Many movies today are shot in central Europe, because costs are cheaper all-around. Movies shot in Hungary often have a person's first name as Attila. Attila the Hun was hated everywhere, except Hungary, where he is considered a national hero, hence the name Attila still being common today. I saw a mainstream movie made in Hungary (I can't remember the name) that had 8 Attilas in the credits.

All Marvel movies have another scene half-way through the credits, so you should stay to see it if you are watching a Marvel Movie. Also, all Marvel movies have a cameo with Stan Lee, one of the originators of the Marvel universe, so you may be interested to watch for that. Alfred Hitchcock had cameos in all his later movies.

You can magnetize the hook, if you want, by passing a magnet over it several times in the same direction (not back and forth). Pass it over the hook as many times as needed to get the magnetization you need. You can do this with any iron-based metal object, like the inserts of screw guns that often lose their ability to hold the screw bit securely after years of use.

I agree with you completely - technically and philosophically, there is no present for the exact reason you mentioned, the future immediately becomes the past. However, in order to understand the human condition, the present refers to something that we are currently engaged in, until we finish doing it. Thank goodness - we'd be lost without that concept. As I understand it, most of the lower animals live like that - once the future becomes the past, it is of no consequence to them. Only the ever approaching future has any meaning to them.

I think this is a strange question. Our country was founded substantially by English colonists. We started out like the child of the parent who grew into adulthood. Over time we absorbed many other nationalities and became larger and more powerful than our parent, but retained our original method of communicating. We have changed so much that we hardly resemble our parent. Children learn the language of their parents, so this is a no-brainer question. What would be the alternative? Deciding we should change our common language into some other language and go through the very difficult process of learning another one? That would be a stupid idea. Most people would not be able to handle that.

English itself evolved from several other languages, so this question is like asking why doesn't the UK speak one of those languages?

I have problems with the conclusion.

First, in the video clip they showed the T.Rex was clearly walking fast, not running. Its steps were almost pondering. When running fast, the feet appear to hit the ground lightly, then push off with force. Not so in the clip.

Second, have you ever wondered how horses can run 45mph on those spindly legs? It looks impossible. Their lower legs are not much thicker than our calves. The T.Rex looks like a running machine. Perhaps it could only run for short distances, but that is not the same as not being able to run at all.

It bothers me to think of how easy it is for this to happen. Now that I am an older person myself, I realize that perhaps most older people recognize how the younger generation is, well, frankly stupid sometimes. Recently, it has been determined that the human brain doesn't fully mature until the age of 26, so that explains a lot of it, but still. That's a long time to be potentially stupid (not counting the many people who seem to remain stupid as they get older). And with the proliferation of video clips and gifs online showing young people making some unbelievably stupid decisions makes it look even worse. It makes me wonder - were we that stupid sometimes when we were that age? There just was not any video existing - permanently on the web - to prove it. I did some "crazy" things at that age, but since "I knew what I was doing," nothing happened and I got away without damaging myself physically or mentally, therefore not appearing to be stupid. But if anything had gone wrong, I would have been identified as being a stupid person. I had no idea of that part. Phew!

So I am wondering and waiting for any reports of just such eye damage.

I hope I am not misunderstanding what you wrote, as I believe you are responding to the original post of this thread, which stated that "they" don't read what they wrote before they post it. While they are writing, they are in present tense, but once they are finished, the act of writing the sentence or paragraph is now in the past tense. A sentence is no longer in the present if it is already written and no one is reading it. The mental processes used for writing the sentence are no longer happening. If, upon re-reading what was written, something needs to be corrected or changed, then the process of writing the sentence re-enters the present tense.

As an analogy, while you are reading these sentences, you are in the present, but once you are through reading, the act of reading the sentences is in the past, unless you go back and read them again.

I hope I have not missed something, but when you are responding to a previous post in a thread as long as this one (9 pages), it helps if you quote what you are responding to directly.

Gives new meaning to the phrase "having the trots."

"Does this dress make me look fat?"
There actually is a worse response possible than the usual response, as I once found out.

