Oh yeah, and there's still some people that I'd absolutely refuse to make an effort reconnecting with. In that case I would rather they stay out of my life without anything short of an apology from them.
Printable View
Oh yeah, and there's still some people that I'd absolutely refuse to make an effort reconnecting with. In that case I would rather they stay out of my life without anything short of an apology from them.
I absolutely agree about people who are not worth reconnecting with. Sometimes a friend's trespasses can simply not be forgiven, and even if they could, should not be without an explicit attempt on their part to seek it and ask for it.
I don't know, sometimes I think friends are the few people in this world that you ever really get to know and be a part of your life and therefore you should cut them more slack and forgive them for some of their bullshit since they most likely have cut you some slack for some of the bullshit you've pulled.
Depends on what kind of bullshit. And not all friendships, or relationships in general, are fair. Most of the time, one knows their place, while the other has their foot on that one's face.
I learned that each verb has approx 62 forms in Polish...I wish luck to anyone who is trying to learn Polish.
62...
Crazy Polish people... :p
Of course this count does not include prefixes.
That the Finns are both completely insane, and incredibly hardcore.
Sauna World Championships
Make sure you read the whole thing for all the gruesome details.
140°C (284°F) saunas.
That's a brilliantly written article. No wonder the author has been consecutively chosen as the best sports writer.
It's 110 degrees for the competition, though. I have personally experienced a 120°C sauna and it was hell already. I don't even want to imagine the 140°C one the sauna champion uses for practice.
Anyway, before you are allowed to participate in that competition, you will need to sign a paper relieving the organizers from any responsibility. Makes perfect sense.
Hah, too right. His descriptions are awesome.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kraco
I loved how the twin burnt patches above the guy's lip was only the beginning. Serious, Ellis needs an award for effort. That's just hardcore.
I learnt how to properly tie a Windsor knot. Up until now I was just tying it in the "Four in Hand" knot...which was all I knew. :-S
That's all I knew too, and I often have enough trouble remembering how to tie one when required since I rarely ever need to do so.Quote:
Originally Posted by fahoumh
Just keep your ties tied. Loosen them when you take them off and tighten them when you put them on.
I've had the same tie tied for about 3 years and accidentally untied it a few days ago before a job interview. Youtube saved the day.
Keeping my tie tied throughout my last 2 years of highschool (we wear a uniform here) was the very reason why the knowledge hasn't sunk in.Quote:
Originally Posted by XanBcoo
Another good reason to untie ties regularly is that the tie creases. When it inevitably unties, the crease becomes bothersome.
I also rarely ever need to do so since I hardly ever go to any formal occasions. Last time I had to wear a tie was over a year ago and it was for a funeral...which was what I was attending this Wednesday.Quote:
Originally Posted by Buffalobiian
They wouldn't let you wear a clip-on? I always rock the clip-on. I can't be bothered to memorize such a tedious process, I have big things going on. BIG THINGS.Quote:
Originally Posted by Buffalobiian
On the rare occasion I need to wear a tie I usually rock the half-windsor. It looks the least fancy, which fits my personality.
Girls wore the clip-ons. We had the real deal.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Heretic Azazel
Tying a tie is like so many everyday art forms, the skills to do them are slowly disappearing through lack of use. One prime example is writing kanji among Japanese youth. They rely so heavily on their cell phones and computers to generate kanji that they are losing the ability to write the characters by hand.
Buck the trend. Learn how to tie a tie. It's not like it's hard.
Its not only youth in japan, some professors in japan's university specialized in teaching kanji and kanji related stuff don't know sequences of strokes.(Info from my Japanese teacher who studied there)
I don't wear a tie that often but somehow I can't forget the Four-In-Hand knot, which is consequently everything I ever use. I always keep my ties unknotted in the closet. Surely keeping them all the time preknotted will ruin them, like Bill said.
As Japan becomes more and more modernized and the elderly die and their ways die with them, maybe in the next 100 years romaji/hiragana/katakana will be the norm and kanji be less widely used. It will be a shame.Quote:
Originally Posted by Xelbair
Loop twice, under, over, through, done.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kraco
I don't think that kanji will get extinct - it is very useful for fast reading - you can write logical sentences without having any idea how to read this out loud - you can only know the meaning of the kanji and its connections, not necessary the whole word and be able to read the text.
Apparently Japan recently introduced closer to 200 new official kanji (and scrapped a few old ones). So, at least the ministries believe in the future of kanji.
