Residents fear the stores deter other business, especially in neighborhoods without grocers or options for healthy food
...
they undercut grocery stores on prices of everyday items, often pushing them out of business.
Make up your mind. They drive grocery stores away, or they're especially bad because they're in neighborhoods that don't have grocery stores anyway? You can't drive away something that's already not there even without you.
packaged snacks containing numerous ingredients and manufactured using industrial processes.
The only thing one could consume that would not fall under that is water. Everything else contains numerous ingredients. And we can't manufacture things using non-industrial processes.
At no level is the politician saying Amazon must come to NYC; he's merely calling their bluff.
The politician claims it's extortion. The implication is that refusing to come to NYC is evil to the point where it should be a crime, not just that it's a negotiation where he's calling their bluff.
The Slashdot headline uses language like "it'd be a shame if something happened", which is associated with extortion, and "from the technically-blackmail dept".
Calling Amazon's refusal to come to NYC "extortion" *is* saying that Amazon must come to NYC.
That's one of the tricks of the shutdown. If the government forces you to use their services, when the services get shut down, the part about being forced to use them doesn't get shut down as well. That artificially makes the shutdown 1) particularly harmful to the public, and 2) particularly good for the government, compared to a real shutdown.
If the government actually shut down, you wouldn't be able to apply but you wouldn't need to, since there would be no government to require you to apply.
It's the same reason why the "shutdown" doesn't result in the TSA being removed from airports and people being able to travel without them.
Dollar General isn't a dollar store. This demonstrates less about dollar stores, and more about shoddy journalism. Apparently, some news outlets think that a foolproof way to tell if a store is a dollar store is to look for the word "dollar" in the store name, rather than actually trying to find out any information about it. (The picture in the Wikipedia article shows that it was a dollar store in 1955.)
Read the Wikipedia article on clearing the neighborhood. It's defined well enough and people know what it means. Claiming that "If you take that literally, then there are no planets, because no planet clears its orbit." is like pointing to the requirement that a planet must be round, and saying that if you take that literally, no planet is round. Yes, no planet is 100% round, but it's possible for a planet to be close to round or not very close to round, and the same goes for clearing the neighborhood.
The research that shows that nobody used this definition in the past is probably correct. But it doesn't help. Scientists can make up new definitions.
Furthermore, while it's also true that planetary scientists call lots of things planets, the report itself admits that they also use the term for moons. Nobody else is going to start calling Pluto a planet under a definition that also includes moons.
This article actually leaves in sufficient facts to contradict the narrative.
The reason that the reddit user "speaking satirically" comes up is that Polygon was pretending they had found someone who actually believed that, but Polygon accidentally linked to the post where he admits his post was fake. This demonstrates that Polygon knew that the post they linked to was a fake post from their own side, but they deliberately used it anyway as clickbait.
Furthermore, the claim that "nobody disagreed with him" is a voted into the negatives and deleted. Voting things down is often used to express disagreement.
The slashdot post is written poorly because it's trying to avoid admitting these things, because "the supposed misogyny among gamers is a false flag operation" contradicts the narrative.
A lot of that falls under "easy for the law to abuse". For instance, if you require regular certification to show you can hit things with your gun, the government can decide to make all the gun ranges illegal so there's no way to become certified (which has actually happened).
And randomly visiting homes is called the "surveillance state".
If I invite you to a party and tell you to get some ice from the freezer, I probably don't expect you to put twenty pounds of ice into a plastic bag and take it home with you. But what I said doesn't literally rule it out.
Proper social skills require understanding implication and context, not just understanding people's literal words. If they say "you can name it anything" and you pick a name like "Boaty McBoatFace" you've literally followed their words (they did say anything), but you've ignored the social context and acted like a clueless geek. There is no violation of trust that the results will be honored, because what they said never communicated that such a name would be honored (regardless of what its literal words sound like).
