Brazil just elected a president who wants to privatize even more of the Amazon, so expect the rate of deforestation there to increase from its current rate of six square miles per day.
I'm not in Brazil, so I don't know this first hand, but I suspect that as with the US, the respectable people wouldn't address things that needed addressing, so the voters went with the unrespectable person.
Get rid of mosquitoes, and the frogs starve to death. Get rid of rattlesnakes, and you're overrun by mice.
This gets brought up every time, but I'm pretty sure that respectable authorities have said that mosquitoes aren't a crucial food source for anything. (yes, some things eat them, but nothing will starve if they went away)
The main fact-checking sites (FCS) give T the worst scores ever of any major politician. If these sites are significantly flawed, then take say 15 evaluations from each and carefully explain how they are clearly wrong. (Two is not a sufficient sample size.) I welcome your results...
While I've disagreed with some of their scoring logic, for the most part FCS appear to be reasonably accurate, based on spot-checking scrutiny I've done.
T, on the other hand, has failed my spot-checking test bigly. T-or-FCS: one or the other is really out of whack. Enlighten me with your careful attention to details in the "fifteen" test. (Actually, both can be out-of-whack, but that still means T is a significant liar. Two wrongs don't make a right.)
Then run somebody who will address the concerns that he was addressing.
If all the respectable people won't get the job done, then the public will eventually choose un-respectable people to do it.
But that same media has been trying to get a sound bite out of Bernie and Occassio Cortez where they say they'll raise middle class taxes to pay for healthcare for months now.
As opposed to their real plan, which is to pay for it with unicorn poop?
Whatever problem you can point out that nuclear power might have, like that insurance cost, will have to be ignored, dealt with, worked on along the way, or pushed off into the future. There isn't time to be bitching about little matters like insurance. This is a matter of runaway global warming if we can't bring down our CO2 production. Everything else is nothing by comparison.
Yes, that's exactly right. If you believe the global warning emergency.
Since the warmistas don't embrace nuclear power, that suggests to me that they don't really believe it.
So while hating on "deniers" is fun, how can you expect them to believe it, if you don't even believe it, warm-inistas?
I'm not a woman, of course, but why on Earth at least a number of rape victims seek legal counsel, press charges and somehow act on the harassment in a provable manner while this recent witch-hunting has been fueled by pure speculations and seemingly nothing else?
Why? Because then there would rules of evidence, cross examination, statutes of limitations, and so forth.
There would be some danger of justice and presumption of innocence and other horrors breaking out. We can't have that...
But as Netflix has moved on to streaming and then to focusing on their own content, their catalog has degraded horribly. Seems like a quarter of our DVD queue is “long wait” or “availability unknown”. Our streaming queue is less than half what it was three years ago. I can’t remember the last time we added something to the queue. We are still subscribed mainly because my wife won’t agree to stop... but she doesn’t seem to watch much either.
Anyway, I realize that’s all tangential at best to this story, except to again demonstrate that the initial promise of the internet to us movie lovers has mostly fizzled out - this is just another example. Maybe it’s what the old guys running the studios had planned, all along.
You might want to check Amazon. Even sticking to what's included in Prime, it's a vast quirky catalog, with more than I could ever watch.
1. Have rural municipalities provide the service, funded out of general taxation.
2. Write the contracts offered to providers in the urban areas so that the grant of each "urban area license" *also* requires the provider to offer their services to a rural area, such that the sum total of all urban contracts at the national level also includes a requirement to provide rural services so that the whole country is covered.
#1 would seem to make sense to me.
If "we" "need" it, then "we" should pay for it, right? (And yes, through general taxation, if "we" decide that enough of the recipients can't.)
Your option #2 seems pointlessly complex, and also seems designed to hide the costs and to pretend that we're making big bad business pay for it out of Uncle Scrooge's money bin.
If "we" want people who can't afford to get fast internet run out to them to get it anyway, then "we" can jolly well pay for that, directly, in taxes.
"The phone...will sell for a price above $500 but packs features that are typically present only in pricier handsets."
At first I thought to myself, "Are they insane? $500 isn't some bargain."
Then I went and looked at the MSRPs of smartphones, and was quickly reminded why it makes little sense to play that game. Blows me away what smartphone junkies will spend on hardware these days.
Same here.
I notice the summary also neglects to mention what the features are (that it is packed with) that would justify the price...
I don't know what any of you do with Twitter, but marking things for followup seems reasonable enough. It's not necessarily just for reading the tweet, but for the content linked in the tweet or as a reminder to revisit it later to see how the conversation has progressed or to comment yourself.
That makes sense. Bookmarking a tweet just struck me as funny at first sight. (But then, I don't use twitter.)