Regarding Kanji being "older", more difficult to write etc, Traditional/Simplified Chinese usage shares much the same usage. I don't see Traditional Chinese fading out in the foreseeable future though, because simplified is just ugly. :(
You'll see Simplified in writing, but you'll never see it as a store sign etc.
It's not an entirely identical situation as Japanese though, since Simplified is still using characters. No one ever writes with the PinYin (phonetic characters used to aid pronunciation) except incompetent students such as myself :p
And even then, I'm pretty sure that method of teaching is phasing out in preference for a Romanised pronunciation aid.
That's the way of things though isn't it? The old school ministry members want to keep the old ways. It's for the youth of their nation to continue to use and/or celebrate the old ways or they will die (the ways, not the youth).Quote:
Originally Posted by Kraco
Today I re-learned that emulating something you see in the movies is not always as much fun in real life. My HP all-in-one printer started having problems the other day so I took it apart to see if I could get it to work again. After messing with it for an hour and making new problems, I took it out to the yard and hit it with a baseball bat a few times. The problem is it has a scanner with a full plate of glass. I had to spend 5-10 minutes in the Texas sun picking up pieces of broken glass so my dog won't get cut on them when he plays in the yard. Not as satisfying as they make it seem in Office Space.
Despite this, the more thrilling experience of eating authentic Fugu would be around to stay I think.Quote:
Originally Posted by wiki
I'd like my fugu WITH mouth-numbing poison please.
It wouldn't surprise me if some restaurants purposefully failed to mention they are using non-toxic fugu just so that the customers would be imagining the danger.Quote:
Originally Posted by Buffalobiian
But they would get found out very easily since it would be missing its distinct tingling sensation on the mouth.
Every piece of meat feels mouth-numbing?
I had no idea it has such an effect.
I don't think you guys realize that the point of eating fugu is the poison. Tetrodotoxin has a narcotic effect.
Non-poisonous fugu is comparable to non-alcoholic beer, and I'm sure it's just as popular.
They could take the non-poisonous fugu and add manually some toxin to it. That way they could always be sure there's just the right tiny amount of it.
lol, after reading Kraco's post, I spontaneously had a fantasy-advertisement playing in my head:Quote:
Originally Posted by Kraco
-------
"Can't find a Fugu chef? With Fugu Heart Stopper, you can savour the Fugu exoticness right from your kitchen! Just add a few drops to your sushi, pasta or anything of your choice and experience the mouth-numbing sensation of Fugu.
Out now, at all large supermarkets near you!
------
It'll be the new Tabasco or something.
Supposedly if you are at a restaurant with a chef who can skillfully handle a knife, he leaves just enough poison in to numb your lips and mouth, but not enough to kill you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Buffalobiian
so if the chef isn't as skilled, does he get charged with manslaughter?
If I'm not mistaken you have to sign a waiver first.
I read some unofficial source saying that a chef who has caused death due to Fugu poisoning is has his license permanently withdrawn.Quote:
Originally Posted by Assassin
I went shopping today and noticed for the first time that while Coke comes in every size available, Pepsi does not cater for the 390mL or the 625mL market.
Is that an Australian thing, or elsewhere too?
One other thing I learned is that Japan's cellphones work on weird frequencies and all that doesn't conform to international standards.
But... 3G works (with limitations) I think?
Only some of 3g functions - you wont be able to make a call with jap cellphone anywhere else...
But you can take a 3G phone into Japan and have International Roaming there, yes?Quote:
Originally Posted by Xelbair
"higher testosterone concentrations were observed following the period of abstinence."
Shit, no wonder my lifts have been stalling lately...
Higher testosterone reduces your manliness?Quote:
Originally Posted by XanBcoo
The study shows that there were raised levels of testosterone in the subjects who abstained from masturbation for 3 weeks.
Be a man. Do the right thing.
Today I learned about the Just World Phenomenon.
It's pretty sad. Things like that and the Bystander Effect make me seriously depressed because it seems to be the default thought process that many people (myself included) go through.
I often question of the victim did something that would have caused them to be, well, "victimised", but I can not say how often that is, or if it's because I'm always presented with a "one sided" view supporting otherwise, provoking me to think of alternatives.
I always question both sides in any case, so I also scrutinize the victim's actions or inaction in such situations. I don't feel compelled to blame the victim though. I just think it is a better practice to consider all angles instead of always rooting for the underdog or victim. Not all perceived "victims" are true victims after all.