Sixteen years ago, I accompanied a good customer of mine (as a carpenter) on some errands. She was a little overweight and tried on this dress and asked, "How do I look?" I thought it didn't look good. You know how some cows have large black areas on a white background? Her dress had large black areas on a white background, and all I could think to say was "It makes you look like a cow," not realizing what I was saying. Wrong word. I immediately regretted it. One word you never use to describe a woman, if you want to live another day. The look on her face cannot be described. She bought it anyway. She later stiffed me for $2000. Oh, well, live and learn. So I guess that's -2000 points for me.

Sorry, but I think all three forms can have a relevant meaning in this discussion.

"Do people read what they wrote..." could mean, do people read what they just wrote, that is, do people read what they wrote immediately after they've done the writing. This is part of the active process of the writing itself, after completing a sentence or paragraph. It concerns checking what has already been written before they consider it to be finished and moving on. It could take place in the middle of the post, or at the end. A present tense action concerning a past tense action. (It could also mean, do they read what they wrote at some later time - after posting, next day, or whatever, too late for correction.)

"Do people read what they write?" means, do people read what they write, as they are doing they writing, and not before they consider it ready for posting. This is a correct-as-you-go approach, as opposed to the above phrase, which refers to re-reading a sentence or a paragraph that they had thought had been written as they wished, and are going back over it, checking for accuracy. This is all present tense.

"Did people read what they wrote?" means did the people read what they had written after they think they have finished, or at some later time. This is similar to the first phrase, but is all past tense - they think the writing is finished and that they are no longer actively involved in the writing, unless they discover that they have to go back for correction.

All three phrases can be relevant. I myself use all three, from time to time. I correct-as-I-go, I pause to check what I have written, and I re-read the entire post before hitting the send button.

There were so many mistakes in that post that I just assumed that it was in jest, as a way to point out the problems we are all faced with. At least I hope so. Perhaps it might have been better if he put "LOL" at the end of the post.

I bought Tamrac's largest sling pack (B&H no longer sells them - perhaps Tamrac no longer makes them), because the swing-around seemed like a good idea at the time - a genius idea actually. However, with only one shoulder strap to bear the weight, it becomes tiring after a while. With a sling pack, you cannot change shoulders for a more balanced trip. I notice in the photo in the link, that they are wearing heavy Winter coats. I imagine that would make it less tiring. Perhaps if I went out with it several times a week I would develop the large shoulder muscles required for such a continuous load. I've been a carpenter all my life, so I am not a weakling, in that regard. I only use it on short trips now, or on occasions where I can take it off periodically. It is unusually convenient, though.

It's too bad it didn't include the part of how looking directly at the Sun with the naked eye can make you blind. When you're looking at the Sun directly for a while, everything seems all right. But the next morning you wake up permanently blind, because it took all night for the scar tissue to cover your retina. The retina is burned that bad. You become blind while peacefully sleeping. Creepy. And scary that you don't know a thing about it when looking at the Sun the day before.

It looks like you still don't get the point. Many of the people who will take advantage of these tips will have improvement of some kind. Anyone who would think this absolves them of getting some real exercise would probably not be getting real exercise at a later point anyway. There will always be, probably, a substantial percentage of people who think this way with every form of claimed advantageous method, technique, diet, or supplement. This is a given with human nature. It's the rest who can, and will, find use for this information. I can't imagine anyone doing all these exercises methodically over a long period of time, which is what it would take to get major changes. If they were that motivated, they would go to a gym. These tips are, to repeat myself, meant to be a pick-and-choose set of options for an individual to use at their discretion, in order to relieve some of the discomfort that arises from working at a desk.

And you can't compare the many supplements and supposed medications out there that are 100% ineffective with something like this that has real value. They're not the same.

I don't think the claim here is for the kind of physical fitness we can get from the gym, walking or running outside, or being engaged in various sports. The idea is to keep the blood pumping, to engage the mind in other activities than just routine rote work. Sitting on one's butt for hours a day is famous for all kinds of physical problems and mental compromise. Even a few of these exercises done a couple of times once in a while will improve one's physical condition and state of mind, so I don't think the idea warrants the condemnation you give it.

The exercises shown here were not meant to be a continuous regimen. They were not meant to ALL be done every time we are at the desk. The idea is to do some of them occasionally, whenever we need a break, whenever we could use a little distraction while doing our work at the same time, whenever we might feel tiredness, aches or pain, or other discomfort creeping up on us. Completely optional, limited every time by our level of interest, and available time - other things often take up 100% of our attention, so this will always be limited.