Also: the article specifies that it's talking about developing countries. The parent's retort applies specifically to the US. (Though it's probably true for other countries as well, the article which everyone is referring to when they say that was talking specifically about the US.)
Sears is still doing good business in some locations. All of the stores that I know of in the US are doing poorly, but I know a few stores in Canada which are doing great. Meanwhile, there are Radioshacks in Canada but they're owned by a different company - the US-based Radioshack company does business in the US and Mexico and that's mostly it. They have very few other international stores.
This is not a counter argument to what the parent is saying above. The parent is not saying that humans are checking the LCDs and that the humans get lazy - the parent is saying that the company which produces the LCDs will cut corners (i.e.: reduce their standards for quality control) unless you police them very carefully on a continual basis.
we have maybe another six to nine months before even a majority of Republicans in Congress begin planning to remove this imbecile from office
Not until after the midterms. The problem with the last election is that it was so surprising - if he had been expected to win, if poles had shown themselves to accurately represent what voters were thinking, then public opinion turning against him would be enough to sway legislators. As it is, Republican legislators don't know what they should think or what they say. They don't know how their constituents will react, so I'm expecting them to avoid rocking the boat until the midterms.
If the midterms go to the Democrats, then the Republicans will turn against Trump.
Climate change as a result of human activity is as close to an established fact as pretty much anything can plausibly be. Unfortunately, when an issue becomes politicized this isn't good enough. Someone says, "It's only a theory." and the completely correct response would be some thing like, "Well it is a theory, but using the word 'only' inaccurately implies... blah blah..." and people stop paying attention.
Communication with the public has long been a problem since the public is only prepared to listen to sentence fragments of a few words or less. Stating climate change to be a fact, without ambiguity, is as close to truth as the public is prepared to absorb. For those people who want more specificity, there are plenty of resources which go into greater depth. Great effort has been expended to communicate exactly what climate change means and what it implies, there is no shortage of resources available for those who are willing to look. I suggest that if you're searching for these though, you drop the acronym "AGW." That was originally a denier term, and whatever information you find by searching for it is likely to skew in that direction. You'll do much better with a search for "climate change" - whatever you find is likely to cover the human aspect as well.
Well, thank you. That was very thorough. I've been quite happy with the gamepad and was hoping that the Switch would feel similar. From your description it seems that there are quite a few differences, but it sounds that they're more like trade-offs than like a bunch of negatives. So that's encouraging.
What I'm noticing is that you linked to a google search which returns only results from very dubious sources. The first link is to redstate.com, then dailycaller, then a Facebook link which is referencing worldtruth.tv, then yiannopoulos.net... These are exactly the sort of sites which Facebook is trying to catch here. The fact that they don't like snopes is not a mark against it.
Even Fox News is credible compared to that crap. You got anything from Fox News? Not that that would necessarily be convincing, but that should be your starting point when it comes to right-wing propaganda - if it's too ridiculous for even Fox News then you know you've really fallen down the rabbit hole.
Other fact checkers, of course. They did say that there would be more than one. Why are you asking this question? How many layers would it take to satisfy you?
Language is living, and it changes. Get used to it.
This is a weak argument that gets really overused. While it is true that language changes over time, this does not mean that it doesn't have rules. Language is a means of communication after all, and it only functions by means of some agreed-upon standards. When those standards are violated it means miscommunication, and shrugging and saying, "language changes," does not resolve that problem.
People fight over the word "literally" a lot, and while you could certainly argue that fighting over any word is rather stupid... this particular idiom in which "literally" is used only for emphasis and essentially means "not literally," this is one of the better ones to fight over. Since the two meanings are basically opposites, just shrugging and giving up and saying, "language changes," effectively means losing that word as a means of communication.
There are laws against HR lying to employees? What? Isn't that basically their whole job? I doubt that there are many laws about companies lying to employees, unless it involves compensation or represents a safety violation.
The point is that "on the horizon" is a phrase which indicates something close by, while we are almost as far away as it is possibly to be from the holidays.