I'm glad that President Trump is focusing on his number of Twitter followers as one of his supporters in Florida is arrested for a terrorist attack on his prominent critics.
He's definitely showing leadership and has his priorities straight.
Systematic bias in a communications medium probably is more important overall than one lone wacko (whether acting alone or used by someone as a false flag).
(Were you this concerned about a democrat "supporter" shooting real bullets (instead of fake bombs) into a bunch of Republican lawmakers, BTW?)
Boring, difficult tasks are where they bill most of their hours. Why would anyone who is paid $300/hr want to finish in 26 seconds? The lawyer who took 156 minutes just made $900.
Proving once again that time spent is a lousy proxy for value.
The arrested bomber's van is covered in pro-Trump stickers, and violent memes spread by republicans nationwide, like a gun target painted on a picture of Hillary Clinton.
Right. Just like any stealthy terrorist would do, lol
"There's a flag, so it can't be a false flag"
You may apologize now.
For what, wondering about yet another bizarre 11th hour thing happening?
Trump should apologize for encouraging domestic terrorism.
Slashdot Mirror
And the proof of this is where?
Why on the blackmailers proof wall, of course, where all blackmailers post handy proof of their activities, in order to settle internet debates!
Brazil just elected a president who wants to privatize even more of the Amazon, so expect the rate of deforestation there to increase from its current rate of six square miles per day.
I'm not in Brazil, so I don't know this first hand, but I suspect that as with the US, the respectable people wouldn't address things that needed addressing, so the voters went with the unrespectable person.
Okay, so you refuse to learn. I guess it's still going to be the un respectable people then.
Get rid of mosquitoes, and the frogs starve to death. Get rid of rattlesnakes, and you're overrun by mice.
This gets brought up every time, but I'm pretty sure that respectable authorities have said that mosquitoes aren't a crucial food source for anything. (yes, some things eat them, but nothing will starve if they went away)
The main fact-checking sites (FCS) give T the worst scores ever of any major politician. If these sites are significantly flawed, then take say 15 evaluations from each and carefully explain how they are clearly wrong. (Two is not a sufficient sample size.) I welcome your results...
While I've disagreed with some of their scoring logic, for the most part FCS appear to be reasonably accurate, based on spot-checking scrutiny I've done.
T, on the other hand, has failed my spot-checking test bigly. T-or-FCS: one or the other is really out of whack. Enlighten me with your careful attention to details in the "fifteen" test. (Actually, both can be out-of-whack, but that still means T is a significant liar. Two wrongs don't make a right.)
Then run somebody who will address the concerns that he was addressing.
If all the respectable people won't get the job done, then the public will eventually choose un-respectable people to do it.
But that same media has been trying to get a sound bite out of Bernie and Occassio Cortez where they say they'll raise middle class taxes to pay for healthcare for months now.
As opposed to their real plan, which is to pay for it with unicorn poop?
Whatever problem you can point out that nuclear power might have, like that insurance cost, will have to be ignored, dealt with, worked on along the way, or pushed off into the future. There isn't time to be bitching about little matters like insurance. This is a matter of runaway global warming if we can't bring down our CO2 production. Everything else is nothing by comparison.
Yes, that's exactly right. If you believe the global warning emergency.
Since the warmistas don't embrace nuclear power, that suggests to me that they don't really believe it.
So while hating on "deniers" is fun, how can you expect them to believe it, if you don't even believe it, warm-inistas?
The French revolution all over again ... last week's hero of progress is this week's guy to lose his head ...
(You may think my old fashioned morals are crusty, but at least they don't change every five minutes.)
I'm not a woman, of course, but why on Earth at least a number of rape victims seek legal counsel, press charges and somehow act on the harassment in a provable manner while this recent witch-hunting has been fueled by pure speculations and seemingly nothing else?
Why? Because then there would rules of evidence, cross examination, statutes of limitations, and so forth.
There would be some danger of justice and presumption of innocence and other horrors breaking out. We can't have that ...
The details of the deal were famously written on the back of a napkin when [Foxconn chairman Terry Gou] and the Republican governor first met
Whew! Thank goodness no Democrat governor has ever been involved in state spending boondoggles.
We can prevent this from ever happening again just by voting!
"When one notch just isn't enough ... there's Google."
Downmodded for a remark about the price of a phone?
Rabid OnePlus fan, or demented stalker, lol?
But as Netflix has moved on to streaming and then to focusing on their own content, their catalog has degraded horribly. Seems like a quarter of our DVD queue is “long wait” or “availability unknown”. Our streaming queue is less than half what it was three years ago. I can’t remember the last time we added something to the queue. We are still subscribed mainly because my wife won’t agree to stop... but she doesn’t seem to watch much either.
