 1,637,884 result in a tie. 74,420 of them result in one of them winning. There is a winner 4.34% of the time which is a probability of approximately 1 in 25 or 24:1 against.

So this isn't an incredibly bad beat even for poker, this scenario has played out countless times, and I bet it happened at other times in this tournament (if we count more than just Aces v Aces). It just feels bad given the stakes, which are pretty high for most pro high stakes poker players. Imagine instead this. You hold KcKs and your opponent goes all-in so you call. He curses (hoping you'd fold) Pokerstove tells me KK against two random cards wins 82% of the time. However he turns over Kd2c. This is a 95% chance of winning. The flop comes: Jh 4d 8s. Your probability of winning is now 99.7%. Then comes 2s - it's OK you still have over 95% chance of winning, unless...2d.

Assuming that the little indicators are correct, they say they both have a 2% chance to win just before the flop. So, without doing any calculations I'd say that means there is a 96% chance of a tie in the situation... The 2% chance for either of them to win must include the chance of a flush AND the very slim chance of a royal flush.


...Awesome that the older guy told the kid to save his money and that you "can't win every hand"... Although it could just as easily come back to bit HIM on the ass.

Been a while since I've studied this stuff, but the way I'd do it is as follows:

Chance for a flush (I'll shorten this to %Flush) is:

%FlushHeart + %FlushDiamond + %FlushSpade + %FlushClub

%FlushSuit = %Atleast4OfSuit

Here we are gonna calculate the odds of drawing 4 out of 4 cards of the correct suit, and simply ignore the 5th card. If that card is always of the same suit, awesome, if it isn't, well that doesn't matter anyways, since there is one of each suit already in play. Since there are 5 positions that the don't care card could be in, we have to multiply the result by 5.

%Atleast4OfSuit = 5 * (#OfSuitInDeck / #OfCardsInDeck)*(#OfSuitInDeck-1 / #OfCardsInDeck-1)*(#OfSuitInDeck-2 / #OfCardsInDeck-2)*(#OfSuitInDeck-3 / #OfCardsInDeck-3)

Run that for each of the four suits in the deck, add the results, and you should have your answer. The above can of course be written more concisely using other notations, but a lot of people aren't familiar with those.

If we ignored the other players to make the calculation more concise, we would have:
4 * 5 * 12/48 * 11/47 * 10/46 * 9/45 = 237600/4669920 = 5.09% chance
If you want the exact odds for this paticular hand, it should be easy to adjust to fit.

Obviously, they shift drastically at the flop and every card afterwards.

Nope. I don't feel bad for him.

Hey stupid, if you survive, next time try to make sure the driver is looking in your general direction before flopping out of view underneath their bumper.

Sorry, but I'm inclined here to call this one as I see it.

If Mr. Veitch is trying his hardest to come across as a loud-mouthed, peace-disturbing, douche-nugget, then I must commend him on a job well done. Really would have made my day to reach the end of the clip and find this obnoxious dicktard flopping around on the ground like a beached fish as a couple of the legit officers steadily pump some serious Mega-voltage through him via their several well-tuned tazers. A-hole.

To play devil's advocate....when she jumped in front of the 'protester' to interrupt his retarded soliloquy, she (lightly) bumped into him, and he moved her away. Then she gets irate, calls 'assault', jumps back in his face, and grabs the camera. At that point, I think they can defend themselves by shoving her away, and if she flops to the ground like a bad soccer player fishing for a foul and hurts herself, that's her problem not theirs. I would guess that's how the cops saw it, with her as the antagonist and instigator, a position that was reinforced when she fights the police too.
She over acted, they over reacted, she over acted again AND over reacted, they over reacted again, she over acted again, she went to jail.
Lots of sound and fury indicating nothing.

Belly flop every time. They need a new diving coach.

The rigid-hull inflatable uses the tube more as a stabilizer than flotation. They only become necessary in rough seas or hard maneuvering. The tubes are attached to a short-sided fiberglass or aluminium hull, which provides the buoyancy. At the end, you can see them slowly making towards home.

Smaller Zodiacs use the tubes as the hull, with just a sheet of rubber hanging between the tubes as a floor, so when the tubes lose air they completely collapse. In order to carry more than 3-4 people, you need a rigid hull for strength. Otherwise it would just flop all over the place like an inflatable life raft.

Whatever, no one uses a toothbrush for teeth anyway anymore...masturbation on anyone's part reminding transient peeps of the rules in a flop-house.

You are confusing me with others you are 'debating'.
I have always thought that the Union went to war to preserve the union...they did not go on a crusade to eradicate slavery. I'm not sure anyone here has ever made that claim.
And yes, the north sent in the army because the south attacked federal forts and took federal property.
Not sure what you're saying here, you now seem to admit that Lincoln tried compensated emancipation before joining the war, only to be rebuffed by the states...I'm not sure where you get the idea it was only tried in Delaware.
And yes, that's how government works, the federal reps and the 'local' reps hash out the laws...in this case the locals said 'not now, and on our terms if and when' to compensated emancipation, and the federal reps had little backing besides Lincoln.
As I see it, Americans did all of those tactics employed by the British etc. Perhaps the federal government didn't try them all, but Americans did.
Contradictory sentiment, false implication, and simple ridiculousness in the 'charitable' paragraph. "Get one over on the south"? Hmmmm.
When a violent insurrection starts, the present government will nearly always engage in kind.
Peaceful secession may have worked...too bad the south had to get violent first.
Again, to you, are you saying it was all about slavery, or about preserving the union? You seem to flip flop there.
Again you intentionally miss-state the obvious, not when faced with a problem, but when faced with an ATTACK. He didn't go to war with Mary Todd Lincoln, and she was certainly a problem!

title is misleading. The message is clearly about porn addiction. It's a very real and serious thing.

And yes, BYU-Idaho has strict standards. Everyone who registers knows about it and agrees to it before they attend. No-one forces those standards on you. If you don't like it there's plenty of other choices. Where you go to college is completely up to you.

I dropped off my niece for freshman semester and they sent her away at the photo-id desk because she was wearing flip-flops. She went back to her room, changed shoes, and got her photo-id.