90262 pts · December 19, 2015
Something about myself.
I'd say it's a debatable difference. She obviously took a moment to think about her decision before she made it, then she chose to violently attack a downed player by kicking them in one of the most deadly places she could. Kicking her hard in the ribs? 100% just assault. Kicking her hard in the back of the head? It's easy to see how that could be attempted murder.
"15 women for an entire day." Obviously all at once.
I'd say there's 2 major factors at play here.1) While some do, most atheists don't go around talking about their atheism all that often. It's easy to not realize that someone you're interacting with is an atheist. It's simply not often a factor in their day-to-day lives unless...2) They are faced with an intrusive religious interaction. Religious people are often pushy, regressive, and talk down to people who don't believe what they do. It can be difficult to not want to push back.
I get your point and kinda agree. When someone asks another's religion and they respond "athiest", they are defining that "religion" category as an absence of it.In your analogy, it's comparable to a bunch of groups claiming there's a building hovering over a lake. Some think it's the empire State building, some the white house, some that it's over Superior, others over the great salt lake. Lakligions. "Athiest" still populates that category, it's just defined by a lack of belief.
I agree. I think it's more of a spectrum. Some people may be fully gay or straight, but most people lie somewhere in between. Kinda like the Ron White joke. But I think it's a very challenging topic for honest responses because of social influence and implications.If it's a truly anonymous poll, then people would be more likely to answer without repercussions of societal backlash. But then they have to contend with their personal struggles to accept who they are. Religion is a major factor.
Yeah, but obviously that's because humans have to interpret and hand draw each frame with this method and a computer does it for them with the dots, making it a lot faster and easier. Just apply a 3D model and voila.
If you're talking about the first guy, he didn't get run over by his car. Looks like he was lucky af and got his limbs out of the way of the tires. Bumped the door a bit, but very, very lucky. That could've been so much worse. I didn't laugh at that either.
Or Dapper Dan. When will it be here? 2 weeks. Ain't this place a geographical oddity. 2 weeks from everywhere.
This guy fucks https://media2.giphy.com/media/v1.Y2lkPWE1NzM3M2U1d2Ftenl3bzYyaWd4bHBqbXdwcWs1aGhpaHZwcm5odGhub3JwcDh4dCZlcD12MV9naWZzX3NlYXJjaCZjdD1n/xUA7baqmfSmprhlohW/200w.webp
Exactly. I'm not too interested in driving insanely fast for 6.2 miles. But if I'm driving a state or two away, fuck yeah, the extra speed helps.500mi≈800km.60kph is gonna take 13:20.80kph is 10 hours.100kph is 8 hours. 8 hours is pushing my limit for a day, but over 13 is a two day trip. Distance is a significant factor.
Yes but I'm pretty sure that one was from a good while back when it was more common to hear about a single study on the news making it sound like xyz was cured. The news was bad about just rattling off new study results that hadn't been peer reviewed. Such as vaccines causing autism. Predating Trump's presidencies altogether.
This picture's been fucked with. Her right forearm is massive and her proportions are off.
*Bark Ruffalo
Someone should nominate him for a Nobel peace prize for uniting everyone against the US
Though typically we don't refer to people from one of two separate continents as just American. We'd call them North American or South American. Just like we'd call others European, Asian, or African to refer to their continent.
« I'm not saying there wouldn't be a lot of things to work out, but simply that self driving vehicles are likely more difficult to do. They have to manage a minefield of obstacles at all times as well as navigate with potentially outdated information and improperly marked roads.Dangerous weather also affects driving conditions. Floods, heavy winds, downed limbs, landslides, etc. Not to mention they have to react to unpredictable human drivers, which aren't going away anytime soon.
As a personal vehicle, it seems less likely. Problems with affordability and volume. As a sort of public transport service, it seems much more viable.Regardless, there'd have to be several things to assist. The beauty of the air is that there's lots of vertical space to fit more vehicles. Allowing an area sufficiently large enough around paths to reduce conflicts, recognizing dangerous weather conditions, and having some sort of landing pad/parking structure/dock thing would be necessary. »
Sorry, but that doesn't make any sense. Rotating the pans changed nothing about the way he needed to apply the next layer of icing. The pans are literally laying on the exact same locations, rotated 180° so they're still in the exact same dimensions on the table.
This is on a global scale, which makes most of the monetary income amounts a lot less meaningful. Upper income levels in one area could be below the poverty line in another.
Why not both? Wii Ass Puswii
I think automation for aerial vehicles would be easier. Well, in regards to navigation. The heavy lifting flight controls have already mostly been tackled by drones.Once in the vehicle it'd chart a course and report it to a local flight path registry for path conflict corrections. Then just fly straight up, follow the path to the next landing location, and straight down.Doesn't seem nearly as complex as a ground based vehicle concerned with following narrow roads & heavy obstacle avoidance.
Chicken's not a vegetable?
"Go away! I'm batin'"
That's because vaccines are dangerous! What we need to do is expose ourselves to the virus so we can build up an immunity! /s
Okay, but are you suggesting they should have done something different? Like running? Screaming? Attacking?Making the mama feel threatened is how they die.Staying calm, getting out of the way, and being non threatening have them the best chance of survival.
Probably autocorrect. R and t are right beside one another and it doesn't care if the word makes sense when it drops it in the sentence. Mine regularly corrects some course works... Duck. Soon of a bitch... Whatever, I'm leaving these. I swear I correct my autocorrect almost as often as it does me.
My house is a bit of both and, unfortunately, the "professionals" don't always do much better.
Maybe save the known annoying ones for last so you can just tell the attendant, "I've got like 10 more of these so you should probably hang out here for a bit."