I tend to think this way except in a more theological sense, ie it is God's will that this person be punished/tested. But sometimes it just comes down to the fact that humans are nothing but animals and it's a dog eat dog world.Quote:
Originally Posted by XanBcoo
See, I'm guilty of this too and it's exactly the line of thinking that makes it so scary depressing. That everyone is capable of shifting blame onto a victim in some misguided attempt to appear balanced in their reasoning.Quote:
Originally Posted by shinta|hikari
The study that's cited in the Wiki link illustrates that pretty well. In each case, the woman is perceived to be responsible for her actions. Even with the different outcomes of rape and marriage, participants "logically" concluded that she had done something to deserve each.
But now that we've learned this and had a chance to analyze it in ourselves, it shifts the responsibility back to us, so that the next time we find ourselves in a situation where someone is being victimized we can't so easily shrug it off and walk away. It's easier to live in ignorance a lot of the time because when you take the time to really find out the truth, sometimes it forces you to act.Quote:
Originally Posted by XanBcoo
@Ani: I tend to think the opposite of you, in that it's God's will that people be blessed, but because of the authority given to humans and the power of free will, it allows people to override God's will and bring injustice and suffering on others.
Look at the vid, apparently it's justifiable (and even underreacting) to not only arrest someone for jaywalking of all things (lol) but also punch an innocent woman in the face for trying to separate you from accosting the person. I don't get this "holy-unable-to-sin" status that American society gives government workers and it's quite infuriating.Quote:
Originally Posted by XanBcoo
What would you guys do? Resist arrest too? Video tape it if you saw it being done? Try to break up the fray?
As painful as it is to say, in my opinion the best thing to do against an evil government worker is not be violent, so I would have done what the camera person did and get it all on camera (to use as evidence against the person etc.). I've done it before and it looks even worse if the person tries to steal your camera or accost you for it. The woman who got punched by no means deserved it in my opinion, but it's to be expected that she would get punched or worse for trying to defend her friend (which is a horrible truth).
The hardest thing about deciding write and wrong with that vid is that you can't hear anything.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sapphire
Were the girls verbally provoking the cop? Did he give any verbal warning to the pink girl before? That all factors in I think.
As for "holy-unable-to-sin", of course not. But one thing people have to keep in mind of is that cops are give authority for reasons of upholding the law. If you believe they've tread beyond that, you can report them - but resisting or breaking up an arrest isn't the appropriate way to say "the cop's not right".
If a cop tries to actually try to arrest someone for saying, say "f*ck off, f*cking pig" then his actions are really nothing other than an emotional response. If you can't handle feeling uncomfortable then you shouldn't be a cop. Look at "don't taze me bro" for instance.
I also highly doubt that the woman said anything threatening towards the police officer. It blows my mind that you think crossing the street at the wrong place (a laughable "offence" in NYC and MOST places in the US)/being rude is a justifiable reason to be arrested?
But yes, sadly, resisting a cops decision will most likely end up with pain on your end. As far as I can tell the girl wanted to be left alone, no grown woman is going to just walk past a cop and cuss at him while jaywalking. lol. Chances are she was innocently crossing the street when the cop thought "jackpot" when the cop approached her and tried to write her up or arrest her.
Edit: And as for "authority".... hate to sound like a broken record, but when the system itself is corrupt then "authority" is nothing but a title. This guy probably failed every rule in the "cop protocol" book and yet people still support his actions because of this title of "authority" that was given to him. Look at people authorizing torture in the Bush administration and shooting up small towns oversees and people still close their eyes and use the default responses of "authority," "responsibility" and "permission". Not saying you think like that Buff but it just makes me mad when "people" turn a blind eye to horrors of the world because of this assumed "right" people have over others to commit such deeds.
Then she is still breaking the law, how petty it may seem. I don't know about US laws, but here insulting a police officer can get you arrested, so saying "fuck of, fucking pig" would've just added a second infraction.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sapphire
Then there is resisting arrest, then the second girl steps in and is basically impeding an arrest and endangering the safety of multiple people.
So basically 5 laws were broken just because she didn't agree with the cop. It's better to just shut up, take the fine and just report the officer, nothing good ever comes from trying to argue the law by breaking more laws.
Wait, who's safety was being endangered? :O
Oh America, land of free speech. (Unless you're around the police)
BTW before we go assuming that she told him to "pig f*ck off" in an attempt to justify the cops actions, that was just me referring to a separate hypothetical situation. In which it would be equally emotional/stupid to arrest someone (regardless of current "law").
