As long as it's not thinly-veiled transphobia, it sounds like as good a reason as any.
nickwitha_k
joined 2 years ago
I'd say that all 9 are corrupt, but to different degrees. Iirc, rejection of ethics oversight was unanimous.
You had a choice, you made the wrong decisions, now own it.
The pro-genocide protest (non-)voters have bought into the propaganda so thoroughly that I'm doubting that they'll accept responsibility even on their deathbeds at this point. They didn't give a shit about anyone or anything but performative actions to stroke their own egos and telling themselves that they are morally superior. There was one the other day who even admitted that they put their own SO's life at risk but still see no fault in their actions and blame dems and strategic voters for their own choice to support making genocide worse.
Thomas Paine was right. It goes back to the founding of the country (at least) and the refusal to form a truly egalitarian society, embracing human slavery instead. This made the US Civil War inevitable.
It's cheaper and easier to get higher quality by gardening for some veggies, like tomatoes. It is, however, more work than buying from a store. Part of the reason being the varieties and practices required for centralized, commercial agriculture. Mainly, varieties chosen for durability in transport rather than flavor or nutrition.
That's the fun thing. They're trying to make them gig workers so that they can be paid less and get no benefits.
So even if it's 4mm away? 5mm? 6mm? 7mm? 8? 9?
If it were that far away, contact would not happen, and thus no injury. To be clear, a graze or tangential gunshot wound requires contact to occur. The hydrostatic shock occurs only when there is physical contact to allow a transfer of kinetic energy.
You argue as if you can be equally injured in a car crash by being a bystander because of the energy of a speeding car. Like, no?
A key part that you're missing in that comparison is the area over which the contact occurs. So, it would be roughly like a 1956 VW Beetle hitting someone in the ear at 60mph. However, this also isn't quite accurate or the full picture because it would require somehow getting an equivalent ratio of surface area contacting the ear, which would be much greater than ear-sized on the VW because a 5.56mm round is so small, as well as the additional forces exerted because of the sonic blast wave that the bullet causes.
Bullets work by transferring immense amounts of energy to a small surface area. High-velocity bullets (those flying at supersonic speeds, like all modern cartridges that are not specifically designed to be subsonic), have an additional effect of causing hydrostatic shock (some research suggests that this may, to a lesser degree, occur with subsonic rounds as well). What that means is that a component of the sonic blast wave participates in the transfer of energy to tissue (we're big bags of water), causing a radiating pressure wave that evidence shows can cause fractures in bone not impacted by the bullet, as well as damage to nearby internal organs and nerves.
Another great way of understanding the importance of surface area to the damage inflicted by rapid kinetic energy transfer would be Blendo. A battle robot built by the MythBusters guys that, as a "weapon" used a flywheel weighing roughly 100lbs (45kg) that was spun up to around 400RPM. The energy in that flywheel was transferred to the opposing robots in a very small surface area, causing such devastating effects that they were asked to withdraw from the competition.
This is very similar to how bullets work and one of a number of reasons that even a graze from 5.56mm bullet that hadn't first lost a significant amount of its energy is very unlikely. The wound being able to heal in a week with no visible scarring (not to mention suppression of any medical records from being used in the investigation or revealed to the public) makes that possibility even more vanishingly small.
Turns out that people don't "grow out of" physiological differences in how their prefrontal cortex forms. Who would have thought?! /s
Ah man. This looks like it is likely the sort of electric motorcycle that I'd actually want. My favorite bikes have been in the 196cc (Yamaha TW200) to 649cc (Kawasaki KLR650) range and pretty no-frills. Most of them were even carbureted. The only change from what I see on their website that I'd want is a mechanical instrument cluster. It's nice to be able to see what's going on when the tank is empty.
Hopefully they release in other regions with similar price points. Having a nice electric dual-sport for fire roads that isn't ridiculously expensive or heavy would be amazing.
Looks like we're all going to have long-COVID.
I have a question for folks here, mainly around English linguistics but would love to hear of parallels in other languages. If you're not big on cats, just skip the next paragraph, which I've include for the context to be clear and show why I have provided the picture.
This morning, one of my cats was acting up a bit, hopping on the table where I have an electronics project, and searching for something to pilfer. In order to halt this behavior, I distracted him with a good deal of play with his toys (he is very athletic, so, lots of tossing a toy mouse for him to chase, then walking over to where he's left it because he doesn't fetch anymore). The image is of the culprit now that he's worn out.
While trying to achieve this state, I had a modified aphorism occur to me:
Idle cats are the Devil's playground.
It occurred to me then that I'm not sure if there is an extant term to describe taking an existing aphorism and modifying it while still conveying the same or similar meaning. For those not familiar, the original aphorism is "Idle hands are the Devil's playground" (apparently of biblical origin), meaning roughly that busy people don't often get into trouble or conversely that bored people will get into mischief.
There is a term, if informal, to describe, often intentional, mismatch of parts of aphorisms (ex. "Not the sharpest egg in the attic"), malaphor. Can anyone think of a similar extant term for a modified aphorism? If not, after trying multiple prefixes, I think that the least clunky seems to be "transaphor" (trans- meaning to change).
Anyone have thoughts on the matter?
61
[Request] Looking for resources on terrible algorithms, architecture, and design
(self.programmer_humor)
12
US History - Beliefs of writers of US Constitution with regards to standing armies
(self.askhistorians)
view more: next ›
True indeed.