Also, in this case Microsoft figured out there are such people on the Internet and actually made the exclusion explicit:
2. Short and welcoming - It has to be a nice welcoming word in most languages (sorry -- while PoopVFS might elicit a giggle, it won't make the cut when I go to meetings with the Windows team with that in my slide deck. Also it needs to not contain special characters so M$FT is a no go as well)
I wonder how long this will last before it suffers the same fate of this other attempt at Berkeley putting content online for free. If everyone forgot, Berkeley tried this and was stopped by advocates for the disabled who demanded that, according to the law, they make all the free material disabled-accessible. And the law doesn't have an exception when putting the material online is free but making it disabled-accessible costs money, so they had to remove the whole thing.
That's really the worst part. What it means is "since white males are not considered systemically oppressed, the harassment rule doesn't apply to them and you can harass them as much as you want".
Because if there's anyone who you'd trust to determine that some news is fake under penalty of destroying your business and maybe jailing you if you don't have a few million dollars to hand over, the government of Germany comes to mind.
By your reasoning, if I got an invitation to a party and couldn't come, I could sell it to someone, they could come to the party, and that's obviously happening because the price of the party invitations (free) was less than the market-clearing price (the price I managed to sell it for).
Unless you collect tickets and only bought the ticket to hang it on your wall, a ticket is just there to indicate the existence of an agreement. The performer didn't agree to let into his venue people who bought tickets from scalpers.
While AMT could hide this traffic from its host, it cannot hide the traffic from the network.
That doesn't help. It would be easy for the manufacturer to program it so that it looks for a specific sequence of bytes over the network and transmits something when it receives that particular sequence of bytes.
I'll also point out that torrent sites often have scary-sounding warnings about how it is of the utmost importance that you use a VPN to protect your privacy. In fact, I would guess that this is where the 14 year old probably heard about it. Pay as much attention to those as you usually would to scary warnings on torrent sites, that is, not very much. Torrent crackdowns on individual users are very rare anyway.
The biggest situation where you may actually need a VPN is if your ISP throttles torrent speed and you can get around it using a VPN. (And if that was happening, I'd assume the poster would have mentioned it.)
Libertarians believe that decisions by private entities should be legal.
Libertarians do not believe that decisions by private entities should not be criticized, and libertarians don't equate "morally right" with "legal". They can think a decision by a private company is evil, and say so, even if they don't want the law to do anything about the company.
Unless the libertarians are demanding that the law should require that the private businesses serve everyone, they are not being hypocritical.
The problem is, this is being seen as a blatant attempt by the Trump administration to purge voter rolls of properly registered voters.
And if you look at the lawsuit, it doesn't say this anywhere. In other words, if this is true, you have a "watchdog" suing using a technicality to get something that they would be laughed out of court for if they actually claimed.
Climate change found to only be as dangerous as pollution by plastic.
If you expect people to believe you when you say that some problem is the worst ever, you can't then claim that another problem is also the worst ever. I'm pretty sure that nobody who thinks that this is "as bad as climate change" would be willing to compromise on some climate change measures in order to stop pollution by plastic, even though that's what you do when you think that two problems are equally bad.
Muslim companies start creating "artificial depictions of Mohammed" which combine light in such a way that there's never actually a full image of Mohammed in one place, but when you look at it you see what looks like an image of Mohammed anyway.
We can follow up with special Amish computers built out of wires instead of transistors because computers built that way can do exactly the same thing as normal computers while being less objectionable to Amish principles.
Maybe instead of creating artificial meat, they should figure out that their aversion to real meat has gone just a little bit too far? If you're making fake meat out of soy, that's a little weird, but people grow soy all the time. If you're developing a complicated and obviously inefficient laboratory growing process just so you can indulge in eating meat that doesn't violate your taboo against meat, things have gotten out of hand and you probably should take a second look at your taboos.
Slashdot Mirror
Residents fear the stores deter other business, especially in neighborhoods without grocers or options for healthy food
...
they undercut grocery stores on prices of everyday items, often pushing them out of business.