Edit: The only thing I really agree with you guys is the victims hand in escalating the situation. I'm not saying she was -wrong- for resisting, because I do believe she was wrongfully victimized, but there's probably not much you can do against that kind of oppression other than go limp and hope someone happens to have a camera on them (if you don't want to get slammed into a car door etc.) A sad, horrible and injustifiable truth IMO. :(
Free speech is here too, it just depends on how you word it, if I said "I think you are a fucking piece of shit", the cop can't do anything. But if I just out right say "You are a piece of shit", then it's an insult.
And who's safety? Everyone who was standing around there, including the cop and the 2 girls. What if you were standing there, and the cop tried to use something like pepperspray instead of a punch, but because of the struggling you, or some other bystander, gets the spray in their face too?
Or what if more people started interfering in the situation?
Anything can be taken as an insult. Refusing to look at someone can be an insult. Come on now. Are you really going to try debate on semantics?
Oh, and another thing. If you actually watch the video, the woman was trying to get away from the cop who was pretty much manhandling her/picking her up god knows what. I mean it doesn't look pretty. Her friend comes in and just pushes them away from each other. The woman then CALMS DOWN for a split second and just stands there. It's not like the woman is going to book it as soon as she gets seperated. Clearly this woman just didn't want to be manhandled as she calmed down as soon as he let go of her.
That's when the woman who SEPARATED them gets punched in the face (and everyone and their mother says well the cop was right cuz he's a cop). Well that -definitely- deserved a punch I guess. Just looks like more reason why people should stand around and watch others get abused. Defending someone isn't endangering the safety of multiple people. If the cop wanted to do even more collateral damage and whip out pepper spray and hurt more people, its his own responsibility lol
I should emphasize: defending someone by merely seperating and offering no violence to either party
----
EDIT because I'm not making a new post stating the obvious about your next post:Quote:
Originally Posted by darkshadow
@DS: Considering that you think a cop would suddenly not be offended/attempt arrest at the use of "I think" + insult rather than just the insult .....yes, that is a semantics argument.
So you're blaming the effect of the cop deciding to use pepper spray, aim badly, and hit innocent people on the girl, all future events that never happened, therefore justifying the punch. "Guiltless authority" principle at it's best. Reminds me of a few military invasion justifications.
Below comment demonstrates the beautiful example of perception that "'authority' = guiltlessness" in our society.
bitch had it coming....dont resist arrest and act like a cop is being ridiculous for doing his job, however retarded the reasons may be. As far as the cop is concerned, he just seems like a stupid rookie.....handcuff them and get it over with. wtf did you get all that training for if you cant even arrest a girl and have to wrestle with her for 5 min.
......What? Do I actually have to spell it out for you? Saying something that is insulting to the other party, where the hell are you getting semantics from? "You are a dumb asshole" is an insult, "fuck you, fucking pig" is an insult. I'm not really mentioning subjectivity here.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sapphire
And if the cops whips out pepperspray, it is his problem...till it lands on some innocent bystander, which makes the girls interferance into endangering the safety.
But yeah the cop was needlessly wrestling her that long, he should've just slammed her on the hood of the car and cuffed her.
It was a messy situation but the officer punched someone in the face. He was enforcing a stupid law that let him arbitrarily pick who he wished to arrest, and when things got heated he reacted childishly. It was an unnecessary escalation of the situation.
Why did I even post that link? :(Quote:
Originally Posted by Assassin
However true this statement may be,
and however irresponsibly she acted, nothing justifies her getting hit in the face by an officer. I hope he's reprimanded for this, but both the system (and unfortunately public opinion) are on his side. Both parties were at fault, but only one will be seen to have deserved what she got.Quote:
It's better to just shut up, take the fine and just report the officer, nothing good ever comes from trying to argue the law by breaking more laws.
Edit: And before someone asks "What is the proper course of action in that situation," I'll answer that I have no idea. I'm not a trained officer, but I am a mature human being and I know that it isn't "Punch her in the face when surrounded by a growing mob of angry people."
The problem isn't whether the offence/arrest was justifiable - you deal with that later.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sapphire
The problem is that the girl pushed a cop while he was dealing with someone else and got punched in the face.
Perhaps a wrong choice of words there Sapphi ;)Quote:
Chances are she was innocently crossing the street when the cop thought "jackpot" when the cop approached her and tried to write her up or arrest her.
