ledge

That said .7 seconds is a hell of a lot of time to shave off your 40 yard dash, especially if you're starting out in relatively decent shape. But I suppose the only way to know is to go for it, good luck!

'look', when not part of any phrasal verb ('look at', 'look for'), is actually a copula in English. A copula is a linking verb, the paradigmatic example being 'to be', that can occur in the pattern (subject) (copula) (adjective).

That's what is happening in sentences like

"The man (subj) looks nice (adj.)"

Whereas with any noncopulative verb we need an adverb

"The man ran quickly.", "The stocks fell rapidly.", etc.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_English_copulae

What's interesting is that if you look at the list of English copulae above, you'll notice that many of them ('smell', 'sound', 'feel', 'taste', and 'seem') are capable of the same kind of inversion as 'look' in their participle forms. So...

"The chicken tasted funny." and "The chicken is funny tasting."

"This song sounds sad." and "This song is sad sounding."

It's a little more awkward to think of examples with 'seem', which is curious since it's the only one of those six copulae mentioned that isn't sensory in meaning.

TL;DR: 'looking' is definitely not a standard adjectival participle, since it can't function as an adjective on it's own, but instead needs to follow another adjective. Another excellent example of how words do not conform neatly to part of speech categories.

That is so arbitrary. Your source and the OP's source are linguistically prescriptive. Prescriptivism is unscientific and it leads to endless spats between groups of people that think the way they learned to speak and write is somehow superior. A better approach is to look at the reality of how native speakers of a language use, pronounce, and write words (descriptivism) and agree that some uses are standard, and some are non-standard.

Here are some screenshots of collocation searches involving post-adjectival 'looking' from the excellent COCA...

'good':

http://s9.postimg.org/r4cok4spb/good_looking.png

'nice':

http://s9.postimg.org/kcm9ha3pr/nice_looking.png

Here's one for your author's example, "well known" (or "well-known"):

http://s9.postimg.org/64wksmr0v/well_known.png

Notice that the reality bears almost no resemblance to the prescriptive idea of what's correct and incorrect.

Granted I have had problems even recently with wireless not working out-of-the-box on linux systems.

Also don't count on basic digital competency anytime soon worldwide. Where I live, young and old alike stare blankly into computer screens with no clue what's happening. Two days ago I unsuccessfully tried to explain to a 25 year old woman what a website is.

There are so many emerging markets for computers that intuitive UIs will be crucial for a long time to come. I'm glad for that, since the ease of opening my web browser or music player has never once prevented me from using command line tools, editing system/configuration files, etc.

For someone with Madoff's connections, it wouldn't be hard to acquire a false identity and resume some kind of low-level fraud. Putting him in prison is the best way to protect the public IMO.

I personally think that prison sentences are just as valid for non-violent crime as violent crime anyway. It's a disincentive, it's aptly punitive in cases such as Madoff's, and it makes it harder for the offender to re-offend.

I particularly remember when writing long papers, I would do things like increase the character spacing, change the font size to 12.5, subtly adjust the margins, add a few words to the last sentence of a paragraph in order to push it on to the next line, etc. If I had to write a 10 page paper, I could get away with writing 8.5 pages and use these tricks to bring it up to the required length in a minute or two.

There were kids in my school who spent 3+ hours a night on homework, but certainly not me. I in no way regret getting a few Bs and Cs, coasting by with some cheating and the aforementioned tricks, and in general blowing off most of high school. I still got into a good college, in part due to SAT/PSAT scores, and I probably learned more and certainly had a better time than most of my classmates.

By extension Ultimate is also well suited for a wide range of athleticism. For throwers (aka handlers) it is more of a skill sport, involving repeated practice of the throwing motion but not necessarily speed or strength, while receivers (cutters) typically rely on pure athleticism.

It also exercises the mind for me, as do all sports. I spend a lot of time thinking, on the field and off, how to improve my play, conserve energy, what my opponent's tendencies are, etc. If you're not using your mind playing sports, you're not doing it right.

I found a nice (enough) apartment for 120$/month that is extremely close to the largest market in PP and Olympic stadium, where I exercise daily. Right outside my front door I can find excellent meals cooked by my friendly neighbors for less than a dollar. I'm here for at least a year, but probably longer; I love this place.

"Who says two spaces is wrong?" they wanted to know. Typographers, that's who. The people who study and design the typewritten word decided long ago that we should use one space, not two, between sentences.

The only argument (which is apparently historically inaccurate according to the parent article) made against double-spacing is an appeal to authority and 'the way it's always been done', exactly what you are rallying against in your last reply.

