Lack of oversight as long as you don't attract too much attention. The idiot at the head of the team decided to start giving interviews that made international news.
Not sure if he was that stupid in things outside his field or realised that he's got too much publicity already and was trying to sell his project to party leadership before he was inevitably going to get shut down by party apparatus clamping down on his "actions that are damaging harmony in society".
"Much less scandal". Right. Riiiiiiiiiiight. In other news, pigs fly, Sun rises from the West and Moon is made of cheese.
As for "elected with more voices", he got elected with a hell of a lot fewer than anyone before him in the first round. Second round, only his core was voting for him. Everyone else was voting against "French woman bad". In this regard, you're correct that they got what they deserved.
Ah, the desperate obfuscation begins. I guess you are his alternate account. Shall we get back on talking how Germany controls wind?
Because the report of the authority you just cited clearly stated that Energiewende broke the trend. And no, whining about "but we closed the plants and we weren't closing them any more so trend wouldn't have continued anyway" has been one of the go-to lies of people trying to pretend really hard that government policy wasn't the disaster it was. Especially when one looks at the fact that closures couldn't continue at the same pace specifically because of Energiewende.
Are you angelosphere's alternate account? Your misrepresentation of my point is exactly the same thing he has done on this topic for years now.
In real world, one need not go beyond a single google search to find countless sources on the fact that Energiewende resulted in Germany missing all of its environmental goals on CO2 emissions and reversal of long standing trend in reduction.
I want to point out that in this long complaint, never once have you addressed any of my points. You avoided them like a plague.
That if anything should tell anyone reading this thread just how much you agree with me on my points. When you opponent cannot even begin to address your actual points, and has to instead go "french woman bad", you know that he has nothing.
It's a political move, not a pragmatic one. France is bottom of Europe when it comes to CO2 emissions per generated energy specifically because of proliferation of nuclear power across the country. Their eastern neighbour is a great example of what happens when you try to close nuclear plants for wind and solar. You get more fossil fuel burning, and your trend of reducing emissions goes straight toward "miss all the CO2 emissions targets you were previously on track to meet".
One has to remember what is the political environment in which these calls are made. Macron is extremely unpopular in France across the board, after being elected as essentially "that bankster that managed to get to run-off against the woman media called every nasty name they can think of for decades". He was fairly unpopular when he was elected, and since he conducted his policies as would be expected out of a man who's essentially a full on elitist throughout his career, his popularity is worse than Hollande's.
So he's going from scandal to scandal, protest to protest. These loud announcements are just the next step in his game of "make loud declarations to deflect attention from current issues".
They making a mistake because closing down nuclear for "wind and solar" means more fossil fuel energy.
Citation: Energiewende and German emissions trends.
That said, this is Macron's desperate wheeling and dealing from position of being the most unpopular president in France in a very long time, managing to successfully beat even Hollande. Most of his strategic long term calls will likely be revoked by the next government.
Again, it is irrelevant what makes sense to me. In China, what will be relevant is what local official working under their ministry of interior will think.
And your Western concept of citizenship make as much sense to such people as question "are your garglers blue" makes to you. The fact that you seriously just referenced "human rights" as relevant underscores just how deep the cultural chasm is.
The problem is that Chinese treat ethnicity as nationality. If you're Han Chinese, you're a Chinese national. If you hold foreign citizenship only, this is a strange thing to happen to this clearly Chinese person, that doesn't really change the fact that they're Chinese and will be treated like one by interior officials.
That is actually a very good example of attitude I'm talking about. To a mainstream chinese person, ethnicity comes first and foremost. If you look Chinese, you are Chinese, papers be damned.
Now if your pedigree is diluted to the point where you don't really look Chinese, you're a foreigner. That is true. But officials may still treat you as a Chinese national. It varies regionally. T1 cities will probably have officials who understand this perfectly.
Unlike you, I'm not trying to split hairs over definitions in order to craft an utterly retarded libertardian argument. I actually mean free markets in common parlance.
If your daughter has any Chinese blood in her, I'd be very careful about these statements. China treats all people with ethnic Han roots like Chinese citizens when they're in China, which includes all of the relevant responsibilities. Something quite a few naive Westernern born and raised people with Han roots have been finding out over last decades with everything from detention and fines to blocking of leaving China just because their relatives have something Chinese state has interest in.