Make up your mind. They drive grocery stores away, or they're especially bad because they're in neighborhoods that don't have grocery stores anyway? You can't drive away something that's already not there even without you.
packaged snacks containing numerous ingredients and manufactured using industrial processes.
The only thing one could consume that would not fall under that is water. Everything else contains numerous ingredients. And we can't manufacture things using non-industrial processes.
At no level is the politician saying Amazon must come to NYC; he's merely calling their bluff.
The politician claims it's extortion. The implication is that refusing to come to NYC is evil to the point where it should be a crime, not just that it's a negotiation where he's calling their bluff.
The Slashdot headline uses language like "it'd be a shame if something happened", which is associated with extortion, and "from the technically-blackmail dept".
Calling Amazon's refusal to come to NYC "extortion" *is* saying that Amazon must come to NYC.
That's one of the tricks of the shutdown. If the government forces you to use their services, when the services get shut down, the part about being forced to use them doesn't get shut down as well. That artificially makes the shutdown 1) particularly harmful to the public, and 2) particularly good for the government, compared to a real shutdown.
If the government actually shut down, you wouldn't be able to apply but you wouldn't need to, since there would be no government to require you to apply.
It's the same reason why the "shutdown" doesn't result in the TSA being removed from airports and people being able to travel without them.
Dollar General isn't a dollar store. This demonstrates less about dollar stores, and more about shoddy journalism. Apparently, some news outlets think that a foolproof way to tell if a store is a dollar store is to look for the word "dollar" in the store name, rather than actually trying to find out any information about it. (The picture in the Wikipedia article shows that it was a dollar store in 1955.)
Read the Wikipedia article on clearing the neighborhood. It's defined well enough and people know what it means. Claiming that "If you take that literally, then there are no planets, because no planet clears its orbit." is like pointing to the requirement that a planet must be round, and saying that if you take that literally, no planet is round. Yes, no planet is 100% round, but it's possible for a planet to be close to round or not very close to round, and the same goes for clearing the neighborhood.
The research that shows that nobody used this definition in the past is probably correct. But it doesn't help. Scientists can make up new definitions.
Furthermore, while it's also true that planetary scientists call lots of things planets, the report itself admits that they also use the term for moons. Nobody else is going to start calling Pluto a planet under a definition that also includes moons.
This article actually leaves in sufficient facts to contradict the narrative.
The reason that the reddit user "speaking satirically" comes up is that Polygon was pretending they had found someone who actually believed that, but Polygon accidentally linked to the post where he admits his post was fake. This demonstrates that Polygon knew that the post they linked to was a fake post from their own side, but they deliberately used it anyway as clickbait.
Furthermore, the claim that "nobody disagreed with him" is a voted into the negatives and deleted. Voting things down is often used to express disagreement.
The slashdot post is written poorly because it's trying to avoid admitting these things, because "the supposed misogyny among gamers is a false flag operation" contradicts the narrative.
A lot of that falls under "easy for the law to abuse". For instance, if you require regular certification to show you can hit things with your gun, the government can decide to make all the gun ranges illegal so there's no way to become certified (which has actually happened).
And randomly visiting homes is called the "surveillance state".
If I invite you to a party and tell you to get some ice from the freezer, I probably don't expect you to put twenty pounds of ice into a plastic bag and take it home with you. But what I said doesn't literally rule it out.
Proper social skills require understanding implication and context, not just understanding people's literal words. If they say "you can name it anything" and you pick a name like "Boaty McBoatFace" you've literally followed their words (they did say anything), but you've ignored the social context and acted like a clueless geek. There is no violation of trust that the results will be honored, because what they said never communicated that such a name would be honored (regardless of what its literal words sound like).
Also, in this case Microsoft figured out there are such people on the Internet and actually made the exclusion explicit:
2. Short and welcoming - It has to be a nice welcoming word in most languages (sorry -- while PoopVFS might elicit a giggle, it won't make the cut when I go to meetings with the Windows team with that in my slide deck. Also it needs to not contain special characters so M$FT is a no go as well)
I wonder how long this will last before it suffers the same fate of this other attempt at Berkeley putting content online for free. If everyone forgot, Berkeley tried this and was stopped by advocates for the disabled who demanded that, according to the law, they make all the free material disabled-accessible. And the law doesn't have an exception when putting the material online is free but making it disabled-accessible costs money, so they had to remove the whole thing.
