Sentences with phrase «so at least things»

So at least things are looking up in one way for a team that is gutting itself of all talent to cut costs.

Not exact matches

So things may not be quite as complicated for many publishers — at least, not yet anyway.

At the very least, you can arrange things so you won't repeat the same mistake.

Ratner suggests owning shares with secure dividends so at least you get paid while you wait for things to turn.

There are a lot of things we can blame Donald Trump for, but the Republican presidential candidate has accomplished at least one thing of value: By lying so repeatedly and enthusiastically, he has managed to convince the New York Times that it needed to be more skeptical.

In business, we have a terrible tradition going back at least as far as Frederick Taylor (yes, the «Taylorism» Taylor) that jobs are things done by employees, but designed by their so - called superiors.

But the Bank of Canada seems to be getting a handle on things, at least over the past year or so.

So you're not profitable in the model for at least three to five years, and then what you would hope is that you can start doing licenses for shoes, bags, things like that and make your money.

The agency has been trying to make this better, or at least it has issued a report about making it better, but FDA approval is by its very nature anti-Valley, the opposite of moving fast and breaking things — which is why so many health trackers and similar devices (even apps) are very careful about their claims.

But at least right now, things really don't look so bad.

The complete article is chock full of other suggestions, including specifying what type of feedback you're after (so as to avoid your team telling you about things you don't have the time or power to fix) and most importantly, actually acting on at least some of what they tell you.

So long as we're aware that social media doesn't turn into long - term happiness, we'll always withdraw from it — at least temporarily — to do things that will give us those long - term rewards.

Broad Listening, on the other hand, claims that it can identify why people do things, or at least give the insights into why, so that a human can figure it out completely.

Meanwhile, more advertising than ever is viewed voluntarily, and comes with things like «Like» buttons and view counts so marketers can't ignore their duty to be, at the very least, entertaining.

And so in 2008 a guy named Satoshi Nakamoto or at least that's what he goes by invented a thing called bollocked chain technology.

Even when things in the alternative space go wrong, they tend to do so at times when at least some other assets are doing well.

«There are so many different things that could go wrong [on the world stage] if they are handled wrong diplomatically — or at least handled normally,» explains Vox's Zack Beauchamp.

Chinese officials seem to systematically decline requests for comments, local sources are willing to provide information on condition of anonymity only, while leaked documents remain unverified.Despite this lack of clarity, here's what's known so far.Effects on TradingThe most important thing we know for sure is that Chinese bitcoin exchanges will be closing down, or at least exiting China.

If I, a mere mortal, can at least think of a better way, why could the all powerful thing not make it so?

There are so many congregations doing the same thing the same way every single week — and the same way as so many other congregations — that people become starved for something, ANYTHING that's at least a change from the monotony.

Believing in God does not cost any thing, so why not believe or at least try too.

So at least to some, one would think they have a view that man has dominion over all other living things.

The main thing I didn't like about the video — at least until I got the point of it — was that all the Christians in it looked so miserable!

So the first thing I have to do is see this thing called prejudice in my mind, or at least see that it is possibly there.

So you believe at least TWO things by faith (i.e. without evidence): 1) God exists 2) the God of the Holy Bible is real, and all the rest are second - rate.

This is the thing we're all so desperate to see — at least I am — that God is there for us in our sorrow.

But we're not so sure he put away childish things when he became a man, or at least a sociologist.

So to me it doesn't mean (at least in my own life) that I'm not going to work or go to church or whatever but I don't have nearly as much faith in these things as I have in what happened on the cross.

Hundreds of faculty signed a public statement of support, and dozens of letters arrived daily, reflecting a deeply felt need to be grateful for something at a time when, at least on the national scene, there were so few things one could be grateful for.

It causes more harm than it ever does good so just stop it and talk about sensible things or at least more probable things that might have a positive effect on others.

Lem me see here, according to your holy book your God personally ordered more infant killings than all American abortion doctors combined, ordered the annihilation of half a dozen civilizations, routinely taunted and tortured humanity, introduced evil into the world then blamed the things he created for it (even though he's supposed to be omniscient and omnipotent), then abandoned humanity for at least a couple thousand years while making plans to come back and slaughter 2/3 of Earth's inhabitants so that he can judge them and throw most of them into a torturous hell for all of eternity... for not being able to overcome the nature your book says he gave them... Just so he can have non-free will - having cloud gnomes sing his praises for eternity.