Here's the latest example which has gotten too big for Western media majors to ignore:
The difference between libetarian argument and libertarded one is that former understands and takes into account the fact that reality in perfect and that state does need to manage markets to allow them to function and avoid the natural end point of free market - full monopolization and termination of free market.
So literally, "fuck home users", which is a number measured in billions in total, yes with a B. Well done.
Luckily at this point in time, most home users get it and try to avoid win10, which is being forced on them as a matter of routine by MS. How long this resistance can last with lack of availability of win7 in retail is anyone's guess, but it's holding remarkably well considering almost total lack of availability of the said product to an average home user.
FBI more likely as this will likely have to do with tracking shipping orders and money. You can easily track merchandise itself since the shoes and whatnot has to go to a physical address. And this kind of a load would have to go somewhere with commercial warehousing, which is also paid for, as volumes would be fairly large.
With that many traces, catching the initial wave of people doing this would be easy, and added costs of having to obfuscate so many layers of your operations while still risking all your merchandise getting confiscated would likely drive profit margins down quick enough to actually act as a viable deterrent.
If you want to know more, and not the sanitized tidbits that a mainstream outlet thinks you should know and nothing else, Rogan's interview with Musk provides a good insight into the man and his views.
Yes, in much greater detail. The interview in question is generally not being talked about any more on mainstream outlets because it would advertise the fact that mainstream media has competitors that technically pull greater numbers in terms of viewership than said mainstream media. You don't want to advertise that your competition does what you do better than you do for obvious reasons.
Slashdot Mirror
Lack of oversight as long as you don't attract too much attention. The idiot at the head of the team decided to start giving interviews that made international news.
Not sure if he was that stupid in things outside his field or realised that he's got too much publicity already and was trying to sell his project to party leadership before he was inevitably going to get shut down by party apparatus clamping down on his "actions that are damaging harmony in society".
"Much less scandal". Right. Riiiiiiiiiiight. In other news, pigs fly, Sun rises from the West and Moon is made of cheese.
As for "elected with more voices", he got elected with a hell of a lot fewer than anyone before him in the first round. Second round, only his core was voting for him. Everyone else was voting against "French woman bad". In this regard, you're correct that they got what they deserved.
It still doesn't address any of my points.
It's so cute when you answer yourself and congratulate yourself on having a tiny echo chamber of science denialists.
It's easier to do than try to address more serious problems.
Also it doesn't impact MS' bottom line.
Ah, the desperate obfuscation begins. I guess you are his alternate account. Shall we get back on talking how Germany controls wind?
Because the report of the authority you just cited clearly stated that Energiewende broke the trend. And no, whining about "but we closed the plants and we weren't closing them any more so trend wouldn't have continued anyway" has been one of the go-to lies of people trying to pretend really hard that government policy wasn't the disaster it was. Especially when one looks at the fact that closures couldn't continue at the same pace specifically because of Energiewende.
Are you angelosphere's alternate account? Your misrepresentation of my point is exactly the same thing he has done on this topic for years now.
In real world, one need not go beyond a single google search to find countless sources on the fact that Energiewende resulted in Germany missing all of its environmental goals on CO2 emissions and reversal of long standing trend in reduction.
I want to point out that in this long complaint, never once have you addressed any of my points. You avoided them like a plague.
That if anything should tell anyone reading this thread just how much you agree with me on my points. When you opponent cannot even begin to address your actual points, and has to instead go "french woman bad", you know that he has nothing.
It's a political move, not a pragmatic one. France is bottom of Europe when it comes to CO2 emissions per generated energy specifically because of proliferation of nuclear power across the country. Their eastern neighbour is a great example of what happens when you try to close nuclear plants for wind and solar. You get more fossil fuel burning, and your trend of reducing emissions goes straight toward "miss all the CO2 emissions targets you were previously on track to meet".
One has to remember what is the political environment in which these calls are made. Macron is extremely unpopular in France across the board, after being elected as essentially "that bankster that managed to get to run-off against the woman media called every nasty name they can think of for decades". He was fairly unpopular when he was elected, and since he conducted his policies as would be expected out of a man who's essentially a full on elitist throughout his career, his popularity is worse than Hollande's.
