Slashdot Mirror

Leave Britney Alone!

Sorry.

Terror Alert Level Intense Orange Red

When is there ever going to be enough of a guarantee to make air travel "safe enough"? When the TSA finally says, "We're finally going to make air travel 100% safe - by banning all airplanes on flights..."?

It's a BBC 4-part documentary, about "how those in power have used Freud's theories to try and control the dangerous crowd in an age of mass democracy" and "explores the various ways that governments and corporations have utilized Freud's theories." It's amazingly eye-opening, going into modern PR, how advertising got women to smoke, and includes info about the Lehman Brothers, the Labor Party, the Clintons, use of focus groups...

Once you see it, you will grok why many politicians are amorphous flip-floppers, how advertisers and politicians are using our basic human nature and base psychology against us. You can catch the whole thing on Youtube.

Tetris: From Russia with Love https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

If you like video game history, this documentary has tons of insights into some of the early console wars and international issues that were overcome to bring a game outside of Russia to the rest of the world.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

All four parts are worth watching, however I consider part one to not only be thought provoking, but also life changing. It's certainly worth an hour of your time.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Yes, Minister.

A documentary that explains in solid musical terms why The Beatles were game changing.

Available on youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

It's worth watching (most episodes are on YouTube), especially alongside Wikipedia to see what has been discovered since airing of said episodes (which were circa 1977-1982) -- in many cases, actual answers have been found to things previously unsolved or deemed unexplainable. Plus, how can you go wrong with Leonard Nimoy as the host?

The Untold History of the United States is a great documentary, although there is very little in it that is "untold". My interest tapered off considerably during the last 3-4 episodes (may reflect my age) but a worldwide perspective on WWII and the cold war was very interesting.

The Vice Guide to North Korea is very dated now, but it intrigued me enough that I visited the country in 2014. So many things have changed since 2008 that many of the details are no longer accurate, but may be worthwhile to watch after watching a more recent DPRK documentary.

[Plug] I made a short video of my DPRK trip in 2014. There are far better ones on Youtube (Aram Pan has done several), but this one is mine.

The Untold History of the United States is a great documentary, although there is very little in it that is "untold". My interest tapered off considerably during the last 3-4 episodes (may reflect my age) but a worldwide perspective on WWII and the cold war was very interesting.

The Vice Guide to North Korea is very dated now, but it intrigued me enough that I visited the country in 2014. So many things have changed since 2008 that many of the details are no longer accurate, but may be worthwhile to watch after watching a more recent DPRK documentary.

[Plug] I made a short video of my DPRK trip in 2014. There are far better ones on Youtube (Aram Pan has done several), but this one is mine.

You actually think Democrats and Republicans are different, and that they aren't controlled by the same masters, who also control Russia.

My bet though, is you've fallen for CNN's version of the lie, they way to so elegantly extrapolate all of CNN's recent talking points.

You are completely mind controlled, and the measuring stick of your reality is Network Cable and your mother's cold lonely basement.

But the problem as such is that the rules come down from the women's studies group

I'm not aware of these rules, please elaborate.

Okay. The problem was addressed and administered by the women's studies group in university. The short list.

Any thing a woman perceives as sexual harassment is by definition, sexual harassment.

Commentary on a woman's appearance, such as telling her her hair looks nice, is not in violation of the law, but if the woman considers it sexual harassment, it is.

Images of scantily clad females are sexual harassment.

There were other restrictions on men, but those were the most onerous. There was also no addressing sexual harassment of men by women.

The first two restrictions were especially onerous, as many of the women had zero problem with a man saying they liked her dress or earrings. Saying a woman's earrings were nice was specifically addressed as a no-no by the harassment counselors. There was an amusing incident when one of the men in the machine shop was ordered to take down a picture of his daughter in her High School cheerleader's outfit. He refused, called in the Union, and threatened a lawsuit of his own. The offensive photo showed a young lady, rather pretty, in one of those on one knee while holding a couple pompoms as high school cheerleaders are wont to do. The only skin showing was from the knee down on one leg, and of course her face. The Sexual harassment police decided to back down. Note that there was such a rumble by most employees - women included including some accusations of projection by the female who was so offended by the photo, that the rules were reviewed, and in some cases "relaxed".

