If I had access to a del Gesù why would I care how I sound on an ordinary instrument? Have you ever handled a tool of your craft that was used by many masters before you? The cognitive biases of musicians are part of the music they make. It is the role of other people to examine the instruments, and no one is stopping them. Musicians must keep their biases.
Anyway everyone who uses one of these still has their "normal" (masterfully crafted modern) instruments for when it's the more practical choice.
NYT as a news organization is, charitably, part of the controlled opposition. They are not meeting this moment at all, through cowardice or intentional complicity I'm not completely sure.
Will it? Weiss seems to understands her role here very well. Her competence at it is still in question but she is consistent. CBS is state media now, she'll say what she's expected to say.
Right, the registry is public in most places, you can just check. When I open it for some of the places I've lived & surrounding areas it is overwhelmingly very serious crimes, the majority of them against minors, a large percentage minors under 13 which is a different category of offense here.
You sometimes need to get familiar with the local legal jargon to interpret it correctly, for example where I live there is no crime "rape" it is recorded as "sexual battery," things like that. And don't assume something is not serious because it is "second degree" or whatever, look up the statutes or sentencing guidelines. I have to seek pretty hard to find anything that could even plausibly be something like an overcharged public urination.
The first one I found, I looked up the case, and the offense took place at 3:40 pm at a city bus stop two blocks from a high school. Pretty decent odds that guy tells all his friends he got booked for trying to take a piss. He might even say that on reddit and HN.
I think you only see the high level offenders in the stuff you can search.
And you say it occurred in the middle of the afternoon at a city bus stop. Pretty hard to do anything serious there without a million people calling 911.
The person you're arguing with is simply in favor of concentration camps and ethnic cleansing. They have 15 years of comments you can skim to verify this, they are very consistent.
You are not changing their mind and are just giving them a venue to present this abominable "if it's legal it's fine" framework.
Read the article. The article is about citizens, not illegal immigrants. Also, the fraud rules that you're pushing have everything to do with race and nothing to do with the acquisition of citizenship.
You’re welcome to that view, but most people in the world don’t believe that. Including most people in the countries that these immigrants are coming from.
I know I just think it's funny how often you ask that like it's some gotcha or clever trick rather than a core value of mine that I will proudly own.
Free movement of people will be the human rights issue of the 21st century as decolonization was the 20th and abolition the 19th. You'll die peacefully in a world made better against your will, fuming and raging, like the slaveholders & monarchists you admire.
No, I suspect I’ll die in an America that’s closer to the third world country my parents escaped from. Because entropy is a real thing and so is regression to the mean.
The "strong" sapir-whorf hypothesis, that cognitive and behavioral categories are limited by linguistic ones, is thoroughly discredited. At most they may influence our perceptions, but they do not constrain them.
Linguistics is one of the fields where HN consensus goes directly against the scholarly mainstream of the discipline for what I mostly find to be ideological reasons. So hopefully this isn't that and you're just a bit out of date. But there's been a big reevaluation of this in the last twenty years and virtually no contemporary working linguists represent the strong relative view anymore. It simply did not consistently produce useful results and has been abandoned.
Which is worse is moot. Which is more likely to harm or immiserate you is the relevant question and unless you're chinese the answer is almost certainly ellison.
I don't know what the difference is intended to be but the guidelines also don't have anything to say about voting on comments except not to complain about it.
The definition of innocent you two are using here is absurd to me. This is, at best, willful negligence. No one sat down and drew up a plan for the child screen addiction machine, maybe, but they noticed they were making it many times and chose to continue.
Anyway everyone who uses one of these still has their "normal" (masterfully crafted modern) instruments for when it's the more practical choice.
reply