|
On January 26 2015 15:58 Shiragaku wrote:Show nested quote +On January 26 2015 14:53 Orcasgt24 wrote:On January 26 2015 14:15 Sub40APM wrote:On January 26 2015 04:43 KwarK wrote:On January 26 2015 03:53 Nyxisto wrote: You can also take East and West Germany, it wasn't much better. East Germany was systematically deindustrialised by the USSR for reparations and future security. As for North Korea, I'm not sure how that fits any existing definition of communist. It's a military dictatorship in which a military elite exploit the people and resources to live lives of luxury at the expense of the poor. so...its like every other communist country ? Every other country "claiming" to be communist. Actual marxist communism has never been achieved. China is as close to a real communist nation that IS NOT a military or totalitarian dictatorship. Post-Maoist China is anything but communism. Reading the quotes by Deng Xiaoping really shows how much he loved capitalism, the only thing that prevented him from being a liberal was his opposition towards democracy. In fact, I would go so far to say that China is so capitalist, that it makes American capitalism appear red to them. Show nested quote +A basic contradiction between socialism and the market economy does not exist. Also, is there a name for this fallacy? I hate A and I also hate B. Therefore, A is the same as B.
The straw man's retarded br other?
It really does seem to me like a badly executed straw man fallacy.
Edit: I guess it's this one: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_equivalence
|
United States42291 Posts
On January 26 2015 14:15 Sub40APM wrote:Show nested quote +On January 26 2015 04:43 KwarK wrote:On January 26 2015 03:53 Nyxisto wrote: You can also take East and West Germany, it wasn't much better. East Germany was systematically deindustrialised by the USSR for reparations and future security. As for North Korea, I'm not sure how that fits any existing definition of communist. It's a military dictatorship in which a military elite exploit the people and resources to live lives of luxury at the expense of the poor. so...its like every other communist country ? No. u dum
|
United States42291 Posts
On January 26 2015 19:17 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On January 26 2015 15:58 Shiragaku wrote:On January 26 2015 14:53 Orcasgt24 wrote:On January 26 2015 14:15 Sub40APM wrote:On January 26 2015 04:43 KwarK wrote:On January 26 2015 03:53 Nyxisto wrote: You can also take East and West Germany, it wasn't much better. East Germany was systematically deindustrialised by the USSR for reparations and future security. As for North Korea, I'm not sure how that fits any existing definition of communist. It's a military dictatorship in which a military elite exploit the people and resources to live lives of luxury at the expense of the poor. so...its like every other communist country ? Every other country "claiming" to be communist. Actual marxist communism has never been achieved. China is as close to a real communist nation that IS NOT a military or totalitarian dictatorship. Post-Maoist China is anything but communism. Reading the quotes by Deng Xiaoping really shows how much he loved capitalism, the only thing that prevented him from being a liberal was his opposition towards democracy. In fact, I would go so far to say that China is so capitalist, that it makes American capitalism appear red to them. To get rich is glorious. A basic contradiction between socialism and the market economy does not exist. Also, is there a name for this fallacy? I hate A and I also hate B. Therefore, A is the same as B. The straw man's retarded br other? It really does seem to me like a badly executed straw man fallacy. Edit: I guess it's this one: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_equivalence Most commonly seen in "You like A? Hitler liked A. Have you considered that maybe you're Hitler?"
|
|
When cooking popcorn on the stove, why is it better to slide the pot along the burner in a circular motion as opposed to just letting it sit still?
|
|
|
On January 23 2015 14:56 jetburger wrote: I had some raw chicken in the freezer since Feb 2014. Still safe to eat? Go down to the supermarket and find a frozen chicken. See what the Use by Date is. That should give a good estimation.
|
Hey man, when you eat any meat or fish raw, you get the highest quality of flavor and texture. Don't you just want pick up a piece of raw chicken and eat it after looking at that picture?
On January 27 2015 16:54 MutantGenepool wrote:Show nested quote +On January 23 2015 14:56 jetburger wrote: I had some raw chicken in the freezer since Feb 2014. Still safe to eat? Go down to the supermarket and find a frozen chicken. See what the Use by Date is. That should give a good estimation. I will try to report back to you on my next day off to avoid missing work.
|
Chicken is the worst. No.
|
On January 27 2015 15:28 Orcasgt24 wrote: When cooking popcorn on the stove, why is it better to slide the pot along the burner in a circular motion as opposed to just letting it sit still?
