Well, I'm a "musician" in the loosest sense. I played in school orchestras my whole school life, but once I graduated, I haven't. I have played in garage bands and whatnot. So to answer the question: Yes, orchestras really do need conductors, in the same way that any organization needs a leader, whether it's a musical leader, or military leader, or a business leader. The conductors do a lot, more than is possible to discuss here. But I suspect if you were to throw 50 talented and professional musicians together, using just well-known sheet music, and some form of automatic tempo (metronome, altho much music changes tempo in a way that a metronome can't really control), you would have a cacophony.
I love Hello Kitty. I'm a guy, and people think I'm weird cause of it, but I can't help it. I don't know why I like her, but it is probably the simple lines depicting such a cute character. And besides, the "backstory" is rather charming and innocent. The world could use more of this.
Only near the end does the cat finally close its eyes. With that almost human look of exasperation at 1:07 ("why me!"), I'd like to guess it was just short of annoyance.
Some of them are valid (that's a subjective opinion), like "cloud computing". Some less so, and will likely remain slang ("flexitarian"). I'm not adverse to seeing new words, and there are plenty of examples of slang or other specialized words becoming mainstream.
Where I live, bicyclists simply ignore traffic laws. They blow thru red lights, ignore stop signs, don't signal, wrong way on one-way roads, etc. Dunno how it is elsewhere, but here, bicyclists have to follow the same traffic laws as automobiles. Thank God I haven't hit one (yet?). So yes, even tho the title is inflammatory, I agree with it.
I'm not the kind of person who posts "FAKE" comments on everything, but I do question the reality of this particular one.
There's no characteristic swelling, redness or other indications that this was recently done, so it would mean it's fully healed. It takes at least two weeks for a tattoo to completely heal. It is near the arch of the foot, so his full weight isn't on that spot, but even so, did he not walk the entire time it was healing? Even if it healed properly without damage while walking, it will still wear out before long.
Your foot (and palms of your hands) are bad places for tattoos, because the skin is replaced much quicker on those areas than most other places, just due to normal wear-and-tear.
I'll say this straight up - I'm opposed to public libraries allowing access to porn. I'm probably considered "conservative", so keep that in mind if you feel like arguing against me for below.
That said, I work for an organization who supports a public library, and they allow this. They even have people who will use the library printers, for a nominal fee, for this purpose.
The basis of the argument is that this behavior is protected by 1st amendment rights. They're not allowed/supposed to censor anything. That includes porn. Certain types of porn, of course, is clearly defined illegal, so there's no way even the 1st amendment can protect that.
You can't have it both ways. You can't prohibit people from accessing porn while permitting other types of "morally questionable" material. I hope people here are familiar with the issues around books like "Catcher in the Rye" and so forth. With the exception of that material which is clearly illegal, who is the person to make the judgement on whether the porn is morally offensive? Some people might consider even relatively benign material, like lingerie catalogs, to be morally objective.
There's no characteristic swelling, redness or other indications that this was recently done, so it would mean it's fully healed. It takes at least two weeks for a tattoo to completely heal. It is near the arch of the foot, so his full weight isn't on that spot, but even so, did he not walk the entire time it was healing? Even if it healed properly without damage while walking, it will still wear out before long.
Your foot (and palms of your hands) are bad places for tattoos, because the skin is replaced much quicker on those areas than most other places, just due to normal wear-and-tear.
That said, I work for an organization who supports a public library, and they allow this. They even have people who will use the library printers, for a nominal fee, for this purpose.
The basis of the argument is that this behavior is protected by 1st amendment rights. They're not allowed/supposed to censor anything. That includes porn. Certain types of porn, of course, is clearly defined illegal, so there's no way even the 1st amendment can protect that.
You can't have it both ways. You can't prohibit people from accessing porn while permitting other types of "morally questionable" material. I hope people here are familiar with the issues around books like "Catcher in the Rye" and so forth. With the exception of that material which is clearly illegal, who is the person to make the judgement on whether the porn is morally offensive? Some people might consider even relatively benign material, like lingerie catalogs, to be morally objective.