Aashenfox

I'm that bored, I fixed it all up for you.

Vinyl wrap on interior bits you can do yourself, and it's actually not that much of a pain in the arse. Watch youtube video tutorials and go for it, you only need the other half's high power hairdryer and the material (some gloves would help too if you are heat sensitive, if you have hands of asbestos, don't bother), and you'll be fine. I did it on my BMW myself, brushed aluminium all the interior trim pieces, first time ever doing it, and got a completely oem result. My wife was really impressed, lol.

I definitely couldn't!! I'm very comfortable for Greece, but I'm still earning half what I was earning in the UK 15 years ago! It's another world over here. If I did my job in the UK and was prepared to make a fair amount of sacrifices I could maybe just about do it. On what I earn over here, no way in the world. I'll need to do something on my own to ever have a chance of making that kind of money. Plus I'm cursed to be a terminal spender, I'd never have the money sitting around when it came to service time, etc. Nah, I'd need to be FABULOUSLY wealthy or I wouldn't bother, there are plenty of exciting cars for regular money that wouldn't need those sacrifices.

This is how I justify it (do I want to be that guy who lives to work, if only for a time), but really, isn't that just a self-justification for being lazy? I dunno. There's a philosophical topic.

Sarnie (Liam), top poster on 350Z, made a similar promise to himself to own a Lambo before he was 30 ... he made it and I think he's got a McLaren now Are we talking a used £70k Gallardo or a brand new Aventador? I'd be more than happy with the high mileage Gallardo Well done Liam, live the dream and grin like a cheshire cat on behalf of we, who can only stare into empty wallets and aspire. /sigh. How did he make his money by the way, if you don't mind me asking and he doesn't mind you sharing? Just curious. My problem is I've been just above comfortable all my life, which has made me lazy, no motivation to go through the hard work to push on and 'make it', I'm often afraid I'm going to be that forever, although it seems somewhat ungrateful to say it like that, I have a lot to be grateful for and I know it.

Don't say stuff like that, I'm liable to do it.

True'nuff. I've been writing a sci fi epic for about 15 years now yet I haven't actually put a single word down on paper, though I've written chapter 1 a few times over the years but always discarded it entirely. I realised every time that I need to know my universe more intimately before I can write authoritatively about it, so I spend a great deal of time sitting and thinking about the setting, the characters, and for example, what their childhoods were like, even minor characters, and building a universe in my mind. I reckon I need about another 15 years before I actually start writing, but basically when it's ready, I'll be able to pull stories out of it at will, they'll write themselves because I'll know how a character or faction would react to anything because I know everything about them. Large epic story arcs, with lots of subtle sub plots, etc. I want to write the next Lord of the Rings, but in space! But that's about as likely as fulfilling another promise I made to myself aged 15, that I would own a Lamborghini by the time I was 40. I've got exactly 44 days left and I have to be honest, it ain't looking likely.

Rarely (actually never in creative writing) is an adjective chosen for such a simple reason, and certainly not when referring to the colour of something. If the colour of the car was meaningless it would not be referred to at all. That's technical though, not creative, any writer will tell you it's simply good policy to leave out details if they don't change anything in the story, this is because human beings naturally try to associate meaning with EVERYTHING, so if you refer often to things that are irrelevant, your audience compartmentalises the information (in anticipation of needing to recall it later) which is then never used. This is one of the phenomena that leads to a story feeling like it rambles. If I did go to the trouble of pointing out the colour of the car, you can be sure there's a complex reason for it, I would have decided the car was red because of some facet of the personality of the owner, but it would be a reason which will make sense when recalled at a later time by the reader. This is one of the most important things about good writing, you should have a fleshed out universe in which your characters live, where you know more than ten times as much as will be shared with the audience, this is how you create rich and believable interactions between characters). You'll find even the most 'pulp' style writing is this convoluted in the mind of the authors. So, to be fair, your teachers were right. The car is never red just because it is. Doesn't change the fact that the kids still chat shite and can't form a sentence, jus sayin', lol

FWIW guys, here are some cheap cylinders (for pre-06), these exact parts are in my car already, haven't been in for long, so can't really review, but prices are unbelievable... Brand new slave for 20 quid: http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/231513647621 Brand new master for 30 quid: http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/231543954000

In my version of the universe, there is a group of psychic beings (think Minority Report) who identify people like this to me, so my minions can execute them (or sterilise as required) and prevent further contamination of the gene pool.