Probably because you have two goals:
a) popping all the corn b) not burning any of the popped corn
Now, if you just let the pot sit there, what is going to happen is that first some of the corn on the bottom pops, propelling some of the unpopped corn to the upper layers where there is more heat. Then, a lot of the heat will get absorbed by the already popped corn at the bottom, blackening it and burning it to the pot. (There is a word for this in German (anbrennen), but apparently not in english)
If you slide the pot around, the unpopped corn with a higher density will accumulate at the bottom, where there is more heat, and no one corn will be directly on the metal of the pot with the same side for a long enough time to burn to the pot, because they are constantly turning and moving.
|
On January 27 2015 19:41 Simberto wrote:Show nested quote +On January 27 2015 15:28 Orcasgt24 wrote: When cooking popcorn on the stove, why is it better to slide the pot along the burner in a circular motion as opposed to just letting it sit still? Probably because you have two goals: a) popping all the corn b) not burning any of the popped corn Now, if you just let the pot sit there, what is going to happen is that first some of the corn on the bottom pops, propelling some of the unpopped corn to the upper layers where there is more heat. Then, a lot of the heat will get absorbed by the already popped corn at the bottom, blackening it and burning it to the pot. (There is a word for this in German (anbrennen), but apparently not in english) If you slide the pot around, the unpopped corn with a higher density will accumulate at the bottom, where there is more heat, and no one corn will be directly on the metal of the pot with the same side for a long enough time to burn to the pot, because they are constantly turning and moving. TL;DR to Distribute the heat more evenly
|
On January 27 2015 16:55 Shiragaku wrote: Don't you just want pick up a piece of raw chicken and eat it after looking at that picture?.
No. Additionally, I think looking at that picture gave me Salmonella. Thanks Obama.
|
If I save a screenshot of something, not in SC2, what's the best format to save it as, baring in mind I'm looking to edit it in Gimp, so .xcf would be best? However Gimp is still complicated for me, so I also use paint.net a fair bit too, which doesn't use .xcf.
So .bmp?
I can convert it to .png for final use, so don't want to loose any quality until then. File size isn't an issue.
|
On January 29 2015 23:15 fruity. wrote: If I save a screenshot of something, not in SC2, what's the best format to save it as, baring in mind I'm looking to edit it in Gimp, so .xcf would be best? However Gimp is still complicated for me, so I also use paint.net a fair bit too, which doesn't use .xcf.
So .bmp?
I can convert it to .png for final use, so don't want to loose any quality until then. File size isn't an issue. .png is lossless and can be opened with GIMP and Paint. Not sure if that helps.
|
On January 29 2015 23:15 fruity. wrote: If I save a screenshot of something, not in SC2, what's the best format to save it as, baring in mind I'm looking to edit it in Gimp, so .xcf would be best? However Gimp is still complicated for me, so I also use paint.net a fair bit too, which doesn't use .xcf.
So .bmp?
I can convert it to .png for final use, so don't want to loose any quality until then. File size isn't an issue. For images with text and large areas of solid color, png is both small and lossless.
Photo (or other photo-like image): png is (needlessly) large for photos. Tiff is probably your best bet for a lossless format, but you won't see much (if any) difference with jpeg in the end product if you have high resolution images.
|
On January 30 2015 00:30 Acrofales wrote: Photo (or other photo-like image): png is (needlessly) large for photos. Tiff is probably your best bet for a lossless format, but you won't see much (if any) difference with jpeg in the end product if you have high resolution images.
So for a picture of around 1920x1080 including text, blocks of solid colour, jpeg would give the best final results?
|
On January 30 2015 01:01 fruity. wrote:Show nested quote +On January 30 2015 00:30 Acrofales wrote: Photo (or other photo-like image): png is (needlessly) large for photos. Tiff is probably your best bet for a lossless format, but you won't see much (if any) difference with jpeg in the end product if you have high resolution images. So for a picture of around 1920x1080 including text, blocks of solid colour, jpeg would give the best final results? I say no because you said size is not an issue and jpeg isn't lossless.
|
On January 30 2015 01:16 ComaDose wrote: I say no because you said size is not an issue and jpeg isn't lossless.
Whilst editing it in Gimp or Paint.net size isn't important, but I thought to also ask about a final file type format.
|
On January 30 2015 01:20 fruity. wrote:Show nested quote +On January 30 2015 01:16 ComaDose wrote: I say no because you said size is not an issue and jpeg isn't lossless. Whilst editing it in Gimp or Paint.net size isn't important, but I thought to also ask about a final file type format. Acrofales is right about probably not noticing a difference with jpg in that case. It will be much smaller.
|
|
|
|