tortilliachp

"mousekeys" meaning jagex-allowed macros on your gaming-mouse (here you can set specific distance jumps, macros for repeated clicks with time-delay etc.) one click per fish is no problem, using "legal" methods. that can surely be sustained, when you can set your scroll-wheel to left-click. carpal tunnel for a pro-gamer? not in a million years.

how does this list tackle the fact that runehead messes up dungeoneering levels that are passed level 99? for instance, EL_POPO1's dungeoneering is 107, not 99 as the list claims. (this is a general runehead issue)

the whole "no sprint to the final" deal royally pissed off some of the sprinters. I mean, the roads are dangerous, you know what you sign up for right?

i think we saw the 4th place team, and the loosing finalist today. lousy performance, at least 5 goals was a consolation

I am a citizen of the world, i am a citizen of the internet, but first of all I'm Norwegian. Even though I'm a dual citizen. Thing with nationality: you don't notice the particularities of your own culture till you move somewhere else, and live there for a while (3 months plus would be my guess). That's something I would recommend everyone do, if economically possible: live abroad to broaden your horizons, and see what your culture actually entails. This new perspective will show you that "things that just are that way" are culturally determined to a much larger degree than you think.

w2 lending out stuff is really the most "profitable" . I just bring a host of stuff and wait till i see someone spamming to borrow something i have. try selling the rest for min, getting market price for lending is always better if possible though :D

show me where this extra energy will come from in ways that do not create an energy deficit for the future, and i will be one very, very rich man. Your solution is so obvious, and simple there should be no problem. There is a problem, and so your reasoning lacks a major consideration: we cannot produce the energy you wish to waste. Now if we could have coldfusion power, your "let's just produce more" sentiment would be very pertinent. As of today's technology, you're living in a magical world of plenty, that simply doesn't exist. May I ask you how long we've been getting net-power from solar cells? Energy costs in production have exceeded energy produced in their lifetimes until about 5 years ago: they haven't been producing power, they've been batteries. Almost all energy production and food production today is fossil-derivative. That means we could not produce the energy and food without the fossil components we're using up that are not replenishable. What is "hydrogen power" ? Do you mean hydrogen fuel cells, which are a way of storing energy, not making it? Oh, you thought I meant we could do these things NOW. No. We still got oil and coal and other methods. Wait till that runs out, THEN we'll switch to the things I said. There won't be no "energy shortage" or "world-wide crisis" when we run out of energy...because we never will. Multi-billion dollar companies, while I do not like them, are not stupid and already have plans to take part of the post-oil energy industry. What else would they do? "Invention is the offspring of necessity." Where we will get energy, while I've got some ideas, I'm sure a scientist (corporate most likely) knows loads more where. Good thing you brought this up. Personally, I would rather grow corn for feeding people, not powering up cars. This is a global energy shortage today. That's why electricity prices are globally rising, why oil, why coal why gas prices are rising. There are no solutions today, "fixing the problem when it happens in the future, in the future" doesn't work when the problems are here today. Invention isn't miracle. There is necessity, half the scientists who ever lived are alive today, where are your inventions? maybe we do have to change how we live, then, since what we're currently doing obviously isn't working? post-oil is here today, now, twenty thirty years ago. We haven't found alternatives. We need to change how we live because the "new technology that will offset everything and make all good" doesn't exist yet. Politicians have budgeted with these improvements for decades and still do. Again, you show a completely lacking understanding of what a biofuel is. What happens to your sewage? Is it used to produce methane? no. Can that be done? yes. Is it done some places in India? yes. Why isn't it done everywhere? we haven't changed. the technology exists. Rather, we use precious fresh water to flush this energy resource quite literally down the toilet. Where is your innovation? what about locations where food cannot be grown? what about the fossil fuel usages in growing food? I think you need a fact check, I think I need to gain better understanding, but i think our politicians need to take charge (to a reasonable extent). consumption and production for consumption is what sustains the world economy. If we went environmentally friendly to the extent the world needs, the world economy would collapse. Civilization as we know it would too, but there would be a future for our grandchildren's grandchildren's grandchildren. I'm not going to make all the changes i should. I like luxury so much i'm not going to give it up even though i do live my life at the expense of others. I'm honest enough to admit as much though, you are either deceiving yourself, uninformed or rejecting your responsibility.