I will buy a Switch for this as well... eventually. Unfortunately, Nintendo has finally gotten onto the DLC bandwagon, so buying the game at launch will net you only a partial experience. If you want the whole game you're going to have to wait probably a year or more for them to release the complete version.
I don't blame Nintendo for this, players have pretty clearly shown that this is what they want to pay for, but it's still a sad day.
One possibility is being told to do something wrong. Another possibility is being ignored or prevented from doing something right. This guy quit the CIA because Trump ignores the work that they do and instead makes policy decisions based off of whatever nonsense he reads on Breitbart. That's gotta be pretty demoralizing.
What's to stop them from writing in the manual, "purchase and install Comprehensive Assembly #012934" and selling that part which is basically a replacement for the entire unit?
Well, presumably the law stops them. I'm sure that the actual text of the law isn't a single sentence, "We hereby require manufacturers to make repair manuals and parts available to the general public." This is why these laws get into hundreds of pages, and sometimes set up regulatory bodies to manage them - to try and cover all of those sorts of loopholes and crafty ways which companies employ to try and wriggle around them. They're not always successful, but that's what it takes to have any chance of making it work.
If that guy only has "low thousands" of customers then no, that isn't what it means. They already exempted ISPs with fewer than 100,000 customers. What they're talking about now are "mom and pop" ISPs with more than 100,000 but fewer than 250,000 customers.
I understand what religion and ethnicity are, and a portion of the complicated way in which they relate to Judaism. What does that have to do with what I said?
You're right, I had two replies and I was conflating them together. Sorry.
That said, Medina is just a place. I'm not an expert on Islam, but I know of no specific religious ties to that location. Though obviously it has historical significance and is considered holy for that reason.
Mecca is explicitly tied to the religion, but it's not a home. You can't by any stretch call it a homeland. And that's not just me being pedantic: in principle, someone else could control Mecca and exclude Muslims from living there (though not from visiting) without violating any Muslim tenants. In practice, of course, this wouldn't happen without a great deal of push back.
I said "in that way" to denote the difference between being merely a birthplace of a religion, and being the homeland of a religious people as proclaimed by god. The fact that Christianity started there is not the same thing, is not even really similar, to the fact that Jews believe that god gave them this land and that therefore anyone else living there is a usurper.
Very few groups would make them claim that a particular land belongs to them or to their people when they had been absent from that land for 1,800 years.
After all, just about everybody else has a "homeland".
Really? What's the Christian homeland? What's the Muslim homeland, or the (insert any other religion)? Judaism is fairly unique for being tied to a specific place in that way. (Mecca is not the "Muslim homeland", the Vatican is not the "Christian homeland") There are a few other religions like that, but they're not popular ones nowadays. The only ones I can think of are the old Mongolian religion and some aboriginal ones, and I don't know any of their names or any details about them.
The point you make about people using anti-Zionism as cover for anti-Jewishness is often true, but in the same way this fact is also often used as cover to dismiss grievances against some of the negative actions of Zionists.... I wrote that, but I'm finding it a hard sentence to parse. Basically: When people say, "Those Zionists are bad because they're slowly stealing/conquering land through the use of settlements." that is a legitimate grievance. When people say, "Those people say they're anti-Zionist when they complain about the settlements, but really they're anti-Jewish and should be ignored." that is not a legitimate counter argument. Painting with a broad brush like that is wrongheaded, no matter who is doing the painting.
The video (which, by the way, was pretty decent for a commercial) says that only a "lucky few" get to experience the STRAW.... What? What the hell is that? I was briefly sold on trying one of these out, but there's no way I'm going to trek to McDonalds and buy one of these shakes only to get stiffed on the one reason I was buying the shake in the first place. That's like buying a Happy Meal and not getting a toy. You just don't do it. That's a sad meal.
I realize that the point of this is to generate buzz, but what's the point of buzz if you're going to follow it up with, "Ha ha, just kidding. We're not actually going to sell you the thing we're advertising."
Slashdot Mirror
Also: the article specifies that it's talking about developing countries. The parent's retort applies specifically to the US. (Though it's probably true for other countries as well, the article which everyone is referring to when they say that was talking specifically about the US.)
Sears is still doing good business in some locations. All of the stores that I know of in the US are doing poorly, but I know a few stores in Canada which are doing great. Meanwhile, there are Radioshacks in Canada but they're owned by a different company - the US-based Radioshack company does business in the US and Mexico and that's mostly it. They have very few other international stores.
This is not a counter argument to what the parent is saying above. The parent is not saying that humans are checking the LCDs and that the humans get lazy - the parent is saying that the company which produces the LCDs will cut corners (i.e.: reduce their standards for quality control) unless you police them very carefully on a continual basis.
we have maybe another six to nine months before even a majority of Republicans in Congress begin planning to remove this imbecile from office
Not until after the midterms. The problem with the last election is that it was so surprising - if he had been expected to win, if poles had shown themselves to accurately represent what voters were thinking, then public opinion turning against him would be enough to sway legislators. As it is, Republican legislators don't know what they should think or what they say. They don't know how their constituents will react, so I'm expecting them to avoid rocking the boat until the midterms.
If the midterms go to the Democrats, then the Republicans will turn against Trump.
Climate change as a result of human activity is as close to an established fact as pretty much anything can plausibly be. Unfortunately, when an issue becomes politicized this isn't good enough. Someone says, "It's only a theory." and the completely correct response would be some thing like, "Well it is a theory, but using the word 'only' inaccurately implies... blah blah..." and people stop paying attention.
Communication with the public has long been a problem since the public is only prepared to listen to sentence fragments of a few words or less. Stating climate change to be a fact, without ambiguity, is as close to truth as the public is prepared to absorb. For those people who want more specificity, there are plenty of resources which go into greater depth. Great effort has been expended to communicate exactly what climate change means and what it implies, there is no shortage of resources available for those who are willing to look. I suggest that if you're searching for these though, you drop the acronym "AGW." That was originally a denier term, and whatever information you find by searching for it is likely to skew in that direction. You'll do much better with a search for "climate change" - whatever you find is likely to cover the human aspect as well.
Well, thank you. That was very thorough. I've been quite happy with the gamepad and was hoping that the Switch would feel similar. From your description it seems that there are quite a few differences, but it sounds that they're more like trade-offs than like a bunch of negatives. So that's encouraging.
Do you have a Wii U? If so, how would you compare the gamepad to the Switch with the Joycons attached? Ergonomically speaking, I mean.
What I'm noticing is that you linked to a google search which returns only results from very dubious sources. The first link is to redstate.com, then dailycaller, then a Facebook link which is referencing worldtruth.tv, then yiannopoulos.net... These are exactly the sort of sites which Facebook is trying to catch here. The fact that they don't like snopes is not a mark against it.
Even Fox News is credible compared to that crap. You got anything from Fox News? Not that that would necessarily be convincing, but that should be your starting point when it comes to right-wing propaganda - if it's too ridiculous for even Fox News then you know you've really fallen down the rabbit hole.
Other fact checkers, of course. They did say that there would be more than one. Why are you asking this question? How many layers would it take to satisfy you?
Independent, third-party fact-checkers who are signatories of the non-partisan Poynter Code of Principles. You could at least read the summary.
Language is living, and it changes. Get used to it.
This is a weak argument that gets really overused. While it is true that language changes over time, this does not mean that it doesn't have rules. Language is a means of communication after all, and it only functions by means of some agreed-upon standards. When those standards are violated it means miscommunication, and shrugging and saying, "language changes," does not resolve that problem.
People fight over the word "literally" a lot, and while you could certainly argue that fighting over any word is rather stupid... this particular idiom in which "literally" is used only for emphasis and essentially means "not literally," this is one of the better ones to fight over. Since the two meanings are basically opposites, just shrugging and giving up and saying, "language changes," effectively means losing that word as a means of communication.
That's also probably illegal.
There are laws against HR lying to employees? What? Isn't that basically their whole job? I doubt that there are many laws about companies lying to employees, unless it involves compensation or represents a safety violation.
The point is that "on the horizon" is a phrase which indicates something close by, while we are almost as far away as it is possibly to be from the holidays.