In NYC?
I'd say it's a debatable difference. She obviously took a moment to think about her decision before she made it, then she chose to violently attack a downed player by kicking them in one of the most deadly places she could. Kicking her hard in the ribs? 100% just assault. Kicking her hard in the back of the head? It's easy to see how that could be attempted murder.
"15 women for an entire day." Obviously all at once.
I'd say there's 2 major factors at play here.
1) While some do, most atheists don't go around talking about their atheism all that often. It's easy to not realize that someone you're interacting with is an atheist. It's simply not often a factor in their day-to-day lives unless...
2) They are faced with an intrusive religious interaction. Religious people are often pushy, regressive, and talk down to people who don't believe what they do. It can be difficult to not want to push back.
I get your point and kinda agree. When someone asks another's religion and they respond "athiest", they are defining that "religion" category as an absence of it.
In your analogy, it's comparable to a bunch of groups claiming there's a building hovering over a lake. Some think it's the empire State building, some the white house, some that it's over Superior, others over the great salt lake. Lakligions. "Athiest" still populates that category, it's just defined by a lack of belief.
I agree. I think it's more of a spectrum. Some people may be fully gay or straight, but most people lie somewhere in between. Kinda like the Ron White joke. But I think it's a very challenging topic for honest responses because of social influence and implications.
If it's a truly anonymous poll, then people would be more likely to answer without repercussions of societal backlash. But then they have to contend with their personal struggles to accept who they are. Religion is a major factor.
Yeah, but obviously that's because humans have to interpret and hand draw each frame with this method and a computer does it for them with the dots, making it a lot faster and easier. Just apply a 3D model and voila.
If you're talking about the first guy, he didn't get run over by his car. Looks like he was lucky af and got his limbs out of the way of the tires. Bumped the door a bit, but very, very lucky. That could've been so much worse. I didn't laugh at that either.
Or Dapper Dan. When will it be here? 2 weeks. Ain't this place a geographical oddity. 2 weeks from everywhere.
This guy fucks https://media2.giphy.com/media/v1.Y2lkPWE1NzM3M2U1d2Ftenl3bzYyaWd4bHBqbXdwcWs1aGhpaHZwcm5odGhub3JwcDh4dCZlcD12MV9naWZzX3NlYXJjaCZjdD1n/xUA7baqmfSmprhlohW/200w.webp
Exactly. I'm not too interested in driving insanely fast for 6.2 miles. But if I'm driving a state or two away, fuck yeah, the extra speed helps.
500mi≈800km.
60kph is gonna take 13:20.
80kph is 10 hours.
100kph is 8 hours.
8 hours is pushing my limit for a day, but over 13 is a two day trip. Distance is a significant factor.
Yes but I'm pretty sure that one was from a good while back when it was more common to hear about a single study on the news making it sound like xyz was cured. The news was bad about just rattling off new study results that hadn't been peer reviewed. Such as vaccines causing autism. Predating Trump's presidencies altogether.
This picture's been fucked with. Her right forearm is massive and her proportions are off.
*Bark Ruffalo
Someone should nominate him for a Nobel peace prize for uniting everyone against the US
Though typically we don't refer to people from one of two separate continents as just American. We'd call them North American or South American. Just like we'd call others European, Asian, or African to refer to their continent.
« I'm not saying there wouldn't be a lot of things to work out, but simply that self driving vehicles are likely more difficult to do. They have to manage a minefield of obstacles at all times as well as navigate with potentially outdated information and improperly marked roads.
Dangerous weather also affects driving conditions. Floods, heavy winds, downed limbs, landslides, etc. Not to mention they have to react to unpredictable human drivers, which aren't going away anytime soon.
As a personal vehicle, it seems less likely. Problems with affordability and volume. As a sort of public transport service, it seems much more viable.
Regardless, there'd have to be several things to assist. The beauty of the air is that there's lots of vertical space to fit more vehicles. Allowing an area sufficiently large enough around paths to reduce conflicts, recognizing dangerous weather conditions, and having some sort of landing pad/parking structure/dock thing would be necessary. »
Sorry, but that doesn't make any sense. Rotating the pans changed nothing about the way he needed to apply the next layer of icing. The pans are literally laying on the exact same locations, rotated 180° so they're still in the exact same dimensions on the table.
This is on a global scale, which makes most of the monetary income amounts a lot less meaningful. Upper income levels in one area could be below the poverty line in another.
Why not both?
Wii Ass Puswii
I think automation for aerial vehicles would be easier. Well, in regards to navigation. The heavy lifting flight controls have already mostly been tackled by drones.
Once in the vehicle it'd chart a course and report it to a local flight path registry for path conflict corrections. Then just fly straight up, follow the path to the next landing location, and straight down.
Doesn't seem nearly as complex as a ground based vehicle concerned with following narrow roads & heavy obstacle avoidance.
Chicken's not a vegetable?
"Go away! I'm batin'"
That's because vaccines are dangerous! What we need to do is expose ourselves to the virus so we can build up an immunity! /s
Okay, but are you suggesting they should have done something different? Like running? Screaming? Attacking?
Making the mama feel threatened is how they die.
Staying calm, getting out of the way, and being non threatening have them the best chance of survival.
Probably autocorrect. R and t are right beside one another and it doesn't care if the word makes sense when it drops it in the sentence. Mine regularly corrects some course works... Duck. Soon of a bitch... Whatever, I'm leaving these. I swear I correct my autocorrect almost as often as it does me.
My house is a bit of both and, unfortunately, the "professionals" don't always do much better.
Maybe save the known annoying ones for last so you can just tell the attendant, "I've got like 10 more of these so you should probably hang out here for a bit."
In NYC?