show me where this extra energy will come from in ways that do not create an energy deficit for the future, and i will be one very, very rich man. Your solution is so obvious, and simple there should be no problem. There is a problem, and so your reasoning lacks a major consideration: we cannot produce the energy you wish to waste. Now if we could have coldfusion power, your "let's just produce more" sentiment would be very pertinent. As of today's technology, you're living in a magical world of plenty, that simply doesn't exist. May I ask you how long we've been getting net-power from solar cells? Energy costs in production have exceeded energy produced in their lifetimes until about 5 years ago: they haven't been producing power, they've been batteries. Almost all energy production and food production today is fossil-derivative. That means we could not produce the energy and food without the fossil components we're using up that are not replenishable. What is "hydrogen power" ? Do you mean hydrogen fuel cells, which are a way of storing energy, not making it? why haven't you mentioned biofuels? These questions lead me to think you know very little about where the energy you expend (rather, degrade but that gets complicated) comes from

I'd like to see some facts backing such a statement. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sustainability If undeveloped countries are allowed to develop to western standards of living, we have to cut an awful lot of our consumption.

thing is: we live lives that aren't sustainable. we need to change all aspects of our lives for them to be sustainable. they still won't be sustainable, but we'll ruin the world less. This is one step in that direction for those who believe we should strive for leaving the world to future generations as best we can, instead of indulging in all luxury we can possibly imagine. that's a little too radical for me, but everyone would be fine in your "boxes" Just not as luxurious at the expense of future generations. would i relinquish most of my luxury for a "better world" ? no.

the epic music in that trailer combined with actors who are now 5 years+ too old for their roles makes this a general fantasy adventure movie however it's made. Not a school movie, like the harry potter series is. The tie-in of old music at 2mins 15ish seconds was also TERRIBLE. I hope the workmanship in the actual movies is better at retaining some form of continuity than the lousy work put into the trailer. Can they pull it off? Guys will be drooling over Emma Watson, and girls will be somewhat-drooling over Daniel Radcliffe, or their fantasy men in the potter-verse. Will the movies be good? doubt it. worth watching for fans? definitely.

as you rightly point out, weight is only good to gain if you gain muscle. most important thing for soccer specifically, is that you maintain your endurance for the running parts of the game. the more weight you have to carry, the more conditioning training you need to increase you oxygen-uptake for the increased mass. for the weight training per se, see other weight training topics. it's all covered there.

to the picture: on the lighting fixtures, temporarily on the goal nets for matches (so they don't get stolen). Where there's a will, there's a way and this isn't exactly a logistical nightmare. it could function as tennis' hawkeye system: it's expensive so only top tournaments / matches / leagues implement them. it works fine for tennis, why not football?

When lyrics are convoluted and make no sense, someone usually paraphrases the whole song line-by line or paragraph by paragraph. but that's inferring your own personal interpretation, expanding the text. What i've provided is a summary where the words are already present. I see the similarity, but personally find a qualitiative difference. On topic: i still don't get why she rationalizes it's a class issue though, maybe if it were Britain. Class and the USA doesn't really go hand in hand that much...

My sincere condolences. your great-grandmother was the age of my grandparents. Enjoy many fantastic years with them, as is your great privilege.

Can anyone confirm or deny this please. I still own a red mask and would like to get cash for it... I was in world 2 today and saw a buying offer of red mask +40m junk, so I'd say if they were crashing they aren't now. Most selling offers are going for only one crown, so they haven't fully recovered street price yet. I wouldn't trust W2 spam, or RSOF posts. a lot of them are only price manipulation posts. For in-game real offers, i'd only trust an accepted second trade screen, where you are the only one that can still cancel the thread. that proves the sincerity of the offer.

write it, pm it to Racheya. That's how i've gotten two publications. Second article: my articles have both been composed in a single sitting, without reading them through in their entirety or major changes. We all write differently, and your experience is certainly very different from mine Ts.

farming consists of runs that cannot be rushed much. doing a set of trees or two daily is an effective way of maximizing your exp gains and saving time off "harcore" farming where that's all you do.

thing is, with all modern stadiums having a giant tv-screen showing the situation in instant reply anyway (thanks to the great South-African production), the Refs have been able to see their mistakes live. Like the offside goal yesterday, where the offside-line was shaded in before the ball was in play again. It doesn't have to take any time at all. Any time it takes (4-5 seconds at max) would be added to the stoppage time. Then stoppage time could actually reflect the time the ball is not in play (almost 10 minutes should be added to every game as it is anyway)

but used adverbally? that's just excessive! mockery asside: dumbing something over-complicated down isn't really interpreting a song, is it?

That article was a great example of how you can convolute your point beyond recognition by over-thinking diction for the sake of "art" to reinforce your artsy point (not the choice of the word artsy rather than artistic for it's degrading connotations [further, note the reference to diction in an ironic, self-mocking note] ). quick explanation of what you just read: edit: it was pointed out to me that i should clarify that i wrote the stuff in the quote, it's another posh reference where I "quote her", so obliviously the upper-class-man would use the quote-tags as it would be "politically correct" (yes i know that's not the annotation of the term [yes, i knows annotation is just another fancy way of saying "*insert word* can't really be used how i did" ] )

Just like Schwarzenegger (He's been my governor), sometime the most apt politicians come from a different business. Can't judge them on past occupation, when they haven't had opportunities to show their political prowess yet. the people trust and believe, which is usually an indicator that it can either go very well, or very bad.