So he's going from scandal to scandal, protest to protest. These loud announcements are just the next step in his game of "make loud declarations to deflect attention from current issues".
They making a mistake because closing down nuclear for "wind and solar" means more fossil fuel energy.
Citation: Energiewende and German emissions trends.
That said, this is Macron's desperate wheeling and dealing from position of being the most unpopular president in France in a very long time, managing to successfully beat even Hollande. Most of his strategic long term calls will likely be revoked by the next government.
Sovereignty backed by MAD.
Again, it is irrelevant what makes sense to me. In China, what will be relevant is what local official working under their ministry of interior will think.
And your Western concept of citizenship make as much sense to such people as question "are your garglers blue" makes to you. The fact that you seriously just referenced "human rights" as relevant underscores just how deep the cultural chasm is.
Your question makes very little sense to an average Chinese official. You may as well ask him if your garglers are blue.
"I would point to this other distortion of the market, and suggest that it is evidence of not distorting the market".
Well played. -10/10.
The problem is that Chinese treat ethnicity as nationality. If you're Han Chinese, you're a Chinese national. If you hold foreign citizenship only, this is a strange thing to happen to this clearly Chinese person, that doesn't really change the fact that they're Chinese and will be treated like one by interior officials.
That is actually a very good example of attitude I'm talking about. To a mainstream chinese person, ethnicity comes first and foremost. If you look Chinese, you are Chinese, papers be damned.
Now if your pedigree is diluted to the point where you don't really look Chinese, you're a foreigner. That is true. But officials may still treat you as a Chinese national. It varies regionally. T1 cities will probably have officials who understand this perfectly.
Unlike you, I'm not trying to split hairs over definitions in order to craft an utterly retarded libertardian argument. I actually mean free markets in common parlance.
If your daughter has any Chinese blood in her, I'd be very careful about these statements. China treats all people with ethnic Han roots like Chinese citizens when they're in China, which includes all of the relevant responsibilities. Something quite a few naive Westernern born and raised people with Han roots have been finding out over last decades with everything from detention and fines to blocking of leaving China just because their relatives have something Chinese state has interest in.
Here's the latest example which has gotten too big for Western media majors to ignore:
https://www.bbc.com/news/world...
I sometimes wonder how much of that 2014 QA axing funding has been used to find the PR efforts.
The difference between libetarian argument and libertarded one is that former understands and takes into account the fact that reality in perfect and that state does need to manage markets to allow them to function and avoid the natural end point of free market - full monopolization and termination of free market.
You're making the latter argument right now.
Because it harms citizens by distorting free market.
So literally, "fuck home users", which is a number measured in billions in total, yes with a B. Well done.
Luckily at this point in time, most home users get it and try to avoid win10, which is being forced on them as a matter of routine by MS. How long this resistance can last with lack of availability of win7 in retail is anyone's guess, but it's holding remarkably well considering almost total lack of availability of the said product to an average home user.
FBI more likely as this will likely have to do with tracking shipping orders and money. You can easily track merchandise itself since the shoes and whatnot has to go to a physical address. And this kind of a load would have to go somewhere with commercial warehousing, which is also paid for, as volumes would be fairly large.
With that many traces, catching the initial wave of people doing this would be easy, and added costs of having to obfuscate so many layers of your operations while still risking all your merchandise getting confiscated would likely drive profit margins down quick enough to actually act as a viable deterrent.
If you want to know more, and not the sanitized tidbits that a mainstream outlet thinks you should know and nothing else, Rogan's interview with Musk provides a good insight into the man and his views.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Yes, in much greater detail. The interview in question is generally not being talked about any more on mainstream outlets because it would advertise the fact that mainstream media has competitors that technically pull greater numbers in terms of viewership than said mainstream media. You don't want to advertise that your competition does what you do better than you do for obvious reasons.
Interview in question if you want to watch it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Windows [not 10] is the same. It's only 10 that has this weird fetish with forcing updates on you.
Honestly, just pull the rip the update service out and run it once a month to update, then nuke it again.