I concur. Doom game of 2016, witcher 3 nice, but slightly long winded, I couldn't get through it either. Still play GTAV online on PC fairly frequently, its the perfect sandbox. I'm currently playing the crap out of pro evolution soccer 2017 on PS4. PES 2017 is MAJESTIC, the best football game ever by miles. The master league is the best its ever been. I play on legend difficulty against cpu.

I knew I was forgetting another language I speak, lol. I'm 1/8th Jock myself, in fact, I'm clan Maclaine (my father's side got morphed into Maclean over the years, but we are directly descended apparently) of Lochbuie for whatever that's worth. *pulls out his bagpipes and rattles out 'Celebrate'* To be honest, I haven't spent any amount of time in Scotland despite the roots (I'd like to, one day), just a few days on visits here and there, but I do actually speak Jockinese, my mum had a Scots husband for a while back in the day, the tight-arsed belligerent git. You know, he used to make me buy him back a whole pack of fags if I asked for just one.

We should give seminars on arrogance together. Idiot is from the word Idiotis, meaning an individual. Its usage as a slur in English is not due to mis-translation, since the original meaning is 'someone who stands alone, not part of the whole or the body', or rather, to take it to its english meaning, someone with whom nobody agrees, they stand alone - an idiot. So the translation is pretty much direct in this case. For example, when I buy a car in Greece, I can buy from an 'emporos' - a dealer (hence our word emporium), or an idiotis (an independent individual). That the word Idiotis has no negative connotation in Greek is certainly true, but the meaning is clear 'one who stands alone'. If you want an example of a word that is used totally incorrectly, then look at apocalypse. The word apokalypsi in Greek means discovery, the removal of a covering, and it always has. Our mis-translation has to do with bad translations of the Bible over the years. I know loads of these (naturally since I speak fluent greek and english), but no other springs to mind currently. Not really sure what this has to do with acronym vs initialisation though, which are both sub-categories of abbreviation and the definitions of which are not debatable, one is said and used as a noun, the other is just a series of letters!!

I don't know what to say, I'm welling up! Rock, an acronym is an intialisation that becomes spoken as a word. As Coldel pointed out, NASA, because we say it as NASSER (not as En, Ay, Ess, Ay) is an acronym. If we said it as the sounds of the letters, it would be an initialisation, as HSBC (aych, ess, bee, see) is an initialisation. If we said HSBC as Huzbuk, then it would be an acronym. I'm not talking about the pronunciation of NASA, i'm talking about what qualifies an acronym compared to an abbreviation, i'll grant you they can over lap however, it still has to spell out a word that has meaning. NASA has no meaning in this current form as USA has no meaning as an abbreviation as they are not used as verbs or adjectives. It has no verb form or adjective form. Therefore it's just an abbreviation. An abbreviation is a catch-all term to mean any word that has been shortened in any way, be it by initialisation (and therefore potentially an acronym), or removal of some letters in favour of an apostrophe to make the word shorter to say or write. Examples: An abbreviation which is an initialisation, which is also an acronym is NASA. An abbreviation which is an initialisation but not an acronym is HSBC An abbreviation that is not an initialisation (and therefore cannot be an acronym either) is lb for pounds, or Dr. for doctor. This does not change the definition of an acronym, and the clue is in the greek of the word. 'onym' is a name, think of syn'onym' direct translation from Greek 'like name'. So an acronym is an initialisation that has become the name of a noun (not necessarily a Proper name, not to be confused) and been adopted as a word. An initialisation is just a bunch of letters said in an order, but still just as much of an abbreviation. Hence HSBC could only be an acronym if we said it as 'HuzBuk', it is then an initialisation that represents the name of a brand new noun, or in this case, organisation 'huzbuk', that would be the defining characteristic that would then make it an acronym. All acronyms started off as initialisations until someone decided how to pronounce them as a complete word and then spread that usage until it became so common that the initialisation became an acronym. As you see, it is actually ALL about the pronunciation of the abbreviation, whether or not it is an acronym. some people will try to say all initialisations as acronyms to make remembering them easier, one example from software is the abbreviation in auditing 'EGA' - Evidence gathering activity. I ALWAYS say it as an initialisation (Ee, Gee, Ay), because that's what is, but some colleagues make it an acronym when they pronounce it 'egger'. If this usage ever becomes the more common, then EGA ceases to be an initialisation and becomes an acronym. P.S. There are no errors in the Oxford English Dictionary unless they have been introduced recently.