In addition, the idea that any and all changes must come from males.

That's untrue. Women have made, and continue to make, many changes too.

Please elaborate.

For example, we really, really need men's liberation, like women benefited from in the 60s.

What exactly is "men's liberation"?

Women had similar ideas about toxic feminism, the idea that a woman's worth was measured by her ability to attract a good husband and the like.

But that is in part a measure of women's worth, just as being a good candidate for being a husband was a good measure of a man's worth. Jeezuz Bubinga on a pogo stick, I've never heard of the qualities of lovingkindness and stability being called toxic before.

I'm imagining the opposite of toxic femininity being a nasty mean person who no one wants to be around heralded as being healthy femininity and the goal for all women.

With the third wavers, you had to be extra careful. Telling some "professionals" they made a mistake made for upsets, and on a few occasions tearful sessions.

Those really don't sound like feminists. Third wave feminism certainly wouldn't support that behaviour. Can you point to specific ideas of the movement that would support it?

I'll do better. These women identify as modern feminists:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Karen Straughan, an MRA (I'm not in favor of MRA's but Straughan versus some third wavers is always interesting. In the pursuit of equal rights, women need them but men? no way. https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Third wavers at a rally addressing male suicide. https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

As one of the male protesters said "We are not interested in talking to them, we are interested in shutting down an even that supports the Male patriarchy."

Now that must have been Ted Nugent or some equally repugnant person t

But the problem as such is that the rules come down from the women's studies group

I'm not aware of these rules, please elaborate.

Okay. The problem was addressed and administered by the women's studies group in university. The short list.

Any thing a woman perceives as sexual harassment is by definition, sexual harassment.

Commentary on a woman's appearance, such as telling her her hair looks nice, is not in violation of the law, but if the woman considers it sexual harassment, it is.

Images of scantily clad females are sexual harassment.

There were other restrictions on men, but those were the most onerous. There was also no addressing sexual harassment of men by women.

The first two restrictions were especially onerous, as many of the women had zero problem with a man saying they liked her dress or earrings. Saying a woman's earrings were nice was specifically addressed as a no-no by the harassment counselors. There was an amusing incident when one of the men in the machine shop was ordered to take down a picture of his daughter in her High School cheerleader's outfit. He refused, called in the Union, and threatened a lawsuit of his own. The offensive photo showed a young lady, rather pretty, in one of those on one knee while holding a couple pompoms as high school cheerleaders are wont to do. The only skin showing was from the knee down on one leg, and of course her face. The Sexual harassment police decided to back down. Note that there was such a rumble by most employees - women included including some accusations of projection by the female who was so offended by the photo, that the rules were reviewed, and in some cases "relaxed".

In addition, the idea that any and all changes must come from males.

That's untrue. Women have made, and continue to make, many changes too.

Please elaborate.

For example, we really, really need men's liberation, like women benefited from in the 60s.

What exactly is "men's liberation"?

Women had similar ideas about toxic feminism, the idea that a woman's worth was measured by her ability to attract a good husband and the like.

But that is in part a measure of women's worth, just as being a good candidate for being a husband was a good measure of a man's worth. Jeezuz Bubinga on a pogo stick, I've never heard of the qualities of lovingkindness and stability being called toxic before.

I'm imagining the opposite of toxic femininity being a nasty mean person who no one wants to be around heralded as being healthy femininity and the goal for all women.

With the third wavers, you had to be extra careful. Telling some "professionals" they made a mistake made for upsets, and on a few occasions tearful sessions.

Those really don't sound like feminists. Third wave feminism certainly wouldn't support that behaviour. Can you point to specific ideas of the movement that would support it?