Anyway, I realize that’s all tangential at best to this story, except to again demonstrate that the initial promise of the internet to us movie lovers has mostly fizzled out - this is just another example. Maybe it’s what the old guys running the studios had planned, all along.
You might want to check Amazon. Even sticking to what's included in Prime, it's a vast quirky catalog, with more than I could ever watch.
1. Have rural municipalities provide the service, funded out of general taxation.
2. Write the contracts offered to providers in the urban areas so that the grant of each "urban area license" *also* requires the provider to offer their services to a rural area, such that the sum total of all urban contracts at the national level also includes a requirement to provide rural services so that the whole country is covered.
#1 would seem to make sense to me.
If "we" "need" it, then "we" should pay for it, right? (And yes, through general taxation, if "we" decide that enough of the recipients can't.)
Your option #2 seems pointlessly complex, and also seems designed to hide the costs and to pretend that we're making big bad business pay for it out of Uncle Scrooge's money bin.
If "we" want people who can't afford to get fast internet run out to them to get it anyway, then "we" can jolly well pay for that, directly, in taxes.
"The phone...will sell for a price above $500 but packs features that are typically present only in pricier handsets."
At first I thought to myself, "Are they insane? $500 isn't some bargain."
Then I went and looked at the MSRPs of smartphones, and was quickly reminded why it makes little sense to play that game. Blows me away what smartphone junkies will spend on hardware these days.
Same here.
I notice the summary also neglects to mention what the features are (that it is packed with) that would justify the price ...
How about we just focus on having the car not try to occupy the same space as anything else solid?
It employed a team of smart women
It made it clear that a passion for art-house and classic film was not exclusive to old white men.
Gee, with an approach like that, how could it fail????
I don't know what any of you do with Twitter, but marking things for followup seems reasonable enough. It's not necessarily just for reading the tweet, but for the content linked in the tweet or as a reminder to revisit it later to see how the conversation has progressed or to comment yourself.
That makes sense. Bookmarking a tweet just struck me as funny at first sight. (But then, I don't use twitter.)
The feature was introduced in 2015 to replace "favourites," a star-shaped button that allowed people to bookmark tweets to read later.
You don't have enough time to read a tweet now, but you do have enough time to realize that you should read it later?
I'm glad that President Trump is focusing on his number of Twitter followers as one of his supporters in Florida is arrested for a terrorist attack on his prominent critics.
He's definitely showing leadership and has his priorities straight.
https://www.abcactionnews.com/...
Systematic bias in a communications medium probably is more important overall than one lone wacko (whether acting alone or used by someone as a false flag).
(Were you this concerned about a democrat "supporter" shooting real bullets (instead of fake bombs) into a bunch of Republican lawmakers, BTW?)
Boring, difficult tasks are where they bill most of their hours. Why would anyone who is paid $300/hr want to finish in 26 seconds? The lawyer who took 156 minutes just made $900.
Proving once again that time spent is a lousy proxy for value.
The arrested bomber's van is covered in pro-Trump stickers, and violent memes spread by republicans nationwide, like a gun target painted on a picture of Hillary Clinton.
Right. Just like any stealthy terrorist would do, lol
"There's a flag, so it can't be a false flag"
You may apologize now.
For what, wondering about yet another bizarre 11th hour thing happening?
Trump should apologize for encouraging domestic terrorism.
Which he has not encouraged. So, no.
Surprising nobody, the person sending bombs to Democratic politicians, supporters, and media organizations is a virulently pro-Trump terrorist.
His van is covered in pro-Trump stickers, along with stickers of Democrats with gun targets on their faces.
The coverings of the terrorist's van refer to Trump's stated enemy list as well as memes shared by right wing republicans nationwide.
Is it too much to ask that Trump stop encouraging his supporters to violently attack reporters and Democrats?
Real bullets that actually work were shot at Republican lawmakers having a ball game. One was seriously wounded.
Was that Democrats' fault? Or was it just a lone nut?
... to run this, lol
Smells like a hoax (meaning, perpetrated or masterminded by someone hoping to help Democrats).
(Similar to those hoax racial incidents where a member of the supposedly targeted group actually paints the racist symbol.)
Let's review-
* October surprise (mid to late October before an election)
* Fake "bombs" that don't explode sent to Democrats
* Cui bono? It's obvious who it is intended to benefit - by what insane calculation could it benefit the other side?
We'll see. (Maybe ... unless the guy they caught mysteriously has no past or an evaporating past, like the Las Vegas guy.)
Maybe it's more effective, isn't it?
Not so far.
Oh, you mean theoretically effective, not in the real world.