Not (based on theatrical version, my opinion, intimations were red herrings). EDIT: If you don't want to know exactly how the movie handles the question cos you've never seen it or don't remember, there's no need to read this until after you've watched the Director's cut.

One of the most artful, meaningful epics on what it is to be human, ever made. I'm worried that no.2 will not be able to do justice to its predecessor. If an alien came to me and said 'what does it mean to be human?', I'd send him to watch Bladerunner and Watchmen and then report back if he had any questions.

Greek also has both formality and gender, it's a minefield every day to not be rude by accident when you are learning, thankfully it becomes instinctive quite quickly. I think countries with the formal/informal thing are quite used to English speakers getting it wrong and hold back their offense. Even the arrogant French who won't speak English to you despite speaking it fluently!! Another language product of a proud culture.

Well done to her! The lack of mathematical structure is the same thing that makes English both one of the easiest languages to learn, but also one of the hardest to master. You can say just about anything and be understood, but the nuances to be absolutely correct are wild. We also have some great advantages that we don't differentiate between formal and informal, or assign gender to all nouns, but we have other equally complex nuances for the advanced student to master.

You are so right, I was so lucky to have been classically educated (Latin and English), and then learn Greek, such insight into all languages with these bases. I am grateful to the universe for this bit of luck on a daily basis. I speak decent French as well, but I'm getting rusty cos I haven't been for many years. My wife speaks 5 languages too, but she only studied for one (Greek (native), Turkish (father), English (me and spent 6 years in the UK), Italian (studied) and French (French school from 5 to 15)). In Europe, I'd say a great number of people speak more than one language effectively, possibly 50%. It's both good and bad luck to be born an English speaker, sure you already know the language of business, but you have little reason to learn another language and therefore many English people miss out on this valuable experience (learning and speaking a foreign language).