I'll do better. These women identify as modern feminists:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Karen Straughan, an MRA (I'm not in favor of MRA's but Straughan versus some third wavers is always interesting. In the pursuit of equal rights, women need them but men? no way. https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Third wavers at a rally addressing male suicide. https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

As one of the male protesters said "We are not interested in talking to them, we are interested in shutting down an even that supports the Male patriarchy."

Now that must have been Ted Nugent or some equally repugnant person t

But the problem as such is that the rules come down from the women's studies group

I'm not aware of these rules, please elaborate.

Okay. The problem was addressed and administered by the women's studies group in university. The short list.

Any thing a woman perceives as sexual harassment is by definition, sexual harassment.

Commentary on a woman's appearance, such as telling her her hair looks nice, is not in violation of the law, but if the woman considers it sexual harassment, it is.

Images of scantily clad females are sexual harassment.

There were other restrictions on men, but those were the most onerous. There was also no addressing sexual harassment of men by women.

The first two restrictions were especially onerous, as many of the women had zero problem with a man saying they liked her dress or earrings. Saying a woman's earrings were nice was specifically addressed as a no-no by the harassment counselors. There was an amusing incident when one of the men in the machine shop was ordered to take down a picture of his daughter in her High School cheerleader's outfit. He refused, called in the Union, and threatened a lawsuit of his own. The offensive photo showed a young lady, rather pretty, in one of those on one knee while holding a couple pompoms as high school cheerleaders are wont to do. The only skin showing was from the knee down on one leg, and of course her face. The Sexual harassment police decided to back down. Note that there was such a rumble by most employees - women included including some accusations of projection by the female who was so offended by the photo, that the rules were reviewed, and in some cases "relaxed".

In addition, the idea that any and all changes must come from males.

That's untrue. Women have made, and continue to make, many changes too.

Please elaborate.

For example, we really, really need men's liberation, like women benefited from in the 60s.

What exactly is "men's liberation"?

Women had similar ideas about toxic feminism, the idea that a woman's worth was measured by her ability to attract a good husband and the like.

But that is in part a measure of women's worth, just as being a good candidate for being a husband was a good measure of a man's worth. Jeezuz Bubinga on a pogo stick, I've never heard of the qualities of lovingkindness and stability being called toxic before.

I'm imagining the opposite of toxic femininity being a nasty mean person who no one wants to be around heralded as being healthy femininity and the goal for all women.

With the third wavers, you had to be extra careful. Telling some "professionals" they made a mistake made for upsets, and on a few occasions tearful sessions.

Those really don't sound like feminists. Third wave feminism certainly wouldn't support that behaviour. Can you point to specific ideas of the movement that would support it?

I'll do better. These women identify as modern feminists:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Karen Straughan, an MRA (I'm not in favor of MRA's but Straughan versus some third wavers is always interesting. In the pursuit of equal rights, women need them but men? no way. https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Third wavers at a rally addressing male suicide. https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

As one of the male protesters said "We are not interested in talking to them, we are interested in shutting down an even that supports the Male patriarchy."

Now that must have been Ted Nugent or some equally repugnant person t

Not considering who the 3rd party candidates are

Shachar

I'm in the UK, it's coming up on 8pm and I'm about to board a flight: in the past hour I've drunk three cans of Tiger beer, 330ml at 5% makes for 1.7 units (10ml of pure ethanol) per can, so 5 units in total. I think I can get another one in before the flight...yeah, sure I can.

This is pretty moderate and normal drinking in the UK. I've noticed a lot of fuck-wits posting to this story about how shocked they are about the drinking levels that all normal people consider to be normal.