Besides, as has been pointed out already in this thread, a period followed by a single space (followed by a capitalized letter) does not solely occur in end-of-sentence contexts, so a period followed by two spaces does provide an added degree of semantic separation.

Personally, I have no preference. You do what you like, I'll do what looks good to me. I am amazed that someone would assume that I was uneducated or ignorant (like the typographer interviewed in the Slate article), because I usually put two spaces after a sentence-ending period.

For me it is better to explain why I am angry or disappointed with a child's behavior in private, and if I don't see a change then implement a punishment like missing recess, changing seats, or sending the child to talk to a counselor/principal. I worked with younger kids, so these were pretty effective punishments.

If you resort to screaming right away, the child won't open up to you about problems at home, problems with teasing, etc. that are important to understanding why they might be acting out. If the child trusts and likes you, they'll try harder to behave for you... it's really not very different than an adult relationship.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bundling_of_Microsoft_Windows

"The Findings of Fact in the United States Microsoft antitrust case of 1998 established that "One of the ways Microsoft combats piracy is by advising OEMs that they will be charged a higher price for Windows unless they drastically limit the number of PCs that they sell without an operating system pre-installed. In 1998, all major OEMs agreed to this restriction."[5]"

Either way, you can strike "child pornography viewers" from my original comment and replace it with "prostitutes", "on-line gamblers", or any other person guilty of a moral crime. The point is that it's us vs. them because a large number of "us" are at risk of being targeted and incarcerated by "them". I have friends in jail for drug offenses, and it's very possible a lead from an intelligence agency was instrumental in their arrest. My own apartment was raided not that long ago, and I can't help but wonder if it's due to some text messages sent back in my college days, so speak for yourself when you say that they're on "our side".

And yes one opinion of mine invalidates every other opinion I have, how true.

You win, good arguments.

Edit: For a more serious reply, there is evidence that countries that have decriminalized viewing child pornography (not production) have seen decreased rates of child sex abuse.

Also, the definition of child pornography is so broad that we have a lot of people rotting in jail for looking at a naked picture that a 14 year old took of themselves in the mirror. Once in jail, these people become targets for violence and ironically sexual abuse.

The topic is not black and white, and when you try to shut down conversation the way you did, it's not helping anyone, children included.

Is it a paranoid delusion if you're a drug dealer to think that the NSA is out to get you? Not anymore. What about a drug user? What about a file-sharer? A child porn viewer? You might not be any of these things, but a huge portion of the American citizenry is, and I'd argue they're not doing anything wrong. Sorry but I'm not going to just take it on faith that the NSA is on 'our side'.

What you see is distorted, but everything you see is actually there. The walls might look like they're dripping or wavy, the branches on a tree appear to reach out at you, and colors become more vibrant, but you won't ever see gigantic bunnies or flying unicorns or some other stupid shit that often ends up in film depictions of a psychedelic experience.

As dosage increases, your mind increasingly tends to interpret what you're seeing as something else, like a shadow may appear briefly to be a person. When this starts to happen I would no longer feel comfortable driving, but for me this occurs at the peak of 500 ug + experiences, the equivalent of 5 standard doses. Not saying that driving on LSD is a great idea, but on a single standard dose it's not nearly as dangerous as driving after you've pulled an all-nighter IMO.

Maybe it wouldn't even matter if the drugs were in plain sight? The cop could likely just use the old "I smell marijuana" trick and then he would 'inevitably discover' the drug dealer's stash, no matter where in the car it's hidden.

As an example, I knew many D1 tennis players who could charge upwards of 70$ an hour teaching private lessons (of which the club would take ~20$). I know one guy who is a pretty exceptional player but no where near good enough to make a living on the professional tour, and he brings in about 50,000$ every summer, then goes on tour with his band all winter.

I was merely a good high school player and even back then I was making 15/hr coaching and 25/hr for lessons. That's more than I make now sadly!

Uphills runs and stair-training are also significantly lower impact on the knees and hips, though both can be harder on certain muscle groups like hamstrings.

I recommend to everyone to find some winding, hilly mountain bike trails and go run on them. I could never get into running outside the context of team sports until I tried this; it's an absolute blast, especially if you have a background in sprinting.

I knew a guy in high school that got expelled in the middle of his senior year, because cops turned up an airsoft gun in the trunk of his car after they brought drug dogs through our school parking lot (this was done routinely, inside the school and also in the parking lot, probably still is). That to me is a much worse example of how far these "zero-tolerance" polices get taken.

A lot of this discussion is a complete embarrassment, I expected better from HN :(