According to the law's definition of "innocent" anyway.
Edit: And as for "authority".... hate to sound like a broken record, but when the system itself is corrupt then "authority" is nothing but a title. This guy probably failed every rule in the "cop protocol" book and yet people still support his actions because of this title of "authority" that was given to him. Look at people authorizing torture in the Bush administration and shooting up small towns oversees and people still close their eyes and use the default responses of "authority," "responsibility" and "permission". Not saying you think like that Buff but it just makes me mad when "people" turn a blind eye to horrors of the world because of this assumed "right" people have over others to commit such deeds.[/QUOTE]
"Authority" here wasn't talking about the authority to hit her without consequence. "Authority" here was meant that the cop was allowed to make an arrest if he stated a (seemingly legit) reason to you - and that you HAD to comply.
Personally, I think the "correct" action would have been to point and verbally warn her very harshly - informing her that she would be liable for arrest too if she continued her action (of impeding a police's job).Quote:
Originally Posted by Xan
We don't have a textbook answer for "What should one do when a girl pushes a cop" - putting what "crossing the line" is up to personal interpretation.
A lot of us are debating whether the police is wrong, while the girl was clearly wrong - hence the difference in treatment.
Uhm, it's not semantics. I don't know about US laws, but adding "I think" here indiciates Free Speech, because it clarifies you are stating your own subjective opinion, if a cop is offended by that he still can't do anything cause the free speech law rules higher than the "insulting an official in office" law. Leaving out "I think" doesn't clarify anything and makes it "objective", thus giving the officer every right to uphold the law.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sapphire
No semantics.
And yes getting involved with an officer that is making is struggling while making an arrest, is endangering the safety, especially because of future events that haven't occured yet.
And I didn't justify the punch, I just mentioned that they needlessly broke a bunch of laws.
I completely agree. And why stop there? Law enforcement should just use stun guns on random people. After all, they will likely commit a crime in the future, right?? Statistically speaking of course.Quote:
Originally Posted by darkshadow
This presumption that people have no rights just because you personally think they didn't behave properly isn't any good. We hold the police to a higher standard, we have to because they are supposed to be better than the people they arrest. It seems rather clear to me, at least in the southeast U.S. that they will take most anyone these days.
I share Sapphire's disgust with this blind support for law enforcement. These people give the exact same mundane response to these stories, I see it on other forums I visit. There is nothing wrong with questioning law enforcement's ability to effectively execute their duties and it is the only way to oversee their behavior. Now that people everywhere have a camera (which is absolutely and unequivocally their right to use in public) it has become really frightening to see the way some cops act. I want to believe the vast majority are good, but boy do the rotten ones skew perspectives of the good ones.
I'm not overly concerned about cops because I know this country is owned by billion dollar corporations with judges in their back pocket. If you really want to see some fucking evil you have to go all the way to the top.
We discussed this in our class on issues in policing. A lot of things were going on in that video. To start, supposedly the officer was stopping someone else for jaywalking at that location and these two women jaywalk by so he stops them too. If a police officer tells you to stop, you don't get to say "that's ok, I'm heading to lunch". So he had every right to restrain the first girl. The second girl who grabs and pushes the cop is technically "assaulting a peace officer". While the closed fist punch is an overreaction by laymens' standards, it is considered appropriate force for an officer in that situation. Looking at the video, it's one cop surrounded by several unfriendlies. A large part of the officer's mindset is to maintain authority and control, and he was clearly losing that so he reacted poorly, but within the law.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sapphire
We saw the link posted earlier about some states making it illegal to record police officers while they are on duty. This video shows us how it is both beneficial and problematic to allow recording police in action.
Jay walking? I didn't know any of the circumstances surrounding the video. I was curious why he didn't have his lights on and why he was alone...
But given the circumstances I didn't think the punch was too over the top. It probably looks worse than pepper spray or taser which she deserved for interrupting an arrest in progress and pushing the officer.
Would everybody have been fine if he sprayed pepper spray all in her eyes instead of punching her?
The punch looks bad, but if you look at it closely it's a pretty weak punch and he lets up before he makes contact with her face. The fact that she didn't crumple to the ground tells us this, or that she can take a punch and should look into women's MMA.