To all you wankers I've got one thing to say...watch this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ru5uyoskbw4

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Louis Rosemann (who own an independent repair shop in NY) is less than positive about that move... https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Just in case that all these ideas aren't clear to you, note that there is a (mechanical) engineering sub-field called material resistance (by assuming that I am not making a bad translation from Spanish), a closely-related branch is structural mechanics. Unlikely dynamics/kinematics, these branches deal with deformable solids (as your pylons do)

In English, concerning physics, "resistance" generally means electrical resistance, thermal resistance, or drag (e.g. "air resistance"). How bodies deform under stress is studied via finite element analysis (FEA / FEM).

with material properties and more realistic conditions what means that a bullet doesn't behave as a stream of water with the same mass

And as was pointed out to you, the issue has nothing to do with the bullet or the water, it's that in a gun you're dealing with several thousand atmospheres of pressure. It's like if someone said "this house would collapse if the roof has to bear five meters of snow but not one meter of snow", and you said, "but what if the one meter of snow was moving at a good fraction the speed of light?" It's not at all relevant to the problem at hand.

If you remove the completely-inapplicable-to-Hyperloop thing you're adding to the conversation (the pressure from the exploding gunpowder), then yes, you can directly compare a bullet sitting in a gun vs. water sitting in a water gun, as simple mass loadings.

You didn't get that point right. I was trying to give a graphical example about the kind of differences which theoretical analyses ignore.

Your comparison was different to the point of being ludicrous. :)

Let me put it in a different way: imagine that you can shoot water at the same speed than a steel bullet, would both of them do the same damage?

The same mass of water? Actually the water would do a pretty damned good job. Ever seen what a non-abrasive water jet cutter does? That's what happens when water moves at bullet-speeds, even tiny amounts of water. The faster the object, the more it's just the kinetic energy that matters and the less that the object's structural integrity matters. If you had a bullet's mass worth of water moving at bullet speeds, it'd cut deep into a person, if not right through. High speed liquid jets are how shaped charges pierce through armour. As a matter of fact, water charges are shaped charges that use water as their piercing fluid.

Now, I'm pretty sure that you're in a weird way trying to make some sort of point about how the distribution of loads matters - am I understanding you correctly? Good. Except that as I pointed out, the distribution of loads is similar for a Hyperloop capsule and a fluid - most on the bottom, less on the sides, little on the top. The exact distribution depends on the final choice of ski locations and the ratio of ski pressure vs. compression pressure**, and it is more uneven than carrying a fluid - but nearly an inch of steel will have zero difficulty whatsoever distributing such loads from an object that only weighs a few tonnes. Image how much an arch of inch-thick steel would deform if you drove a loaded pickup onto it. Basically nothing, right? Exactly. The only relevant potential for deformation is linear, along the pipe's length - so it doesn't matter whether the mass is a fluid or a capsule, it just becomes simple mass loadings - and only the amount of mass, not the type, matters.

** - And if you don't think it's even enough? Just add more skis.

The only practical difference is that the Hyperloop loads are transient, while the fluid loads are permanent. But transient loads are generally to a structure's favour. As noted previously, even if the added loads weren't borne at all and the pipe went into free fall every time a capsule passed, it would only drop a couple centimeters.

Back to the beginning: versus a pipeline and HSR, Hyperloop's loads peak loadings are dramatically lower, and they're transient. Elevation costs are directly proportional to mass loadings.

True, but some are fairly insightful. This video presents a counter argument, arguing that the Hyperloop is something we should never give up.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

All the campaigns had contact with the Russians.

Yes, people forget what the "facts" are supposed to prove, partly because I don't think we ever knew. It is just "blah blah Russians."

If you started out with, "He promised Russia diplomatic concessions in Syria/Ukraine in exchange for hacking the DRE voting system in Pennsylvania to tip the state for him," then that is clearly serious but "facts" don't support it. "Contact" is clearly not, yet is made to seem so by words like "collusion" which are then supported by facts that show contact.

