|
Tuxedo Catfish posted:Also if you're really worried about grammar, don't end a sentence with a preposition
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2017 06:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 22:05 |
|
|
Is there an easy way to download all of the Harmontown videos? They're on a word press site, and each video is on it's own individual link 1 webpage deep.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2017 06:44
|
|
|
FCKGW posted:When's the last time you saw a Walmart and a Whole Foods in the same shopping center? They serve two totally separate markets. I'd thought that Amazon might become able to deliver food to far-flung houses, in the long term, which could better serve a large portion of the people who are stuck shopping at Wal-mart if they offered a generic Amazon brand. I'm probably expecting too much of Amazon's supply chain. Their poo poo sounds positively utopian compared to my dried out and ice-damaged produce. LLSix posted:Whole Foods does not compete on price. It is unlikely to be an effective platform for competing with Walmart on price. In my amateur opinion, Walmart is likely to remain strong for at least five years. I would be surprised if they weren't still a significant presence in 20 years. This feels like a good take. I guess my worry now is that as Wal-mart is restricted to the countryside, stores and infrastructure will become more understaffed and the supply chain will become more hosed and incompetent than it already is, and what that will mean for anyone who actually has to take responsibility for it. The company culture, as I've experienced it, is to deny that they are getting owned and generate tons of activity regardless of productivity. It could be hell if I got a job that's actually difficult. greazeball posted:There's The Retail Collapse of 2017: Murdered by Amazonians and The fall of unicorns: iThread covering different business stories in D&D and there may be something else in BFC. Thanks! D&D, I shoulda known.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2017 07:12
|
|
|
Tiggum posted:That's a dumb rule that no one actually follows. While it is a dumb rule, tons of folks still follow it and it's even being taught in a few schools still.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2017 12:05
|
|
|
Tiggum posted:That's a dumb rule that no one actually follows. It's no more or less dumb than any other rule about grammar, especially when the guy was asking how to get it right, presumably for a context where the impression it gives matters.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2017 14:44
|
|
|
i before e, except after c, and if the word is science, sufficient and species and a whole host of other words grammer., defiantly SUCKS!!! Qubee fucked around with this message at 14:48 on Aug 16, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2017 14:46
|
|
|
I couldn't find a general astronomy thread or subforum, so I'll ask here: is there anywhere left to order eclipse glasses from, that can deliver fast? I thought my wife had ordered some but it turns out her order was cancelled.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2017 15:05
|
|
|
Tuxedo Catfish posted:It's no more or less dumb than any other rule about grammar, especially when the guy was asking how to get it right, presumably for a context where the impression it gives matters. "Grammar" in one sense means the structural rules of the syntax and morphology of a language. In this sense, "don't end a sentence with a preposition" is highly dumb, since no such rule exists for English.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2017 15:07
|
|
|
The rule really is that a preposition has to have an object, but that only ever happens when someone uses a preposition to end a sentence with. Find the object of "with" in that sentence. Taking the word out does not change the meaning or clarity of the sentence in any way. Add "disregard for the rules" as the object right after it and now it's useful.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2017 15:10
|
|
|
jackpot posted:I couldn't find a general astronomy thread or subforum, so I'll ask here: is there anywhere left to order eclipse glasses from, that can deliver fast? I thought my wife had ordered some but it turns out her order was cancelled. Get a piece of glass, put a lighter under it to get it all sooty. I don't guarantee it will protect your eyes, so you know, you might go blind.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2017 15:13
|
|
|
jackpot posted:I couldn't find a general astronomy thread or subforum, so I'll ask here: is there anywhere left to order eclipse glasses from, that can deliver fast? I thought my wife had ordered some but it turns out her order was cancelled.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2017 15:14
|
|
|
jackpot posted:I couldn't find a general astronomy thread or subforum, so I'll ask here: is there anywhere left to order eclipse glasses from, that can deliver fast? I thought my wife had ordered some but it turns out her order was cancelled. Might want to try hitting the local big box stores, I've seen them in odd places. Extra points if you have a science museum nearby.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2017 15:14
|
|
|
jackpot posted:I couldn't find a general astronomy thread or subforum, so I'll ask here: is there anywhere left to order eclipse glasses from, that can deliver fast? I thought my wife had ordered some but it turns out her order was cancelled. Round here it seems every hardware store, gas station, mini mart and lemonade stand is selling some variety of disposable cardboard eclipse viewing glasses. Now, I will not vouch for either the quality or safety of these products, but they are readily available.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2017 15:16
|
|
|
JesustheDarkLord posted:The rule really is that a preposition has to have an object, but that only ever happens when someone uses a preposition to end a sentence with. The object of "with" in that sentence is "a preposition" and you're talking complete nonsense
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2017 15:18
|
|
|
Tiggum posted:That's a dumb rule that no one actually follows. its not even a rule at all.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2017 15:41
|
|
|
CzarChasm posted:Now, I will not vouch for either the quality or safety of these products, but they are readily available.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2017 15:49
|
|
|
The AAS has a site that calls out known-good manufacturers and sellers.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2017 15:54
|
|
|