I don't know what to say, I'm welling up! Rock, an acronym is an intialisation that becomes spoken as a word. As Coldel pointed out, NASA, because we say it as NASSER (not as En, Ay, Ess, Ay) is an acronym. If we said it as the sounds of the letters, it would be an initialisation, as HSBC (aych, ess, bee, see) is an initialisation. If we said HSBC as Huzbuk, then it would be an acronym. Dialects aside, there is a right and a wrong way to not only speak, but also structure sentences. Yoda speak for example is often cited (except for some curious exceptions) as one of the purest formal forms of English, as the verb is placed last. This is a throwback from Latin, where every sentence was said as a story, also why Italian developed from it and sounds like singing. So yeh in Latin, you have a strict word order, subject, object, verb. First the star is introduced, then the other players or related objects, then lastly we find out what they are doing. It's a way of speaking that made for great orations (friends, romans, etc etc) and is called AN SOV language (sub - obj - vrb). English eventually developed to be AN SVO language because it is slightly more efficient and intuitive to the way the brain processes information, SVO languages are considered efficient because you don't have to wait til the end of the sentence to find out what the point is, Latin keeps you in suspense right til the end You start to see where culture plays a role in language, Latin which was a language that had great impact, evolved into the most artistically spoken language (Italian), this is their culture, to embellish, and don't they just, in everything! Johnny, with the ball, is playing - Latin structure, SOV. Johnny is playing with the ball - English structure - SVO. For interest value, discounting oriental languages cos I don't know crap about them, Greek was one of the earliest SVO languages, probably why it became the language of science, and to this day, the SOV style (storytelling style, verb last, as per yoda) is the most widely used grammar model, but only by a very small percentage. As English speakers, we are quite lucky that our language is flexible enough to switch between grammar models if we want to, although it sounds really weird sometimes, like the Johnny and the ball sentence above, you CAN say it SOV, but it doesn't sound 'right', however, one of Yoda's famous quotes "Around the survivors, a perimeter create!" is just a beautiful sentence. Greek for example, has no such flexibility, if you change the word order from what is natural you are immediately talking gibberish. Speaking of which, you guys seen this interesting anecdote, it's been popping up a lot lately... In English, the order of adjectives is curiously more important than in any other language. For example, you can say "a big, fat, hungry, green bear" in English, but you can't say "a green hungry fat big bear", it sounds like rubbish, or at best, unnatural. In Greek you can mess around with the adjective order as much as you want, it makes no difference. Curious this language business, eh?

It is said (but it might be an urban legend), that when the official language of America was being decided (I don't know at what point this was), that the decision was taken to use English over Greek, but only by a very few votes, the intellectuals thought it would be an opportunity to spread Greek more, because it was the language of Science. We may well all be speaking (at least basic) Greek now if that had happened.

I got one for you then, lets digress ever so slightly... The price of progress... I blame the internet for bad spelling and grammar, I already said that, but really, if you think about it, it's the price of progress. Nobody would ever say that the damage the internet has done to good spelling and grammar in EVERY language would negate the good that it has done. We all now hold in our hand (smartphones) virtually unlimited access to the entire repository of world knowledge (and you only use it to play Angry Birds while takinga crap? shame on you), and I'm giving the internet a kicking for ruining spelling and grammar? Seems rather petty, doesn't it... But this is it...language is important. Every language is a product of its culture. The English have umpteen descriptions for rain, the eskimos for snow, the Greeks have 4 times as many general words as most other european languages. How big a price are you prepared to pay for progress? Some say the next big enabler for the human race, and a big step toward World Peace would be to all speak a common language; already English has started to fill that role, becoming the language of business. While it is clear that the loss of grammar quality caused by the internet does not negate the good it does, or rather the PROGRESS it gave us, is the loss of culture surrounding languages worth it for the progress it would give us? If all of a sudden, all countries stop supporting their native language and switch everything to English... The productivity of the whole world would go shooting up within ten years, but is the loss of culture worth it? Waht's more important to you, our uniqueness or our ability to progress as a species? Then to bring that full circle, is the progress of the internet worth the loss of culture after all? Very round about and philosophical, but you get what I'm saying I hope. Tell a Greek that in 100 years his progeny will be speaking exclusively English and no Greek he'll tell you he hopes he doesn't live to see such a drastic loss of culture (and it would be, Greek is 4 times richer as a language than English).

I won't argue with you there, if I had the kind of money to do it right (I don't either), I'd FI, not a stupid fat bodykit.

You're not wrong there, which is why people like me (sometimes foolishly) try to hold on to the 'old ways', and eventually end up being behind the times and therefore wrong. Whatever is known by the majority is really what's important, as that gives you a better chance at being understood, much as it pains me to say it. We'll be back to olde english before long with people spelling words exactly as they please and there probably won't be any issue either.

If I couldn't make money in IT anymore, I'd go to teaching in a heartbeat, I'm sure its a nightmare, but fact is there is no nobler profession than trying to educate others. I do a lot of training at my job (training others how to use systems etc), and I enjoy it. Not sure what I'd do if I was a teacher in order to go to something else... Scientific research?