Not really, look up nalbinding. That old way of knitting used one thumb and a needle instead of two needles. all those knobs could have been used in place of your left thumb.
Man, i looked up nalbinding. It's knitting, 7000 years old, romans made their socks and mittens that way, it's not crochet, of course, but it's knitting. Apparently it was only named nalbinding in the 70s, it was just knit before.
Thinking of those two clowns at the hardware store, clearly following me around, very unsubtly acting like they were sure i was there to shoplift. They kept asking what i was looking (which was actually non specific christmas gifts) so I started throwing out meth ingredients, phosphorous, ammonia, neo citran daytime, sodium hydroxide, caustic soda, lye....I know that went right over their heads because they found me a gallon of pure crystal form dry lye. Anyways, she bagged half the stuff up without ringing it through. I'm sure i started a rumour in town, when they told their husbands bout the big biker looking dude asking for obscure chemicals. Took the lye though, that's stuffs hard to find these days.
Wikipedia and this sort of thing.....Yknow the article on saddles says that stirrups weren't invented till the 9th century AD but the article on riding boots said the heel, to prevent your foot going through the stirrup, dates to 5th century BC.
I have a freezer from 1953, works fine. It's appliances made after @2000 that shit the bed in 5 years or less. No, it's not survivorship bias, there's a certain time period you don't see anything survived from.
Doesn't matter, that was just an example. People get "institutionalized" in both government and corporate positions, the difference is the corporate ones have little power over the general public, next thing you know you have government representatives running around trying to make peoples lives hell for making clotted cream. If that sounds like a weird example, it is, definitely.
good. Enforcement should not decide law. that is a clear conflict of interest, in their favor. For an extreme example, you absolutely don't want a police officer deciding citizen's rights.
Yeah the main trade off is federal organizations have become so determinate that pretty soon, and it's come close already, they're just gonna support a dictator enable their internal politics.
Why do you people present this is as an answer to the previous statement? EVERYONE knows this at this point, it doesn't change thee previous statement in the slightest. It's like when people smugly respond "that's not how free speech works"....no, not according to everyone who prefers to limit it, it ain't. You're rebutting someone's principles with regulations made by people don't care for that specific philosophy and saying more about yourself than you think.
I'm just saying what is. If you want what I think should be, I'm a non Randian libertarian. Big on personal responsibility and the risk of consequences and consequences of risk, less on being a whiny bitch about everything.
That's right. Nothing is a human right. Many humans have rights outlined in their countries constitutions but even those are easily stomped on with usually little consequence
Which is why you execute them immediately, not 20-30 years later. I don't want to hear about innocent people in jail that long, I don't even want to hear about guilty people in jail very long. Just kill em and move on regardless, it's really less cruel.
Well, I'll give you this. Most communists don't actually admit they want to drag everyone down to their level. The honesty is refreshing. That's not sarcasm, this is rare as hell.
Yeah I watched the video. it's knitting dude.