Whoa. Suddenly my mind is clear.Quote:
Originally Posted by Buffalobiian
So if I see a shop owner kicking a homeless guy in the face for loitering at his store that's justifiable too, right? Because he's guilty, right? I mean, he has the authority to do it on his property and the homeless guy is clearly breaking the law. Well, whether the kick was too much is up to personal interpretation. If he used pepper spray then it would be the homeless guys fault for any collateral damage that happened.
Nope, the shop owner doesn't have the right to use force to stop the homeless guy from loitering at his store. He has the right to call the police to come kick the guy's ass. That's one of the tenets of policing. Citizens grant police the authority to use force to enforce the laws, but relinquish that right themselves.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sapphire
That's the problem, Ani. :/
That perception is what gives police a "holy" status, and allows other forces of government to commit complete and utter travesties unscathed, crimes which no single person could dare get away with.
I don't believe you'd really like the alternative, Sapphi. For it's anarchy. Unless you are a really violent gang minded person, of course. No internets in anarchy, though. Gangs fighting each other for power and survival have no time for the net.
Ya, pretty much.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sapphire
(MY personal interpretation: as per my first post, I base it on how much stern verbal warning was given to the guy. If you've been told to gtfo someone's property and you don't comply - you had it coming.)
Today while i was listening to Kansas' song "Dust in the Wind" (awesome song btw) i decided to check the wiki page to see what bands had made covers of it, and there learned about this list of songs that were deemed "Lyrically Questionable" after the 9/11 attacks in america.
The whole thing is just so retarded it honestly made me laugh.
Here is the list: 2001 Clear Channel memorandum
Haha I'm sure Bridge Over Troubled Water is a veritable terrorist anthem.
Not to mention Armstrong's What A Wonderful World.
Japanese streets have no name
I always wondered why no one draws maps here, and everybody draws (often misleading) maps in anime.
So.. what happens when you tear down a building and erect a new one? Does everybody on your block get their numbers shuffled around in chronological order? :S
That's pretty interesting.
And:
Quote:
Japanese intra-block address number is put in clock-wise manner. If a new building appears in between two others, it is given one of its neighbors number.
What will I do without my road names?
What everyone else is doing
Contrary to the majority of youtube comments, there are some pretty interesting an informative ones:
Quote:
Originally Posted by #13
My opinion after reading the article was that the Japanese block system was completely stupid, but it seems there's a degree of sense behind this.Quote:
Originally Posted by #19
about 3 years ago I moved from the midwest to the DC suburbs, and experienced a bit of a street layout culture shock.
In the midwest, almost without exception things have a superimposed grid layout. Even in cul-de-sac developments, there's always a grid overlaid, the giant confusing mats of cul-de-sacs are never more than a mile by a mile, always have arterial streets, and always connect to at least one or two big north-south or east-west arterial streets. Sometimes that grid layout is bent around a big landmark like a river or something, but it's always there. Once you get east of the Appalachians, though, that all breaks down.
In most places in the US, odd-numbered highways go north-south and even-numbered highways go east-west. But on the east coast, while that's generally true, you can't assume it's true for the general case of a couple miles. Like, I live near a road that's an even-numbered state highway that goes east-west for about 2 miles, then north for about 2 miles, then east-west for another 4 miles, then northwest-southeast for the rest of it. For any given two mile stretch of it, which way it's going can only be determined via either a compass or the rising or setting sun.
Over 3 years in this environment, I've pretty much made sense of where I go on a day-to-day basis, and the general layout, but whenever I go exploring I'm constantly faced with new challenges to my grid-expectations. Who'd expect that VA-123 is, for 15 miles or so, an east-west street? Or, knowing that, that if you go west on it from Arlington and just keep going, you'll end up 10 miles south of Arlington in Woodbridge?
Natives seem to have no problems with this idea. Midwesterners like myself and one of my roommates seem to have endless trouble figuring out how it all works.
Still, street naming versus block naming ... street naming seems less arbitrary, even if the streets are severely twisty.
You think that's bad, you should see some of the roads in LA. Have you ever seen 5 or 6-street intersections? How about two roads running parallel, yet at one point trading places with each other? Then of course roads that turn from north/south to east/west and even worse once you get to the hills.
the trading places thing can't happen in this area, because roads virtually never run parallel for more than a mile or so.
North-South to East-West .... yeah, we got that.
poly-intersections: Seven Corners, VA. is a bit bizarre, but it's less a single intersection and more about five acres of tangled intersection mess.
More complicated intersections in DC proper and in a lot of other places around here are handled with traffic circles, which is probably the best solution to a 7-way mess.
