in big cities in the uk (edinburgh, london, etc.) paying with a contactless tap of a debit card each journey will never result in paying more than the cheapest daily, weekly etc. travel pass. single tickets are gbp 2.00 and a daaily pass is gbp 5.00 so individual journeys are recorded and counted (when paid for with the same card, obviously) and at the end of the day, if more than three journeys have been made the total charge for the day is capped at gbp 5.00 - and the weekly total is also capped at the value of a weekly pass, etc.
YOU ARE IN A MAZE OF TWISTY LITTLE PASSAGES, ALL DIFFERENT.
YOU ARE IN A LITTLE MAZE OF TWISTING PASSAGES, ALL DIFFERENT.
i remember getting lost in that maze, and didn't realise that the subtle change in wording for the room description was the trick to identifying them, so i dropped objects to help me make a map - which is what you are supposed to do in the other maze
YOU ARE IN A MAZE OF TWISTY LITTLE PASSAGES, ALL ALIKE.
For those, like myself, who don't quite know enough Greek grammar to work it out properly, I looked up the definition of _Entomophagy_ ... it is derived from the Greek words 'entomon' (insect) and 'phagein' (to eat) and it describes the practice of eating insects; particularly by humans. Good to know in these exciting times!
no, the bit about having no money was a response to a claim that the advice was 'actionable' and i pointed out a situation where in believed it was not actionable dute to practical financial constraints.
however, my statement about entitlements of the performer being non existant along with the listener having no obligation to pay the performer because they stayed for some amount of time, was made on an moral level. i also believe it is a morally 'good' thing to compensate the performer if they provide you with entertainment, i just do not believe there is any obligation placed on you to do this by the performer. like you say, it is for me alone as the listener to decide. i objected to the use of the word 'owe' in the advice, basically.
true. but, it could also mean they are demonstrating traits that make them a more desirable candidate!
for example, if they have recently made the decision to stop smoking cigarettes, thereby making a positive change in their lifestyle and health, this shows strength of character. it also demonstrates their ability to question past poor decisions rather than give in to the sunk cost fallacy, and then take steps to correct them. and of course, it also tends to make you put on weight [0] ... although not much more that 10 lb or 5 kg it seems, so interviewer beware, i guess ;)
i guess, and intent is important as a factor, at least somewhat mitigating. teaching that actions have consequences based on their outcome, nom matter how well intentioned, is important though, as is the lesson that life is unfair, or at least does not care about what you wanted or intended to happen ;)
i think i actually have a similar problem about asccusations of lying that often get thrown around in arguments etc. when the peoson accused has simply made an error in good faith...
> If you stop to listen to a musician or street performer for more than a minute, you owe them a dollar
if i am a child, with no money, or am un- or underemployed with very little money in the form of disposable income, then this advice is not actually actionable.
not to mention that it is also wrong - you do not owe the street performer anything, no matter how long you stop and listen for. they are not entitled to anything just because they made a choice to perform in a public place. and this is not to suggest i have never, or will not in future, donate to buskers etc. - but it is always an active choice...
i find it incredibly hard to believe that you "didn't ever do anything wrong on purpose" since you disclosed the fact that you were once a child. are you perhaps meaning something along the lines of "didn't ever think that things i did on purpose were wrong" instead? the thing that upset you when you were punished would then be that your definition of wrongness was different to that of the person punishing you?
most kids want a combination of 1.) approval from parent(s) and 2.) stuff that makes them happy and when 2 conflicts with 1 there can be issues, and it is a rare child that seeks only approval from their parents in all circumstances, as you also point out.
except the company haven't changed their policy, which is stated in their terms; contract; conditions of carriage and small print inter alia, which has always been that: account sharing is not allowed.
now, they may have previously ignored breaches of this contract, but that didn't stop them being breaches. you are well within your rights to cancel your contract, all i point out is that it is unreasonable of you to be upset. this is business as usual, and to be expected, therefore a good thing.
> Netflix decided to crackdown on password-sharing: my brother moved away some months ago and has been using our Netflix account, and we don't want him to pay Netflix for himself
So you're upset that you are no longer able to freely breach a conract you agreed to, and have to pay for services you consume?
> Quantum dot film are becoming common now (they have been used for a while, but are mainstream now because Rec. 2020)
not really, there are essentially zero quantum dot based white light products commercially available right now, apart from some very niche offerings that are expensive and unreliable like osram/plt leds. and what does 'because Rec. 2020' even mean as a justification?
you know this research was published in 2006, and is based on earlier work (from the citations you can see papers from the early 1970s onwards) which suggests the ignorance might be more localised ;)
> To extend this conclusion from the dead fish experiments to mechanical devices,
and to demonstrate the applicability of these results in an engineering context, we also show that a flexibly mounted two-dimensional rigid foil, through fluid-induced motion only, is capable of producing net thrust using a negative mechanical power input, i.e. all the required mechanical power is extracted from the flow.
from the paper, which was published in 2006. and re a downstream comment, they euthanized the fish with a bath of anaesthetic, also in the paper.
sure, touché, i may well have my very own issues, this in no way stops me being correct though. also, in no way did i suggest you are a lesser or inferior person, you are just wrong. we all are, occasionally. in your case, the thing you are wrong about is the certainty that you are not delusional. the fact that you can describe these delusions and have 'no explanation for how it is possible' should maybe be the thing to introspect on...