Delivering facts that actually mean something on this issue is an incredibly heavy burden, and Democrats have delivered hysteria instead. For example, the NSA leak that Russians did in fact attempt to hack electronic voting, which is closer than we've ever got before and as close as we can expect to get, is still way short:
  - was it directed by Russian government or random hackers doing it because as American and German hackers have been saying for so long, it's incredibly, egregiously easy?
  - was it successful? "Days before the election" seems too late to phish a voting machine vendor's office and get results; you should start earlier, or go directly for the installed machines in the field.
  - was the aim to tip an election for Trump? for Hillary? to get the result early and speculate on stocks?
  - was it done as a quid-pro-quo with a candidate, or because they felt it in their independent self-interest? Even if they did hack the election, the actual voting machines not just propaganda drops, the fact Russia likes one candidate more than another isn't a strike against him.
  - is the NSA release "fake news"? Deep state influence undermining democracy scares me more than Russian influence because it means we are becoming a country run the way Soviet Russia used to be run, which is scarier than having a close election tipped by a foreign power.

so I sympathize that it's hard to deliver "facts" even if something terrible is at foot, but they still need to be delivered, and the bar still needs to be set in a rational way, not a vague cheerleading character-assassination way.

I'm not saying stuff on this list is ok, just they aren't equivalent to "Trump colluded," whatever that means. "Colluded" only feels like it means something if you hate Trump and are sloppy. If you like Trump, you will say, "wat," and if you are not sloppy but hate Trump you will say what Greenwald says. While there are reasons to hate Trump, he should be hated for those reasons. This news cycle is about the level of birtherism.

McNuggets don't have MSG in them.

Anyway, the idea that MSG sensitivity exists has been thoroughly disproved by double blind tests. Proteins are all broken down to component amino acids starting in the mouth, and glutamates are a very common amino acid essential to life.

Excitotoxic shock doesn't come from what you eat, but the body processes that involve amino acids. You don't understand what Excitotoxins are. Without glutamates we will die, and MSG is a simple salt of an amino acid, that dissolves in water.

It is true that glutamates can make some foods taste good, generally speaking it's very helpful for soups with little or no meat (meat is naturally high in glutamates already).

All in all, what you’ve just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

Given that all of the content of Wikipedia, Commons etc. is contributed and curated by unpaid volunteers, the question is how much of the "value" is due to the paid staff. Because the staff take no part in writing or checking content.

In 2007, for example, when Wikipedia was already a top-10 internet site, the WMF had less than a dozen employees (compared to something approaching 300 today). How much value have the $350-odd million in donations and the hundreds of employees added since then, over and above the content freely contributed by unpaid volunteers, and was the money spent efficiently to create the most value for readers and contributors?

In 2005, Jimmy Wales was proud to tell people:

“So, we’re doing around 1.4 billion page views monthly. So, it’s really gotten to be a huge thing. And everything is managed by the volunteers and the total monthly cost for our bandwidth is about 5,000 dollars, and that’s essentially our main cost. We could actually do without the employee We actually hired Brion [Vibber] because he was working part-time for two years and full-time at Wikipedia so we actually hired him so he could get a life and go to the movies sometimes.”

It's a very different animal today.

It's not verbatim, but indeed it happened:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

This was just one element of the Obama euphoria that people experienced. Another (quite nauseating I might add) example is this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

It's not verbatim, but indeed it happened:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

This was just one element of the Obama euphoria that people experienced. Another (quite nauseating I might add) example is this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

You do actually have a point:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Weapons, marching as a show of force, brown shirts...now all we're missing is kristallnacht.

They want their foreign policy back.

- Barack Obama

Ballmer "in drag"

First, you have to obtain a copy of G.A.Y N1GGERS FROM OUTER SPACE THE MOVIE and watch it.

You can watch G.A.Y N1GGERS FROM OUTER SPACE on Youtube.

Second, you need to succeed in posting a G_N_A_A "first post" on slashdot.org , a popular "news for trolls" website

Third, you need to join the official G_N_A_A irc channel #G_N_A_A on EFNet, and apply for membership.
Talk to one of the ops or any of the other members in the channel to sign up today!

