bstrand
However, the language options offered beyond those already provided by Netflix are machine translated. This is good enough to follow along or fill in gaps in your knowledge of the officially subtitled language, but is a subpar representation of the program.
This happens fairly often on German Netflix. When the program's language is neither German nor English, often there are no English subtitles available.
International licensing is obviously complicated, so it's hard to say whose "fault" it is, but my suspicion is that some rights owners will only license the service to use the local language to prevent end users doing digital geo-arbitrage.
For example, the Swedish series "The Bridge" is available on German Netflix, and the trailer has English subtitles, but the actual episodes only offer German subs. AFAICT in the US market this show is only available for streaming as a purchase from Amazon.
I pushed back on your mention of the distinction mainly due to a growing tendency in which people dismiss concerns about constraints on freedom of speech/expression/opinion by arguing such concerns are only valid insofar as the First Amendment applies. (Not to say you were doing that yourself.) At best it's a tiresome debate tactic; to the extent it's believed, it's a dangerously narrow misapprehension of one of our fundamental social tenets and civil rights.
»When we speak of anything as “free,” our meaning is not definite unless we can say what it is free from. Whatever or whoever is “free” is not subject to some external compulsion, and to be precise we ought to say what this kind of compulsion is. … Legal penalties are, however, in the modern world, the least of the obstacles to freedom of thoughts. The two great obstacles are economic penalties and distortion of evidence. It is clear that thought is not free if the profession of certain opinions makes it impossible to earn a living. It is clear also that thought is not free if all the arguments on one side of a controversy are perpetually presented as attractively as possible, while the arguments on the other side can only be discovered by diligent search.«
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-fny99f8amM&feature=youtu.be...
> Don’t get IT people who specialize in running Internet services to run your Internet services. Have software coders run them instead.
The point is that one should consider the former to be a subset of the latter.
Ketosis does not require or imply a severe caloric deficit. It requires a very low carbohydrate intake, but you can eat a maintenance level of calories and be in ketosis.
None of the standard guidance (e.g. [1]) for a weight loss program using a ketogenic diet advocates such a severe deficit. Presuming you're a male of average height, 700 kcal is about a 75% deficit. By all appearances, that was the source of your troubles, not keto per se.
I'm glad you recovered all right!
Oh, community college.
1) https://www.aaafoundation.org/sites/default/files/bikeuse_PB... 2) https://www.google.com/search?q=amsterdam+cyclist&espv=2&tbm...
Sarah Jeong has written thoughtfully on whether justices need be tech savvy: http://sarahjeong.net/2014/04/23/scotus-is-bad-at-computers-...
How, exactly, are you harmed by having to share the road safely with non-motor vehicles? Your stated concern over protection applies equally to motorcyclists, yet you seem to have no problem with them.
Your real concern seems to a presumption that you would get to work faster if it weren't for bicyclists. This is very unlikely in reality, and certainly no more than a couple minutes in the worst case. A belief that your right to get to work 2 minutes faster trumps other citizens' entitlement to use and enjoy public rights of way safely is somewhat sociopathic.
I can relate, though. This is what car commuting does to a lot of people. It's dog-eat-dog and me-first out there, with few norms of or need for civility. I've been there. It eats away at you progressively and makes life objectively worse. Explore your options for transit or ride-sharing or find a job you can walk, bike or take transit to. It really makes a huge difference in quality of life.
The only way forward is reconciliation.
Impossible to give a date with both high precision & accuracy, maybe, but certainly not impossible to predict. Statements like that would give me pause were I were trusting AgileBits to protect my secrets.
The cognitive dissonance, it burns.
The BART police are mandated to wear cameras in the wake of the killing of Oscar Grant. Unfortunately it's up to them to activate the camera. Recently a BART cop was shot & killed by another officer when searching a robbery suspect's home. Supposedly none of those officers had their cameras running. http://www.sfgate.com/crime/article/Fatal-BART-shooting-not-...
Note that for autos, the equivalent is the yellow lamp in a stoplight and in that case the rule is that the vehicle must have entered the intersection before the lamp turns red. So LA seems to have standards that are paradoxically more stringent for pedestrians.
Nor are most "techies", even if they are fortunate enough to be an exception to the downward trend in real wages (for the moment.)
[1] http://www.zcommunications.org/steven-pinker-on-the-alleged-...
I'd suppose that given a pilot with low experience on that aircraft and relatively good conditions, this was considered a good opportunity to get a visual approach and landing under his belt. That presumes a lot, of course.