The worst person you know

Gerontophilia.

Depends on what positions she offers Trump.

That is not fair, she has only shown two people she has profiled her asshole. At least that we know of.

Prince Philip getting blown by Olivia Nuzzi

When you nut, but Olivia Nuzzi keeps sucking

Olivia Nuzzi watching Cocoon with a towel on the bed

Olivia Nuzzi was doing journalism the right way.

by Ezra Klein

Free speech is more than me being allowed to say what I want. Everyone also has to like it and tell me I'm a smart and handsome boy

If you need an example of Marx's theory of tendency of the rates of profit to fall, look no further than AI. Tech companies pooring billions into capital for no profit just so they don't fall behind the others pooring billons into capital for no profit.

Usually how i end up.

The often do that, have a category that sort of cuts across the others.

Pedestrian also goes with humdrum, everyday and banal.

Zebra with barcode, IBM logo and rugby top (strippy things)

School with philosphy, approach and method.

Usually it is one that has been used before.

Also the pharamacutical manufactures don't do any research to find new things like this.

They wait until someone else discovers it and then lock the manufacturing process behind patents and mark up the drugs 1000%+

Once the patents are about to expire, they find a new use and lock it up again.

It will still be methicillin resistant, it just isn't resistant to this potenial new antibiotic.

Not much of a logic puzzle when it has so few constraints that there is often a non-unique solution.

YouTube video by Albert Eard Sweyn Alex Jones ''...Trump sucking ding dong...better than WW3...'' (Syria 4/14/18)

We can at least be sure that, while there maybe photos, there is no video.

youtu.be/6Ye5A3tqGoY?...

10,000 $1 bets at +5000 is only a 500,000 payout, not much for a large company.

If you make it burdensome you will just drive it underground again. There is no reason online bets couldn't all be collected in a central database and monitored for unusual patterns.

If that is an actually concern a better way if dealing with it would be better tracking of who is placing bets, as the risk people making pseudoanonymus bets.

That is the risk they take in the business they chose. They could easily write it off as free advertising. They drew attention to the $5000 bet at +9000 with thr intention of free advertsing.

Tens of millions is nothing compared to what crosses books every week.

I am guessing you are a Lions fan upset about the call.

Large betting companies don't need to rig games to cover their losses on one off bets as they have large cash reserves and will win on average over the long-term.

You are assigning meaning to a low probability event because of the unusal circumstanace it occured in. There are thounds of equally unlikely bets made each week that don't get paid out and nobody notices.

They make their money on the precieved promise you will strick it rich by luck, all the while they are making a consistent small stream of money, so they might deem it worth eating the occassional big payout.

They are bet broker, they are organising covoluted multiparty bets you can't make yourself

Anyone that bet on another player scoring the first touchdown loses. The risk is offset overall bets.

The betting company will shift the line to meet the incoming bets, unless they have chosen to eat it for the promotion, in which case they will payout.

The quarterback under center motioning is an unsual situation as normally they are motioned from shotgun.

Probably cos none of the field refrees and umpires were aware of this weird technicallity. The backfield players can recieve the snap and motion. On the line of scrimmage players can not recieve the snap and must remain stationary for a second after a shift.

You can make the same bet ever single week. You can bet on just about any player being the one that catches the first touchdown. So this logic would apply to literally every first touchdown scored.

It is only because of an exemption they are allowed to recieve the snap.

A backfield player is allowed to go into motion, but a player on the line of scrimmage has to shift, and must become stationary for one second afterwards.

Apparently, the quarteback under centre must shift.

Goff just violated an obscure rule. If he had been in shotgun this wouldn't be illegal, but when the quarterback is under centre they are techically being covered by the tackles and hence is on the line of scrimage.

The NFL has a seperate set of investigations for this, they don't give on field punishments.

Like lets look at the Lions/Eagles.

Lions are +130, Eagles -142.

If i split $10,000 with 4256.07 on Lions and 5743.93 on Eagles, i would end up with $9788.96 either way. So it is a $211.04 profit for the bookie.

That is how bookies make money, taking a small amount of cash with each bet.