Maybe the system should actually check what's at each page.
And you should read more carefully. I did not suggest the thing you say is a bad idea.
602 karma · joined March 21, 2008
curi@curi.us
And you should read more carefully. I did not suggest the thing you say is a bad idea.
Free trade.
Most people eat large quantities of food all at once. Stop half way and wait 20 minutes and you might not be hungry anymore. If you eat too quickly then you don't know at what point you'd eaten enough to satisfy your hunger.
Perhaps one could generalize badly with 2 data points, but isn't it just impossible with 1, and therefore he must actually be doing something else?
If you want to skim or go back, don't use it. But there are sometimes things you read where you don't need that.
You can get first on Google for obscure terms just by commenting on YC. The site you are on matters, the issue is only whether knol gets special treatment or matters in the normal way.
"Depending on the number of screens used, these high-definition video teleconferencing systems that deliver life-size images of the participants used to cost $500,000 or more per room."
Life-size video chat!
http://youtube.com/watch?v=EsEYpJMYIIw
30min vid
My point was that I think an explicit not is clearer than unless in cases sufficiently complex as to require stopping to think about it. If you're trying to keep track of multiple negations, then having one be in a different form than all the rest does not help. (And meanwhile, there is nothing wrong with a habit of always using if).