I think the dark is a lack of critical thinking and intellectual curiosity.
Scalia isn't arguing that same-sex marriage should not be passed. In fact he's arguing his personal opinion is irrelevant. He's merely stating that he does not think same sex marriage should have become legal in the matter it did, by the ruling of nine naturally biased persons. These people do not represent all 320 million Americans and their viewpoints. Accordingly, this ruling by 9 persons undermines the views of the other 320 million of us. I'm glad this ruling occurred, but I'm inclined to agree with Scalia. It would have been better if the states had passed their own laws to similar effect, after due public discourse. Is this cold hearted? Yes, but let's not have personal emotion and beliefs interfere with the basic processes and beliefs that underline the American Constitution. I do think the 14th Amendment does guarantee the right to same sex marriage, but the precedent set here is more worrisome.
I'm on a roll with these Simpson references
Why would you choose under? I find it easier to grab a square when it's over. While were on the topic, do people prefer to wipe while sitting or standing? Even more important, are you a crumpler or a folder?
I read further into this. This detail on the crash (stolen from Wikipedia) is particularly macabre: At least some of the crew were likely alive and at least briefly conscious after the breakup, as the four recovered Personal Egress Air Packs (PEAPs) on the flight deck were found to have been activated.[26] Investigators found their remaining unused air supply consistent with the expected consumption during the 2 minute 45 second post-breakup trajectory. While analyzing the wreckage, investigators discovered that several electrical system switches on Pilot Mike Smith's right-hand panel had been moved from their usual launch positions. Fellow astronaut Richard Mullane wrote, "These switches were protected with lever locks that required them to be pulled outward against a spring force before they could be moved to a new position." Later tests established that neither force of the explosion nor the impact with the ocean could have moved them, indicating that Smith made the switch changes, presumably in a futile attempt to restore electrical power to the cockpit after the crew cabin detached from the rest of the orbiter.[27] Whether the crew members remained conscious long after the breakup is unknown, and largely depends on whether the detached crew cabin maintained pressure integrity. If it did not, the time of useful consciousness at that altitude is just a few seconds; the PEAPs supplied only unpressurized air, and hence would not have helped the crew to retain consciousness. If, on the other hand, the cabin was not depressurized or only slowly depressurizing, they may have been conscious for the entire fall until impact. Recovery of the cabin found that the middeck floor had not suffered buckling or tearing, as would result from a rapid decompression, thus providing some evidence that the depressurization may have not happened all at once. NASA routinely trained shuttle crews for splashdown events, but the cabin hit the ocean surface at roughly 207 mph (333 km/h), with an estimated deceleration at impact of well over 200 g, far beyond the structural limits of the crew compartment or crew survivability levels, and far greater than almost any automobile, aircraft, or train accident.[22] On July 28, 1986, NASA's Associate Administrator for Space Flight, former astronaut Richard H. Truly, released a report on the deaths of the crew from the director of Space and Life Sciences at the Johnson Space Center, Joseph P. Kerwin. A medical doctor and former astronaut, Kerwin was a veteran of the 1973 Skylab 2 mission. According to the Kerwin Report: The findings are inconclusive. The impact of the crew compartment with the ocean surface was so violent that evidence of damage occurring in the seconds which followed the disintegration was masked. Our final conclusions are: the cause of death of the Challenger astronauts cannot be positively determined; the forces to which the crew were exposed during Orbiter breakup were probably not sufficient to cause death or serious injury; and the crew possibly, but not certainly, lost consciousness in the seconds following Orbiter breakup due to in-flight loss of crew module pressure.[22] Some experts believe most if not all of the crew were alive and possibly conscious during the entire descent until impact with the ocean. Astronaut and NASA lead accident investigator Robert Overmyer said, "I not only flew with Dick Scobee, we owned a plane together, and I know Scob did everything he could to save his crew. Scob fought for any and every edge to survive. He flew that ship without wings all the way down... they were alive."[25]The crew cabin, made of reinforced aluminum, was a particularly robust section of the shuttle.[25] During vehicle breakup, it detached in one piece and slowly tumbled into a ballistic arc. NASA estimated the load factor at separation to be between 12 and 20 g; within two seconds it had already dropped to below 4 g and within 10 seconds the cabin was in free fall. The forces involved at this stage were likely insufficient to cause major injury.
I'm sore from running 8 miles in the last two days, plus the brutal workout my girlfriend put me through. Speaking of the girlfriend, we finally said those three big words, "I love you." On the same day, at the same time, independently. I don't think it could have gone any better :) Finally, I'm applying for a few health administrative fellowships. I would work for a year or two learning the ropes in a hospital/health care system. So I'm just working on putting my applications together. First up: getting my letters of recommendation. The rest should be relatively easy.
I got inspected the other night at a Regal before seeing "Straight Outta Compton" with my girlfriend. It did strike me as odd but I didn't give it much thought. It just seems to be the way things are going, sadly. While we're on the topic, there were police waiting outside the theatre after the movie let out. Nobody in the theatre was behaving remotely rowdy or criminal. The only conclusion I could draw was that the officers were there because they felt (indeed they were right) that the movie's audience would be primarily African-American, and therefore might be triggered by the movie to riot (?). Instead of feeling protected, I felt the police presence itself was a move that could trigger an audience walking out of such a movie to behave irresponsible. I know I felt as if the police were behaving at best overzealous, and at worst racist. I still find it astounding that the police would show up and affirm the film's main message that the police are a injustice menace to African-American society. In the end, it helped drive home the film's message even further.