In the philosophical field there has been the strong assumption that any perfect thing must already have all possible values (at least for its specific ontological status), so that any change must be for the worse.

It is too difficult to give up everything, and so we take the easy way out, and leave things the way they are, or at least sift through the hay - stack of our beliefs with a needle, when we need a pitch - fork or a fork - lift.

So if we do not choose to help make things worse, we can at least have a good conscience about resigning from responsible participation in the world.

Trying to insert god into scientific theories is only setting yourself up for science to prove you wrong in time, so how about you try and look at things with a fresh perspective and consider the possibility that god (or at least the version of god you have in mind) has a very low probability of existing.

Perhaps the culture of religion (at least as I have experienced it) so muddies our thinking concerning this thing called love.

Funny thing, there is not «act of God» in insurance policies as I had previously believed, so at least from a legal standpoint, God doesn't exist.

Clive, you point out how others often don't understand what Jesus was saying; but while Jesus often labors to try and make things clear to the unbeliever («Oh, you of little faith) or at the very least the author tries to make it clear for us in retrospect (At the time they didn't understand that he spoke of this...), in this case Jesus switches from something that might be figurative to essentially say «no, I seriously mean this» and it concludes not with Jesus saying «don't go away, this is what I actually mean» but confirming that people would refuse to accept that God intended for them to actually fill themselves with the life that He offered so they stopped following hiat the very least the author tries to make it clear for us in retrospect (At the time they didn't understand that he spoke of this...), in this case Jesus switches from something that might be figurative to essentially say «no, I seriously mean this» and it concludes not with Jesus saying «don't go away, this is what I actually mean» but confirming that people would refuse to accept that God intended for them to actually fill themselves with the life that He offered so they stopped following hiAt the time they didn't understand that he spoke of this...), in this case Jesus switches from something that might be figurative to essentially say «no, I seriously mean this» and it concludes not with Jesus saying «don't go away, this is what I actually mean» but confirming that people would refuse to accept that God intended for them to actually fill themselves with the life that He offered so they stopped following him.

I believe that the truth of things is always itching to be told, so it seems that perhaps some things would be made public, or at least include all parties involved.

Whitehead seems rather to deny that these things really are new at all — at least he seems to say so explicitly in the little Nature and Life....

You do not understand everything the Christian church teaches, you say, and some things that you think you do understand you do not believe, but you at least see enough in the kind of faith and life for which Christianity stands so that you would like to do something about it.

It is so easy for people to judge, but till you have something like this happens in our life, then we can understand, my son ended his life 6 years ago, we had no sign of anything, any of all the parents or not parents pointing the finger at this family, shame on you cuz, things happen when you least expect them, if we had known what to do, do you think we would not have done it.

How exactly is it «the truth» if it gets so many things wrong, like when the end of the world is going to occur on at least 3 occasions?

Then again, it's also something that is at least partly ideologically in - line with Planned Parenthood, so maybe the official account was looking to shake things up.

Hegel was wrong, so far as I can tell, about most things, but he was right at least about this: the movement of thought is, in the sense just mentioned, dialectical.

So all this discussion says is we all believe in at least one thing the Bible says.

So each one of us, even the least important, can add as he or she speaks of the church and its faith, experto crede, «believe one who knows» — one who may not know much, to be sure, but who at any rate has found that life grows continually more meaningful, richer, more integrated in the things that really matter, more adequately adjusted to the divine reality called God, and more sensitive to others who are met each day.

The thought of every piece of private property — inherent in each piece as such — is at least turned against all wealthier private property in the form of envy and the urge to reduce things to a common level, so that this envy and urge even constitute the essence of competition.

So at least this guy knows there are things like automobiles and electricity and gay rights, but aside from that he's still pushing a 1500 year old philosophy about unknown people and special beings in the clouds.

We all in practice assume that, when speakers raise their hands, thereby (among other things) changing the spatial location of the electrons in them, they do so because they decided to do so; or, if we take the speaker's hand gestures to be involuntary, we at least assume that they occurred because of points the speaker had decided to make.