"getting drunk" is very much a psychological thing. Scandinavian tests have Scandinavians getting very drunk on alcohol-free beer, and not drunk at all on alcohol, when they are led to believe they're drinking the other kind. Of course, heavy intakes give different results, but if you think you're getting drunk, you'll act more like you are drunk. a lot of other good advice has been posted already.

results to the 300 question test, results are percentile placement. It seems i'm a combination of many things, which fits well with my self-image.Some of the traits in different categories seem to be contradictory, which is also fitting with how i perceive myself. If anyone cares, here's me : [hide]EXTRAVERSION...............92 ..Friendliness.............97 ..Gregariousness...........98 ..Assertiveness............97 ..Activity Level...........90 ..Excitement-Seeking.......21 ..Cheerfulness.............71 Your score on Extraversion is high, indicating you are sociable, outgoing, energetic, and lively. You prefer to be around people much of the time. AGREEABLENESS..............84 ..Trust....................86 ..Morality.................67 ..Altruism.................95 ..Cooperation..............59 ..Modesty..................44 ..Sympathy.................84 Your high level of Agreeableness indicates a strong interest in others' needs and well-being. You are pleasant, sympathetic, and cooperative. CONSCIENTIOUSNESS..........79 ..Self-Efficacy............99 ..Orderliness..............34 ..Dutifulness..............49 ..Achievement-Striving.....90 ..Self-Discipline..........53 ..Cautiousness.............89 Your score on Conscientiousness is high. This means you set clear goals and pursue them with determination. People regard you as reliable and hard-working. NEUROTICISM................1 ..Anxiety..................4 ..Anger....................22 ..Depression...............11 ..Self-Consciousness.......3 ..Immoderation.............19 ..Vulnerability............0 Your score on Neuroticism is low, indicating that you are exceptionally calm, composed and unflappable. You do not react with intense emotions, even to situations that most people would describe as stressful. OPENNESS TO EXPERIENCE.....88 ..Imagination..............72 ..Artistic Interests.......89 ..Emotionality.............83 ..Adventurousness..........86 ..Intellect................93 ..Liberalism...............34 Your score on Openness to Experience is high, indicating you enjoy novelty, variety, and change. You are curious, imaginative, and creative. [/hide]

I wanted a third option for most of the questions. "It depends" or "a balance of both" Apparently I'm an ENTJ "The executive" (http://www.personalitypage.com/html/ENTJ.html ) Strength of the preferences % : Extraverted 33 Intuitive 62 Thinking 1 Judging 22 There are major portions of the type description that i don't recognize myself in one bit. I would put that down to a lack of self-understanding and introspection, but i have candid, open dialogs with close friends about how they perceive me. These mostly revolve around the "judging" criterion. how the hell can i be 1% thinking though, that makes no sense to me at all. Particularly this paragraph really bothers me: I can find no question that outlines the possible difference in how you treat your own mistakes and the mistakes of others. I hate making mistakes, a born perfectionist. But i don't hold others to the standards i hold myself. That would indeed make me overbearing, but i can't find a question that relates to how you treat others differently from yourself at all. Inferring that the treatment is identical is a major flaw in the test in my opinion. How you treat others in relation to yourself defines how your relationships function. further, this makes me sound like some sort of robot, rather than balanced, thinking individual, again because i couldn't choose an option that "both are important to me" rather than answering simply yes / no after close consideration between two options i believe are almost equally important: I did find one thing particularly striking though: This is a sentiment i can call somewhat of a personal truth. I respect those who will partake in discussion very thoroughly, if their reasoning and logic holds some epistemological value. However, they do have to have reasoned views if i will consider them. In my more philosophical, discussion-based classes, (Theory of Knowledge, Philosophy, literary analysis, history) I find a lot of people cannot separate argument from person, so they are indeed intimidated to silence although they could provide interesting new views and arguments to a discussion, however eloquently or bluntly uttered the argument remains the same. It doesn't matter who presents an argument, the arguments and views hold importance in a discussion, not people. I discuss to broaden my horizons and widen my perspectives, culminating in me constantly wanting to re-examine my pre-held dispositions. That may lead to a change in sentiment or not. Either way, my views are re-examined critically. There are few arenas where you can thank and complement someone's commitment in uttering their views, and then examine these views critically. That makes you look two-faced due to the perception that when someone disagrees with your views, they attack you as a person. I wish less people would be intimidated by a personally perceived threshold for participating in true discussion: for the sake of discussion, not mission, propagating personal views or attacking people. all in all, 20 minutes well spent :P