Ras Het posted:The object of "with" in that sentence is "a preposition" and you're talking complete nonsense stylistically he has a point, if you remove the "with" from the end of that sentence the meaning is just as clear. but its not a grammatical "rule"
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2017 16:10
|
|
|
Ras Het posted:The object of "with" in that sentence is "a preposition" and you're talking complete nonsense
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2017 16:37
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OR7kVDwGiRg&t=130s
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2017 16:40
|
|
|
Earwicker posted:stylistically he has a point, if you remove the "with" from the end of that sentence the meaning is just as clear. but its not a grammatical "rule" Perhaps, but I think that's a really irrelevant point to make. There's no platonic form of a sentence where meaning is as clear as it can be, with nothing extraneous
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2017 16:44
|
|
|
Ras Het posted:Perhaps, but I think that's a really irrelevant point to make. There's no platonic form of a sentence where meaning is as clear as it can be, with nothing extraneous well no not universally, but when writing in certain contexts (certain forms of professional and commercial writing for example) removing anything extraneous is generally considered good form. but like i said its style not grammar. Earwicker fucked around with this message at 16:51 on Aug 16, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2017 16:49
|
|
|
he came awfully close to getting out his shinebox
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2017 16:53
|
|
|
Yeah true, but I think the way schools and popular discourse pushes these specific stylistic ideas does more harm than good, because it gives people these really weird, counterproductive ideas about language and communication
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2017 16:54
|
|
|
I stand corrected, enjoyed reading about the history of that perceived "rule," and ended a sentence in another thread with a natural-sounding preposition not 15 minutes later.  I still think "to whom we spoke" sounds better than "whom we spoke to" in that context though.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2017 17:10
|
|
|
Ras Het posted:Yeah true, but I think the way schools and popular discourse pushes these specific stylistic ideas does more harm than good, because it gives people these really weird, counterproductive ideas about language and communication speaking of communication i've been trying to figure out basic Finnish and it is breaking me
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2017 17:27
|
|
|
It's very simple. 956 is yhdeksänsataaviisikymmentäkuusi, while 956th is yhdeksässadasviideskymmeneskuudes.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2017 17:32
|
|
|
 PLEASE DO NOT LOOK AT THE ECLIPSE WITH SOMETHING YOU BOUGHT FROM A GAS STATION Get a welding mask or welding goggles with RATING 14 inserts. No less than 14. Something that is rated for high-amperage arc welding or carbon arc welding. edit: VVV yes, do that preferably, anything that replaces you looking at the sun with you looking at an image of the sun is always going to be safer. Memento fucked around with this message at 23:51 on Aug 16, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2017 23:34
|
|
|
This is reliably safe:
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2017 23:43
|
|
|
I'm going to use binoculars to get a decent look at the eclipse, but they're tinted so it'll be alright
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2017 00:13
|
|
|
If I wasn't meant to look at the sun, why do I have eyes, doctor smartypants?
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2017 00:14
|
|
|
Q8ee posted:I'm going to use binoculars to get a decent look at the eclipse, but they're tinted so it'll be alright Hey dumbass the sun is a star. Use a telescope.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2017 00:18
|
|
|
My vision is bad so I'm gonna take my glasses off and squint
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2017 00:19
|
|
|
I'll never forget the first eclipse I saw as an adult. I was 22 or 21, and it was in the UK. The sky was so overcast, I had to pull over and ask some van removal guys the direction to the sun, cause there were just dark clouds everywhere and it was impossible to see. Was a pretty fun and memorable experience. My friend and I caught a glimpse of the eclipse through the clouds cruising down the motorway at 70mph, good times.Flash Gordon Ramsay posted:Hey dumbass the sun is a star. Use a telescope. it's 2017, the sun is a sun.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2017 00:32
|
|
|
Q8ee posted:I'm going to use binoculars to get a decent look at the eclipse, but they're tinted so it'll be alright All you have to do is use them backwards, idiot.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2017 00:44
|
|
|
jackpot posted:I couldn't find a general astronomy thread or subforum, so I'll ask here: is there anywhere left to order eclipse glasses from, that can deliver fast? I thought my wife had ordered some but it turns out her order was cancelled. Order welding glass from lowes, it'll work just as well.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2017 02:58
|
|
|
Turtlicious posted:Order welding glass from lowes, it'll work just as well. If you don't have 14-rated glass inserts you will damage your eyes. Read the relevant OSHA standard here (PDF warning) so that you know what to ask for. If you go to a welding supply store and say "I need welding glass for Carbon Arc Welding" then they will sell you inserts that you can use to look at the sun. You should still just use a camera obscura. The number of yokel blindings is going to be in the hundreds. People will look at it when it's in totality and go "oooh aaah" and then it flashes out from the side again and your eyes aren't adjusted for it. Please don't add to those numbers, gentle Goons. Memento fucked around with this message at 03:39 on Aug 17, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2017 03:36
|
|
|
Flipperwaldt posted:This is reliably safe: And where the gently caress do you expect me to get a box?
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2017 04:25
|
|
|
Memento posted:If you don't have 14-rated glass inserts you will damage your eyes.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2017 04:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 22:05 |
|
|
Tuxedo Catfish posted:It's no more or less dumb than any other rule about grammar Earwicker posted:its not even a rule at all. Tuxedo Catfish posted:I still think "to whom we spoke" sounds better than "whom we spoke to" in that context though. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2017 06:19
|
|