Not universally or objectively bad, but they are examples of things that a certain number of people might want discretion about. Other people would have different things that they would feel that way about but the underlying anonymity concerns would be the same.
Viktoria talks about how male employees might want to alter (or not alter) their behavior if they find themselves working for a female boss for the first time.
And yet Wikipedia offers us a wealth of frivolous preferences, while not allowing the selection of Commonwealth or US English, which would be vastly easier than many of the other frills.
Exactly. Whoever put it there committed trespass and vandalism and deserves to be hauled into court for being so dumb as to not contact the city first.
A real lawyer could give useful information, for example, I'm not giving you legal advice, but when you hire your own lawyer, here are a few questions to start with...
The problem isn't science. The problem is science reporting.
It's especially flagrantly biased 'science' reporting. Most nutritional/fitness claims are intentionally false marketing where the lies are only minimally disguised.
Adams is right, however, that nutrition science has not stood up and challenged nutrition pseudo-science and nutrition outright falsehood. And given its central role in public health, that truly is a disgrace. So, the scientists aren't the root of the problem, but they don't seem to be part of the solution either.
In their defence, metabolism is fiendishly complex, and fundamental discoveries are still being made. People talk, for example, about the body 'burning' calories, an oversimplification that is essentially a falsehood. People may well understand that no actual combustion is taking place, but they certainly don't appreciate that they're talking about a chemical reaction with about 20 steps.
I've seen restaurants use photos of the menu taken from a phone or even a serious camera, and it looks amateur. Webcam is unlikely to look better no matter what you do.
If this menu is done daily and looks professional in the restaurant, it should be professionally done on the website, such as a PDF. If the menu is just a chalk board that someone updates by hand, possibly several times a day, then a photo should be fine, but even then you should take a proper photograph from close up and upload it.
There's another option, which is not being interested in football (or whatever) simply to be polite, but to be interested in the other person's passion for football, which is something personal.
It's gratifying to see technological progress that enables people with obstacles to be productive, rather than just enabling cat videos and teenage gossip.
It's also good for technology to actually help the visually impaired in a dignified way, because it seems most advocates for the disabled are lunatic fringe reverse bigots who want obnoxious in-your-fact interventions for the visually impaired which are merely political statements to inconvenience the able-bodied with no benefit to anyone.
Slashdot Mirror
He practically patented
Patent has lost some of its meaning lately, but not that much.
Not universally or objectively bad, but they are examples of things that a certain number of people might want discretion about. Other people would have different things that they would feel that way about but the underlying anonymity concerns would be the same.
But of course you already knew that.
There's stereotyping, and there's statistical significance.
One is reality regardless of whether or not you like it.
One minute is journalism. Twenty-two minutes is not.
In other words, too often..
ELIZA beat the Turing test 50 years ago. I don't think that test is as significant as people make it out to be.
Viktoria talks about how male employees might want to alter (or not alter) their behavior if they find themselves working for a female boss for the first time.
So, not respecting them as an individual?
Actually, the US is the leader in caving before stateless corporations.
How often does a species reproduce?
And yet Wikipedia offers us a wealth of frivolous preferences, while not allowing the selection of Commonwealth or US English, which would be vastly easier than many of the other frills.
They knew exactly what the reaction would be and that was their objective all along.
Their only miscalculation was that when the Arab Spring finally came it leaned more towards liberalism (in the classical sense) than theocracy.
Exactly. Whoever put it there committed trespass and vandalism and deserves to be hauled into court for being so dumb as to not contact the city first.
a note was attached to it saying it was for an art project
Which does not mean that it was for an art project or that it wasn't a bomb.
A real lawyer could give useful information, for example, I'm not giving you legal advice, but when you hire your own lawyer, here are a few questions to start with...
The problem isn't science. The problem is science reporting.
It's especially flagrantly biased 'science' reporting. Most nutritional/fitness claims are intentionally false marketing where the lies are only minimally disguised.
Adams is right, however, that nutrition science has not stood up and challenged nutrition pseudo-science and nutrition outright falsehood. And given its central role in public health, that truly is a disgrace. So, the scientists aren't the root of the problem, but they don't seem to be part of the solution either.
In their defence, metabolism is fiendishly complex, and fundamental discoveries are still being made. People talk, for example, about the body 'burning' calories, an oversimplification that is essentially a falsehood. People may well understand that no actual combustion is taking place, but they certainly don't appreciate that they're talking about a chemical reaction with about 20 steps.
You're missing the point. Credibility is not a factor. It *should* be, but it isn't.
business ethic and workflow
Maybe look up those words.
I've seen restaurants use photos of the menu taken from a phone or even a serious camera, and it looks amateur. Webcam is unlikely to look better no matter what you do.
If this menu is done daily and looks professional in the restaurant, it should be professionally done on the website, such as a PDF. If the menu is just a chalk board that someone updates by hand, possibly several times a day, then a photo should be fine, but even then you should take a proper photograph from close up and upload it.
There's another option, which is not being interested in football (or whatever) simply to be polite, but to be interested in the other person's passion for football, which is something personal.
And snacks.
Munroe has the right idea:
Hooray for snacks!
By 'superbole', I'm guessing you mean Superbowl hyperbole?
Or duelling.
Just throwing money, or tools of any kind, at a given problem isn't going to inherently address the problem.
Throwing money at a problem generally leads to a well-funded problem, not a solution.
It's gratifying to see technological progress that enables people with obstacles to be productive, rather than just enabling cat videos and teenage gossip.
It's also good for technology to actually help the visually impaired in a dignified way, because it seems most advocates for the disabled are lunatic fringe reverse bigots who want obnoxious in-your-fact interventions for the visually impaired which are merely political statements to inconvenience the able-bodied with no benefit to anyone.
All she's done is file paperwork and paid some fees. She's hasn't won a judgment yet.
Of course, with the US justice system, anything is possible.