Beltways are present in major metropolitans(those goes east west, north-south then east west and north-south again). I am sure not that many people would complaint about that.
Back to the topic, roads should be designed and named to ensure efficient transportation. The Japanese block by block system isn't any more difficult to use. Read a map, not every foot path is named for your convenience, that's why we have coordinates and tech assisted GPS.
You mean roundabouts. Which are actually a bit more common in Europe. They're supposed to be more efficient than 4-way stops, too.
As long as the traffic "self-regulate," it should be fine however it can creat a zone that some driver frequently get into fender bender. That said, I like roundabouts, a slow roundabouts is better because it works on a first come first serve basis.Quote:
Originally Posted by Assertn
They're insanely unfair when some roads are much busier than others though.Quote:
Originally Posted by Assertn
When that happens, we often see roundabouts get upgraded to traffic lights so you can actually get out of the smaller streets.
If this science was true, wouldn't most priests and monks be ultra-aggressive?Quote:
Originally Posted by XanBcoo
Are you saying that majority of priests and monks doesn't masturbate?
How likely is that?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_sex_abuse_casesQuote:
Originally Posted by Animeniax
Plus what depthcharge said. It doesn't apply to sex, just masturbation.
I was wondering about the differentiation. Is it ejaculation (via sexual intercourse) that contributes to decreased testosterone or the act of choking the chicken (the mental aspect/shame) that decreases testosterone levels?Quote:
Originally Posted by XanBcoo
One of the tenets of Christianity (probably most major religions) is that masturbation is a sin.
As far as the Catholic pedophiles go, let's not generalize and suggest all men of the cloth are pedos.
Yeah I was wondering that myself. The study doesn't clarify, but seems to make a distinction. The only other study about sexual activity is this Chinese one, that found that after 7 days of abstinence you have a testosterone spike, but after the 8th day it drops back down:Quote:
Originally Posted by Animeniax
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12659241
I wasn't generalizing at all, just pointing out a trend that refutes the notion that a man of the cloth is without sexual desire. To believe that is pretty naive.Quote:
One of the tenets of Christianity (probably most major religions) is that masturbation is a sin.
As far as the Catholic pedophiles go, let's not generalize and suggest all men of the cloth are pedos.
I know pro fighters will abstain from sex for weeks in advance of a fight, most likely for the added testosterone. So it's most likely ejaculation period (sex or masturbation).
or maybe it's to keep their man-parts from being overly sensitive to sweaty dick-punching.
...that using a mortar and pestle is really, really hard work.
At last, I have completed the processing of the cayenne peppers I have been growing since April. I have a few tablespoons of cayenne powder, and an equal amount of hot pepper flakes (seeds too of course).
The powder tastes amazing. Nice heat, good flavor. I've got plenty of seeds saved for next year. :D
I learned that commas are actually used as decimal points in some parts of the world. I have always ignored it as some quirk in font conversion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by irc
A comma is always used as the decimal mark over here. A space is used as the thousands separator.
I reckon it might be hard to notice this variation since most publications in English and the English language part of the net tend to stick to the same format (dot as the decimal mark) to keep things understandable, no matter where the person might be from. If you browsed foreign web sites in their own languages, you'd see the differences.
At least you Europeans format dates properly. mm/dd/yyyy
Oh wait...
/me head explodes.
You got that right. The stupid mm/dd/yyyy order is something I never use, not even if the expected recipients were used to it, no matter where I type dates. Because it makes no sense whatsoever. With the decimal mark a dot is just as good as a comma; there's absolutely no difference in logical value. But in that mixed date order I fail to see any reason. It's either dd.mm.year or year.mm.dd (or whatever you use to separate them from each other, a dot is used over here - that variation doesn't really bother me at all). It's either from the smallest unit (day) to the largest (year) or from the largest to the smallest if better by year ordering is required (like in folder names).Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryllharu
We may be one the few countries to use it, but it isn't stupid. It's quite sensible when you think about it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kraco
It's the more common way one verbalizes the date. 02/03/2010 becomes "February 3rd, 2010." The European way is, "The 3rd of February, 2010." It is rarer (and more formalized) to use the latter way in speech.
Likewise. I accidentally bought coffee beans instead of ground coffee so I have to hand grind with a mortar and pestle every morning (until this bag runs out). It's a pain in the ass, and I can't tell the difference in flavor anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryllharu