Did Deezer HiFi pay for this advertisement, or did Bang and Olufsen? Deezer probably needs the exposure more but Bang and Olufsen has the budget to easily pay for this, so it's kind of a toss-up in my mind.
Update your "about:config" settings or edit your "user.js" file - problem solved.
Well, let' see here, I figure about 1% of Mozilla's users are technically proficient enough to try this, or even be all that aware of the problem or that there might be a fix for it, Of that number, about 1% are going to be able to figure out this incredibly intuitive procedure. Yeah, this solves the problem.
It's on open display, in an unlit basement with a door marked "Beware of The Leopard", at the bottom of a locked file cabinet. Really, I don't see how there's any problem at all.
Once you're old enough to breed, evolution is done with you.
Untrue, children have to be raised, and after that, grandchildren. You're not an evolutionary success just because you breed; your descendants must live and breed themselves.
Cue the guy to claim is was 'all infant mortality'. He is wrong.
Yes, he is. But not completely. A man in ancient times could reasonably hope to live until his 60s or 70s if he survived childhood, which was terribly dangerous, which dragged life expectancy down. As the Bible says, "three score and ten". But while a man of today can reasonably hope to live into his 80s or 90s thanks to modern living being largely healthier (although some things have gotten worse).
How sexist do you have to be to believe women and minorities need "special" games and can't just play what everyone else plays.
Nice unspoken assumption there that young white males are the norm that others must conform to, and anything that caters to other audiences is special consideration.
Build a wall and the crime, illegal migration and moment of drugs stops along the wall.
Uh, no, it won't. The vast majority of drugs are smuggled through the legal checkpoints and a wall won't stop them at all.
Illegal migrants then have to present a legal crossing with fake documents and are easy to return to their own nations.
No, they aren't. Because most of them claim asylum from persecution or imminent danger in their home country and those claims by law have to be investigated before they are repatriated.
This is less like a physical bank robbery and more like counterfeiting. When a counterfeiter successfully passes bogus cash in large amounts, he affects tha value of the real money, and it *does* have an effect on the value in your pocket.
People fear automation as the next big thing that will take their jobs. But it isn't. It's been the thing that can take their jobs for atleast the last 50 years.
Try 250 years. Used to be almost everybody worked in agriculture, because that was the only way mankind could feed itself, and even then it wasn't enough now and then. Farm machinery eliminated the vast majority of those jobs, making it so that only a small percentage of the population could easily keep the rest fed. (yes, there are still famines, but they can always be traced back to political problems keeping agriculture or distribution from working properly. The world easily makes enough food to keep everyone well fed. While doomsayers hold forth the possibility of future food shortages because of environmental problems and may be right, the world makes plenty of food right now)
Is there some measure of revenue that gets hurt by owning things?
Yes, it's called "return on capital", and it's a fairly basic way of evaluating a company. The idea being that if you have bought stuff to produce revenue, that's an investment. The more stuff you've bought, the more revenue you should be making. If you're not making more revenue, the stuff should be sold and the money invested in something that will produce more revenue.
By your reasoning, I'm not supporting her, she's supporting herself.
Not in the slightest. As I mentioned, Germany is putting in over twice as much in absolute figures. So the analogy would only hold up if she was spending about $12,000 on herself. (there are other holes in the analogy, but that's the biggest one).
The UK is to the EU as the US is to NATO - pay for everything all the time
Uh, what? Yes, the UK does net pay into the EU, as one would expect from one of its richer countries. Germany however, has a net contribution over twice that of the UK (larger as a share of its economy, too). France, too, gives more. This is largely due to the fact that the UK gets two-thirds of its net contribution back as a special rebate. In fact, if you look at net contribution as a share of the national economy, the UK comes in ninth.
Slashdot Mirror
Or at least, that's what Zuckerberg says they're for...
No. But when the article is a slobbering wet kiss over how awesome the company's new product is,one naturally becomes suspicious.
53 minutes to the Russian troll. You'd better pick up the pace, or they'll stop paying you.
Did Deezer HiFi pay for this advertisement, or did Bang and Olufsen? Deezer probably needs the exposure more but Bang and Olufsen has the budget to easily pay for this, so it's kind of a toss-up in my mind.
Well, let' see here, I figure about 1% of Mozilla's users are technically proficient enough to try this, or even be all that aware of the problem or that there might be a fix for it, Of that number, about 1% are going to be able to figure out this incredibly intuitive procedure. Yeah, this solves the problem.
It's on open display, in an unlit basement with a door marked "Beware of The Leopard", at the bottom of a locked file cabinet. Really, I don't see how there's any problem at all.
Untrue, children have to be raised, and after that, grandchildren. You're not an evolutionary success just because you breed; your descendants must live and breed themselves.
Yes, he is. But not completely. A man in ancient times could reasonably hope to live until his 60s or 70s if he survived childhood, which was terribly dangerous, which dragged life expectancy down. As the Bible says, "three score and ten". But while a man of today can reasonably hope to live into his 80s or 90s thanks to modern living being largely healthier (although some things have gotten worse).
Nice unspoken assumption there that young white males are the norm that others must conform to, and anything that caters to other audiences is special consideration.
Uh, no, it won't. The vast majority of drugs are smuggled through the legal checkpoints and a wall won't stop them at all.
No, they aren't. Because most of them claim asylum from persecution or imminent danger in their home country and those claims by law have to be investigated before they are repatriated.
Yeah, but when the colonel panics, it's bad for the whole regiment.
That only works for CONTROL.
Samsung phones have had apps you can't delete for years, including Facebook and other stuff.
Nowadays, yeah. It's happened in the past, though. Currencies with much smaller float than the US dollar are still vulnerable, as well.
This is less like a physical bank robbery and more like counterfeiting. When a counterfeiter successfully passes bogus cash in large amounts, he affects tha value of the real money, and it *does* have an effect on the value in your pocket.
Try 250 years. Used to be almost everybody worked in agriculture, because that was the only way mankind could feed itself, and even then it wasn't enough now and then. Farm machinery eliminated the vast majority of those jobs, making it so that only a small percentage of the population could easily keep the rest fed. (yes, there are still famines, but they can always be traced back to political problems keeping agriculture or distribution from working properly. The world easily makes enough food to keep everyone well fed. While doomsayers hold forth the possibility of future food shortages because of environmental problems and may be right, the world makes plenty of food right now)
Yeah, but the ones who aren't are a lot less likely to want to rent a house for one night on New Year's Eve.
A quick review of the record shows that you are hopelessly optimistic.
Because the first requirement of a UI is of course that the user should be totally unfamiliar with it.
Yes, it's called "return on capital", and it's a fairly basic way of evaluating a company. The idea being that if you have bought stuff to produce revenue, that's an investment. The more stuff you've bought, the more revenue you should be making. If you're not making more revenue, the stuff should be sold and the money invested in something that will produce more revenue.
It's a lifetime warranty. They just didn't say whose lifetime.
You can't change. Being an asshole is your revenue model. You couldn't continue to operate as a business if you changed.
And now it's green. The heck?
Normal stories get green headlines, and ads get brown. So what does blue mean?
Not in the slightest. As I mentioned, Germany is putting in over twice as much in absolute figures. So the analogy would only hold up if she was spending about $12,000 on herself. (there are other holes in the analogy, but that's the biggest one).
Uh, what? Yes, the UK does net pay into the EU, as one would expect from one of its richer countries. Germany however, has a net contribution over twice that of the UK (larger as a share of its economy, too). France, too, gives more. This is largely due to the fact that the UK gets two-thirds of its net contribution back as a special rebate. In fact, if you look at net contribution as a share of the national economy, the UK comes in ninth.
Yep. Came here to say exactly that.