Oh wait, it's March now. I think the point still stands.
system + game bundles on the horizon for the holidays
Dude... Come on, what? It's February.
I will buy a Switch for this as well... eventually. Unfortunately, Nintendo has finally gotten onto the DLC bandwagon, so buying the game at launch will net you only a partial experience. If you want the whole game you're going to have to wait probably a year or more for them to release the complete version.
I don't blame Nintendo for this, players have pretty clearly shown that this is what they want to pay for, but it's still a sad day.
One possibility is being told to do something wrong. Another possibility is being ignored or prevented from doing something right. This guy quit the CIA because Trump ignores the work that they do and instead makes policy decisions based off of whatever nonsense he reads on Breitbart. That's gotta be pretty demoralizing.
What's to stop them from writing in the manual, "purchase and install Comprehensive Assembly #012934" and selling that part which is basically a replacement for the entire unit?
Well, presumably the law stops them. I'm sure that the actual text of the law isn't a single sentence, "We hereby require manufacturers to make repair manuals and parts available to the general public." This is why these laws get into hundreds of pages, and sometimes set up regulatory bodies to manage them - to try and cover all of those sorts of loopholes and crafty ways which companies employ to try and wriggle around them. They're not always successful, but that's what it takes to have any chance of making it work.
If that guy only has "low thousands" of customers then no, that isn't what it means. They already exempted ISPs with fewer than 100,000 customers. What they're talking about now are "mom and pop" ISPs with more than 100,000 but fewer than 250,000 customers.
I understand what religion and ethnicity are, and a portion of the complicated way in which they relate to Judaism. What does that have to do with what I said?
You're right, I had two replies and I was conflating them together. Sorry.
That said, Medina is just a place. I'm not an expert on Islam, but I know of no specific religious ties to that location. Though obviously it has historical significance and is considered holy for that reason.
Mecca is explicitly tied to the religion, but it's not a home. You can't by any stretch call it a homeland. And that's not just me being pedantic: in principle, someone else could control Mecca and exclude Muslims from living there (though not from visiting) without violating any Muslim tenants. In practice, of course, this wouldn't happen without a great deal of push back.
Could you clarify your comment? How does that relate to what I said?
I said "in that way" to denote the difference between being merely a birthplace of a religion, and being the homeland of a religious people as proclaimed by god. The fact that Christianity started there is not the same thing, is not even really similar, to the fact that Jews believe that god gave them this land and that therefore anyone else living there is a usurper.
Very few groups would make them claim that a particular land belongs to them or to their people when they had been absent from that land for 1,800 years.
After all, just about everybody else has a "homeland".
Really? What's the Christian homeland? What's the Muslim homeland, or the (insert any other religion)? Judaism is fairly unique for being tied to a specific place in that way. (Mecca is not the "Muslim homeland", the Vatican is not the "Christian homeland") There are a few other religions like that, but they're not popular ones nowadays. The only ones I can think of are the old Mongolian religion and some aboriginal ones, and I don't know any of their names or any details about them.
... I wrote that, but I'm finding it a hard sentence to parse. Basically: When people say, "Those Zionists are bad because they're slowly stealing/conquering land through the use of settlements." that is a legitimate grievance. When people say, "Those people say they're anti-Zionist when they complain about the settlements, but really they're anti-Jewish and should be ignored." that is not a legitimate counter argument. Painting with a broad brush like that is wrongheaded, no matter who is doing the painting.
The point you make about people using anti-Zionism as cover for anti-Jewishness is often true, but in the same way this fact is also often used as cover to dismiss grievances against some of the negative actions of Zionists.
The video (which, by the way, was pretty decent for a commercial) says that only a "lucky few" get to experience the STRAW. ... What? What the hell is that? I was briefly sold on trying one of these out, but there's no way I'm going to trek to McDonalds and buy one of these shakes only to get stiffed on the one reason I was buying the shake in the first place. That's like buying a Happy Meal and not getting a toy. You just don't do it. That's a sad meal.
I realize that the point of this is to generate buzz, but what's the point of buzz if you're going to follow it up with, "Ha ha, just kidding. We're not actually going to sell you the thing we're advertising."