All you need to vote is a driver's license, and illegals have those.
No way leftists, in sanctuary cities and states, are going to overly investigate the legality of those voting. Not when it's very well known that immigrants, legal or otherwise, vote democrat 80% of the time.
While everybody is in a wad about Russia, nobody will notice millions of illegals rigging the entire election process.
The greatest presidential landside in US history was won by 17 million votes. There are, at least, 22 million illegals, and they practically all vote democrat. Do the maths.
> Facebook only got hated when the RWNJs no longer found themselves able to use it for their insanity and FB banned them.
Who determines what is "insanity?" You? Me? Facebook?
Whatever happened to freedom of speech? What is wrong with countering bad ideas with good ideas? If something is "insanity" than expose it as such with evidence and logic.
If Facebook is to determine what is acceptable, and what is a thought crime, then Facebook is a publisher, and should be treated as such.
The US is $22 trillion in debt. Our infrastructure is crumbling. Vets are sleeping outside in the freezing cold and not given the health care they entitled to. The US cannot healthcare for it's poorest citizens. And I could go on.
How much would it cost to put a colony on the moon, and what is the payoff? What do we have on the moon that we don't have on earth?
We cannot solve all of our energy need by using hydroelectric dams. You cannot put dams just anywhere. Also dams have their own environmental impact - just like wind and solar.
Also, without any constraints on population, or consumption, I don't see how any energy source can do much to solve the problem.
But what about the material to make the battery? If the whole world started using batteries for everything, would there eventually be a shortage of such material? Also have to consider the disposal of such material. Is such material considered hazardous?
Did Fox News published the fake news story about Cohen's trip to Prague?
Has Fox News actually staged news events like ABC, CNN and MSNBC have done?
Has Fox News used photos from a previous administration, as evidence of what the current administration is doing?
Has Fox News published the fake news story about the child being ripped from her mother's arms, like TIME did?
Buzzfeed not only published a fake news story about a Trump/Cohen conspiracy, but when the story was proved to be bullshit, buzzfeed refused to retract it. This is not the first fake news from buzzfeed. Why no conspiracy to censor buzzfeed, like what was done to Infowars? Why isn't buzzfeed being deplatformed? Why the double standard?
Before you bash conservative news sources, maybe you should take a more objective look at the leftist sources?
Slashdot Mirror
Might be worth a shot. Most people using it seem to be fairly happy with it.
I am using Calculate Linux, based on Gentoo, now. But Devuan is looking good. I used to love Debian, before the systemd crap.
All you need to vote is a driver's license, and illegals have those.
No way leftists, in sanctuary cities and states, are going to overly investigate the legality of those voting. Not when it's very well known that immigrants, legal or otherwise, vote democrat 80% of the time.
While everybody is in a wad about Russia, nobody will notice millions of illegals rigging the entire election process.
The greatest presidential landside in US history was won by 17 million votes. There are, at least, 22 million illegals, and they practically all vote democrat. Do the maths.
> It's their platform, they can ban anyone they like for any or no reason
No. If Facebook can ban anyone they like for any or no reason, then Facebook is a publisher, not a platform.
> Facebook only got hated when the RWNJs no longer found themselves able to use it for their insanity and FB banned them.
Who determines what is "insanity?" You? Me? Facebook?
Whatever happened to freedom of speech? What is wrong with countering bad ideas with good ideas? If something is "insanity" than expose it as such with evidence and logic.
If Facebook is to determine what is acceptable, and what is a thought crime, then Facebook is a publisher, and should be treated as such.
> Why does Facebook get blamed for how people use or misuse the social platform he created?
Because Facebook is a publisher, not a platform, and should be treated as such.
If Facebook were a platform, they would have no business censoring content that disagrees with.
If Facebook is a publisher (which they clearly are) then Face is responsible for anything and everything that is posted.
Seems like incremental improvements to already decent products.
Nothing wrong with that. But I am not "blown away."
Maybe people will get so disgusted they will seek alternative means to get their content?
Why not?
If I can make videos that good enough to be monetized, why shouldn't I be able to make a living at it?
It can take a lot of work to make a really good video.
BTW: I have never attempted to monetize a video myself.
Next? Youtube has censoring conservatives for years.
Google could easily plant the comments themselves.
Punisher season 2 was not good either.
I can hardly believe I watched it until the end.
What if you live in Kansas, but buy a laptop, or phone, from Dell, or through Amazon?
Seems to me that this bill might kill electronic retailers, while doing nothing to stop porn.
I suspect these filters will be easily defeated.
I think NASA decided it did not want any kind of artificial gravity. The micro-gravity in the space station is something NASA wants.
A space station like the one in 2001, would require millions of tons of material, and cost trillions, maybe tens of trillions, to build.
Bottom line: what's the point?
The US is $22 trillion in debt. Our infrastructure is crumbling. Vets are sleeping outside in the freezing cold and not given the health care they entitled to. The US cannot healthcare for it's poorest citizens. And I could go on.
How much would it cost to put a colony on the moon, and what is the payoff? What do we have on the moon that we don't have on earth?
Is that "green?"
Some animals China is driving into extinction:
- vaquita
- pangolin
- elephants
- rhinoceros
Several others.
I think there was an article on slashdot, not long ago, about 97% of ocean plastics coming from Africa and China?
Are they just going to have less workers? Or are they going to foreign workers in some manner?
Works great, can run LibreOffice on any platform.
Jussie Smollett story from TMZ now appears to be a hate hoax.
Story about Covington high, from New York Times, school was grossly misreported.
Buzzfeed story about Trump telling Cohen to lie was purely fake news.
Seriously, Infowars is vastly more reliable than most leftist sources.
If Android is a “stolen product,” then so was the iPhone
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/02/if-android-is-a-stolen-product-then-so-was-the-iphone/
Good point.
We cannot solve all of our energy need by using hydroelectric dams. You cannot put dams just anywhere. Also dams have their own environmental impact - just like wind and solar.
Also, without any constraints on population, or consumption, I don't see how any energy source can do much to solve the problem.
I would think that electric is also quieter.
But what about the material to make the battery? If the whole world started using batteries for everything, would there eventually be a shortage of such material? Also have to consider the disposal of such material. Is such material considered hazardous?
> Today batteries are better in every possible way except possibly air travel
What about the materials used to make batteries? Are those materials available in near limitless amounts?
What about the processing and disposal of those materials?
Did Fox News published the fake news story about Cohen's trip to Prague?
Has Fox News actually staged news events like ABC, CNN and MSNBC have done?
Has Fox News used photos from a previous administration, as evidence of what the current administration is doing?
Has Fox News published the fake news story about the child being ripped from her mother's arms, like TIME did?
Buzzfeed not only published a fake news story about a Trump/Cohen conspiracy, but when the story was proved to be bullshit, buzzfeed refused to retract it. This is not the first fake news from buzzfeed. Why no conspiracy to censor buzzfeed, like what was done to Infowars? Why isn't buzzfeed being deplatformed? Why the double standard?
Before you bash conservative news sources, maybe you should take a more objective look at the leftist sources?