If you are having trouble locating #G_N_A_A, the official G.A.Y N1GGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA irc channel, you might be on a wrong irc network. The correct network is EFNet, and you can connect to irc.secsup.org or irc.easynews.com as one of the EFNet servers.
If you do not have an IRC client handy, you are free to use the G_N_A_A Java IRC client by clicking here.

If you have mod points and would like to support G_N_A_A, please moderate this post up.

This post brought to you by Penisbird , a proud member of the G_N_A_A

G_____________________________________naann_______ ________G
N_____________________________nnnaa__nanaaa_______ ________A
A____________________aanana__nannaa_nna_an________ ________Y
A_____________annna_nnnnnan_aan_aa__na__aa________ ________*
G____________nnaana_nnn__nn_aa__nn__na_anaann_MERI CA______N
N___________ana__nn_an___an_aa_anaaannnanaa_______ ________I
A___________aa__ana_nn___nn_nnnnaa___ana__________ ________G
A__________nna__an__na___nn__nnn___SSOCIATION_of__ ________G
G__________ana_naa__an___nnn______________________ ________E
N__________ananan___nn___aan_IGGER________________ ________R
A__________nnna____naa____________________________ ________S
A________nnaa_____anan____________________________ ________*
G________anaannana________________________________ ________A
N________ananaannn_AY_____________________________ ________S
A________ana____nn_________IRC-EFNET-#G_N_A_A________ ________S
A_______nn_____na_________________________________ ________O
*_______aaaan_____________________________________ ________C
Gary Niger gary_niger@G_N_A_A.us G_N_A_A Corporate Headquarters 143 Rolloffle Avenue Tarzana, California 91356
Enid Al-Punjabi enid_al_punjabi@G_N_A_A.us G_N_A_A World Headquarters No.33 Kyutei Bld. 2F, Shinjuku 2-11-7, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, Japan ????????2??11-6
Copyright (c) 2003-2015 G.A.Y N1GGER Association of America

Ich Bindawalross (London) - G_N_A_A (NYSE:

You missed one:

• If anything goes even slightly wrong, you kill all the passengers and likely destroy much of the entire system.

This has already been discussed rather extensively.

I wish I had your strength. Maybe I should go look for that feature. In all my years on Slash, I've never blocked a user, not even Khyber, who I think is malignant. He's legit DSM-V mentally ill. He needs real help.

creimer is crazy, but in a fun way. I don't know how he keeps a job, or how his co-workers see him, but to me he's as fun as fart videos. Farts are also monotonous, but always funny!

creimer is the fart video of slashdot users.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

I hear that background music in my head every time I read a creimer post. I need to laugh, especially tonight when Obama was eating just down my street.

What does that have to do with anything? We had a great laugh at you. Even your fat ass was laughing for weeks! You see retaliation and anger everywhere, where normal people see nothing. No picture was "stolen". Copied, for sure! If your fat stupid ass was too ADHD to use robots.txt to prevent your shitty picture from being cached... How is that our fault?

This old video will best explain how we see you.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Except those people took off their costumes after.... You're stuck being creimer. Forever. The good news is no one else has to be you.

Here's an explanation:

https://youtu.be/1RGohIKxc9M?t...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

What does that have to do with anything? We had a great laugh at you. Even your fat ass was laughing for weeks! You see retaliation and anger everywhere, where normal people see nothing. No picture was "stolen". Copied, for sure! If your fat stupid ass was too ADHD to use robots.txt to prevent your shitty picture from being cached... How is that our fault?

This old video will best explain how we see you.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Except those people took off their costumes after.... You're stuck being creimer. Forever. The good news is no one else has to be you.

Here's an explanation:

https://youtu.be/1RGohIKxc9M?t...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Trey Gowdy on Hillary emails
He talks about intent around 1:55, but the lead up is not bad either. They chose to pretend there was no intent. There was proof of intent, but no prosecutor to prosecute her.