EXTREME GRUBSKI CHALLENGE: EAT ANOTHER HUBSKIER
I avoid them, because I'm afraid of what they'll do to my mental state. I've worked hard to improve on my anxiety, depression, and overthinking. I'm finally in a good place, and I don't want to mess with that. Pot already makes me very anxious and paranoid, and I can't control myself with alcohol, so god knows what else may happen with other drugs.
I'm sick :( too much walking outside in the freezing cold in NYC.
Yes, health concerns are why I don't make my bed every morning... I'm glad to know my laziness has unknowingly been (supposedly) improving my health!
First day of classes today. I'm only taking one class this semester, thankfully. After that I'm all done. My one course is entitled, "Economics of Health Policy: Your Money or Your Life".
I would argue it's the message we'd be sending, rather than the actual functionality, that is the problem. It just seems like a insular and over reactionary measure to ignore new users for a week. It sends the message that users who are already established are worth more than a new user. And many established users may agree with that sentiment. However, I think it's a move that will turn off the majority of people who visit. It may intrigue some, but I think overall the negative vibes will outweigh any positive benefits. I honestly really, really do not like this measure. I fear it will hurt Hubski a lot. As Mal-2 said, new users who try to contribute will feel ignored or marginalized, and have little incentive to stay. Again, it sends the message that we are an insular and guarded community, rather than an opening and welcoming community.
I support this move, I like the increased accountability.
Believe it or not, I played risk for the first time a few nights ago. It was a helluva lot of fun.
I stopped reading after this: Why should anyone want to dissociate themselves from all that connectedness, fun, convenience, reach and power? Well, because it would be – and I can’t be bothered to search for a better word and anyway perhaps there isn’t one – awesome. I skimmed the rest to see if he expanded on this idea, but I was disappointed. Instead, this is what I got out of it: As if I haven't posted this enough already. So he's advocating that we ditch anything involving online communication, just to rebel? Because... it's awesome? What a nonsensical and unproductive load of hooey. Being a rebel for the sake of being a rebel isn't awesome. It's dumb. I mean I get it, lots of what happens online today is frivolous and probably even harmful. In my opinion, people under 30 today are far too caught up in social media. Most people are stupid and lazy. They're going to use the Internet for the lowest common denominator content , and they're going to be exploited via it. But that's always been the case with any technology, whether that be the printing press, radio, TV or the Internet. I still think more good than harm comes from it being online, and I think my life is improved by it. I get my news online, I read enlightening articles and conversations on Hubski, I can discover new and free music on any number of websites, and I can indulge my random interests on reddit. Why would I give that up just because of the bad stuff on the Internet? (Normally I like to just ignore these types of articles, but this one was particularly asinine.)Well maybe. But I’m going to suggest that if I was young now, my proudest boast would be: ‘My friends and I, we disappeared ourselves. No social media, no email, no chat, no wifi, no selfies, no SMS, no smartphones. We did it. We did this thing. We Got Off The Grid.’
Fascinating. 50 people have control over 4 delegates. I know there is a lot of delegates, but still...
Today Cons: Got soaked coming into work, I feel and look like a drowned rat. Pros: Considering buying a beer helmet.
Good. Led Zep was finished the moment John Bonham bit the dust. I'm glad at least one group has the integrity to stay broken up.
I thought this said "Free Bernie Sanders" stickers, as if he were a political prisoner. I was quite confused for a minute, and then bemused!
He'll always be Willy Wonka to me.
I'm not gay nor am I a straight bachelorette party attending women, but I can see how this would be grating both on a cultural and physical level. The ignorance and sense of entitlement in some people is simply astounding.
Badged for general recognition of the outstanding nature of the Sunday Paper. It was long overdue, consider it my expression of gratitude :)
I shit you not, it took me the better part of three days to make it through that article. Because: 1. It's a long ass, rather dry article 2. The layout necessitated me taking breaks from reading it. I should add the layout wasn't something I consciously thought was bad. I freely admit I know little about these matters, and care little more. I did unconsciously feel the layout was rather crummy, if that makes sense. It's a decent article, believe it or not. Is it worth the slog through that lay out? Probably not, but the topic is something I'm into so it was worth it to me personally.
Nujabes - Lady Brown Japanese jazz rap
What about the Chromebit though?
I had no idea this type of technologic magic was possible. I imagine it has very limited functionality though.This summer, ASUS will launch a new type of Chrome device: the Chromebit. Smaller than a candy bar, the Chromebit is a full computer that will be available for less than $100. By simply plugging this device into any display, you can turn it into a computer. It’s the perfect upgrade for an existing desktop and will be really useful for schools and businesses.
I personally think these people are trying too hard, but eh, let 'em have fun. I think the worst idea is the name. Yeethoven? C'mon.
Im gonna vote here on the criteria I have to go on, realistically: presentation and what I already know I like. Therefore, elizabeth is the clear winner. Pulled pork in any form is amazing, yum!
I think it's worth talking about at least. One concern I have is that it may drive away some people who might sign up otherwise. Let's say someone discovers Hubski on the second of the month, and is intrigued by the site. However, he doesn't know anybody already signed up, and subsuquently forgets about Hubski before the first of the month comes around again. Essentially my point is that restricted sign up times may drive away some folks who might otherwise become contributors. An idea I have is that, perhaps, there could be someway for folks to apply for membership at any time. This could be in addition to the invites and restricted open signups, or an application only policy. For example, an applicant could select a few articles and discussions that were recently posted, and write up a few brief thoughts on each one. I feel only someone who was serious about joining would go to such effort, and, potentially, community members could vote on submitted applications.