Whoops, the article does say. And it isn't 50/50, although it's far more vinyl than I'd expect.
Cars with drivers, and horses, combined, are outselling self-driving cars.
How much of the "CDs and vinyl are outselling" is CDs and how much is vinyl? I suspect it isn't 50/50.
That's really the worst part. What it means is "since white males are not considered systemically oppressed, the harassment rule doesn't apply to them and you can harass them as much as you want".
Zuckerberg is unable to demand that I pay him a few million dollars or else go to jail.
Because if there's anyone who you'd trust to determine that some news is fake under penalty of destroying your business and maybe jailing you if you don't have a few million dollars to hand over, the government of Germany comes to mind.
Twilight Zone is an episodic series with no continuing storyline. How in the world is it possible to "reboot" that?
By your reasoning, if I got an invitation to a party and couldn't come, I could sell it to someone, they could come to the party, and that's obviously happening because the price of the party invitations (free) was less than the market-clearing price (the price I managed to sell it for).
Unless you collect tickets and only bought the ticket to hang it on your wall, a ticket is just there to indicate the existence of an agreement. The performer didn't agree to let into his venue people who bought tickets from scalpers.
That doesn't help. It would be easy for the manufacturer to program it so that it looks for a specific sequence of bytes over the network and transmits something when it receives that particular sequence of bytes.
I'll also point out that torrent sites often have scary-sounding warnings about how it is of the utmost importance that you use a VPN to protect your privacy. In fact, I would guess that this is where the 14 year old probably heard about it. Pay as much attention to those as you usually would to scary warnings on torrent sites, that is, not very much. Torrent crackdowns on individual users are very rare anyway.
The biggest situation where you may actually need a VPN is if your ISP throttles torrent speed and you can get around it using a VPN. (And if that was happening, I'd assume the poster would have mentioned it.)
Just because the user could have navigated the confusing user interface doesn't mean it's his fault. Microsoft created the user interface.
By your reasoning there is never any such a thing as a user interface problem because the user could always have done something else.
Libertarians believe that decisions by private entities should be legal.
Libertarians do not believe that decisions by private entities should not be criticized, and libertarians don't equate "morally right" with "legal". They can think a decision by a private company is evil, and say so, even if they don't want the law to do anything about the company.
Unless the libertarians are demanding that the law should require that the private businesses serve everyone, they are not being hypocritical.
Technically, Logan would be considered a parent of Laura so she would have American citizenship (or Canadian if Logan never got American citizenship).
And if you look at the lawsuit, it doesn't say this anywhere. In other words, if this is true, you have a "watchdog" suing using a technicality to get something that they would be laughed out of court for if they actually claimed.
Climate change found to only be as dangerous as pollution by plastic.
If you expect people to believe you when you say that some problem is the worst ever, you can't then claim that another problem is also the worst ever. I'm pretty sure that nobody who thinks that this is "as bad as climate change" would be willing to compromise on some climate change measures in order to stop pollution by plastic, even though that's what you do when you think that two problems are equally bad.
Muslim companies start creating "artificial depictions of Mohammed" which combine light in such a way that there's never actually a full image of Mohammed in one place, but when you look at it you see what looks like an image of Mohammed anyway.
We can follow up with special Amish computers built out of wires instead of transistors because computers built that way can do exactly the same thing as normal computers while being less objectionable to Amish principles.
Maybe instead of creating artificial meat, they should figure out that their aversion to real meat has gone just a little bit too far? If you're making fake meat out of soy, that's a little weird, but people grow soy all the time. If you're developing a complicated and obviously inefficient laboratory growing process just so you can indulge in eating meat that doesn't violate your taboo against meat, things have gotten out of hand and you probably should take a second look at your taboos.