There is a legitimate need for a solution that is like: the "smart speaker" talks over wifi to your desktop, which acts as a server and processes the voice, then searches the locally built index of your locally built library. I suspect this would be a possible thing to build, but much harder for a company to sell it to you like that.

They have such things - or at least, dictation software that processes locally and doesn't use a cloud-based server for its library. They suck.
I mean, really, have you notice how good dictation has gotten in just the past couple years? That's a result of Google and others using machine learning on the inputs from millions of users. Even just 5 years ago, people were still using Dragon Dictation and the like and having to spend hours reading sample paragraphs and training the thing, just to have it say "Eat up, Martha.".
You could probably do a similar locally-processed home automation system, but it would take hours of training and still suck.

Check this out and tell me the harassment doesn't start with the CEO

He was a dick.

• Headless Chrome, for testing situations.
• Image Capture, which lets Chrome control your web cam. I'm not really sure why this is a good feature. It's not like we already don't have enough problems with our computers being turned into spying devices.
• Chrome updated to look like Googleâ(TM)s Material Design. Cosmetic only, yay, I guess?
• Navigation Preload API, which starts loading pages faster.
• Only 3 requests per web page, after that Chrome will deny further dialog box opening requests. Resets after a week.
• 30 security fixes.

Video summary here.

We live in a social sphere with literally centuries of cultural tradition of men initiating intimate relationships with women.

And the initiation has benefits, mathematically speaking. In any case, Github is not a dating site, but workplace, and hitting on colleagues is known to be problematic. Even worse, if gender skew is 19:1, then if men are "hitting" only occasionally, women get "hit on" all the time.

Jailbreak it and run Windows 95 https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

How will I save my copy of Shazaam!?

There is no such movie. You're the victim of a popular Internet conspiracy.

As far as the movie you're really thinking of, no need to worry. You can watch it for free on YouTube. Or, here's the YouTube version you actually have to pay to see, and is somehow 15 minutes longer.

Whoosh :)

How will I save my copy of Shazaam!?

There is no such movie. You're the victim of a popular Internet conspiracy.

As far as the movie you're really thinking of, no need to worry. You can watch it for free on YouTube. Or, here's the YouTube version you actually have to pay to see, and is somehow 15 minutes longer.

Whoosh :)

How will I save my copy of Shazaam!?

There is no such movie. You're the victim of a popular Internet conspiracy.

As far as the movie you're really thinking of, no need to worry. You can watch it for free on YouTube. Or, here's the YouTube version you actually have to pay to see, and is somehow 15 minutes longer.

How will I save my copy of Shazaam!?

There is no such movie. You're the victim of a popular Internet conspiracy.

As far as the movie you're really thinking of, no need to worry. You can watch it for free on YouTube. Or, here's the YouTube version you actually have to pay to see, and is somehow 15 minutes longer.

Video of president colluding with Russain President. Oh, you meant Trump, not Obama... Sorry.

Story of presidental candidate taking BRIBES from Russia to set foreign policy. Oh, sorry again. I forgot you meant Trump, not Clinton.

Did you have some evidence of Trump working with Russia? It sure looks like the DNC was working with them, not Trump. I provided links with evidence. Did you?

lols, poor snowflake

Shut up! I'm already over 200 episodes behind on Master Chef Australia.

Stop that immediately, and upgrade to Deep-Fried Masters.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Quote from that episode:

When they put my food in their mouth, they gonna slap their own self.
    - Lumpy

Yes, it has come to that. Drunk rednecks deep-frying stuff on TV. Next step: become the fat people floating in flying chairs like in Wall-e.

Just Have too...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Can i use it without any form of internet connection to Apple, and without it sending any data outside my local network?

Do you have a server farm that can do near instantaneous interpretation of natural language speech? That's really a prerequisite for any of these devices to work locally.

This is an approximate rendition of what it would be like.

Try this "Country" star ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...