Not because they didn't want to imprison him; it was due to an activist judge who held that there was such evidentiary misconduct that the case was dismissed.
I happily consumed ~99% of your post. The ~1% (activist judge) I was able to gobble down, but it generated a nasty fart. My wife, and - more importantly - my dog, curse you.
You mean some federal SWAT-types are gonna bust down my door and force me at gunpoint to fill out a form? Answer intimate questions like "boxers or briefs?", "pink or stink?", or perhaps even (gasp) "paper ot plastic?" OH NOES!!!
Oh wait..."compelled" means that CoreLogic (the corporation that already has all my mortgage data) wants to sell the data to the CFPB. Mmmm...doesn't look like much in the way of compellin goin on. No SWAT Team for me, then.
That's nice. After all, what does it take to pause something, and close a popup these days? 8 seconds, 10 seconds? Apparently that's too much effort.
That is nice, isn't it? But you're repeating yourself.
I've long been in the habit of quickly bouncing off sites that use annoying advertising tactics like breitbart.com. Personally, I wouldn't link to such a site in this or any other forum. But that's just me. You obviously feel differently.
In any case, the FACT that Andrew Breitbart was an ideological blowhard had nothing to do with my comment to your post. I just don't like douchey sites that pull that kind of cheap advertising crap.
Why are you using the internet without an adblocker anyway? Besides pure laziness.
Not that it's any of your business, but on my personal devices I DO use an adblocker. This might come as a shock to you, but sometimes folks access the internet on computers they don't own. It just so happens that I was using my sister-in-law's laptop when I followed that link you posted. The fact that you so quickly resorted to an insult without considering that possibility says way more about the rigor of your thinking than mine.
That's nice, now go read the article and what will you see?
Yeah...uh, by the time I closed the annoying pop-ups and stopped the auto-playing video commercial that was loaded, I decided NOT to read the article. Chew on that reality.
Reserves are not production, they are an estimate of what is possible to extract using available technology.
[snippage of a lot of smart stuff]
I'm trying to figure out whether you agree with me or not. You don't have to read my post too closely to see that I'm asserting two points: 1) the global market for oil won't be budged by this "news", and 2) The effect on the CA economy by this "news" will not be felt for a while (if ever).
In any case, my reply to GGP was aimed at debunking the notion that anyone (consumers) will feel an impact at the pump in the short/near term.
If you agree, great! If you were just trying to show off your knowledge, mission accomplished. Otherwise, I've read your reply several times and there doesn't seem to be a direct refutation of my assertions. Try again?
Slashdot Mirror
I can't wait for the marketing campaign. How ironic would it be if Pink Floyd licensed "Welcome to The Machine" for the media blitz?
These cards should have been tested from the perspective of high performance computing or scientific application.
I don't think nVidia would want that.
GTX 780 over the cheaper but somewhat more powerful R9 250
That's one heckuva typo. (I *hope* that's a typo)
Persons denying the existence of killer robots may be robots themselves.
Maybe it's based on the Eando Binder novel "I, Robot", which long predated Asimov.
Or, it could be based on the album by the Alan Parsons Project.
Hasn't this tired car analogy run it's course by now? Every time I hear "Turbo!" I think of this guy. JFC.
It's a buggy OS from a thrashing dinosaur of a buggy-whip maker.
Which, at this point, describes the rest of the desktop OS alternatives.
Not because they didn't want to imprison him; it was due to an activist judge who held that there was such evidentiary misconduct that the case was dismissed.
I happily consumed ~99% of your post. The ~1% (activist judge) I was able to gobble down, but it generated a nasty fart. My wife, and - more importantly - my dog, curse you.
It figures it'd be the LAPD. What other police force on the west coast would hunger for this kind of invasiveness?
Uh, ALL the rest of them? And not limited to the west coast (or the USA, for that matter)
You mean some federal SWAT-types are gonna bust down my door and force me at gunpoint to fill out a form? Answer intimate questions like "boxers or briefs?", "pink or stink?", or perhaps even (gasp) "paper ot plastic?" OH NOES!!!
Oh wait..."compelled" means that CoreLogic (the corporation that already has all my mortgage data) wants to sell the data to the CFPB. Mmmm...doesn't look like much in the way of compellin goin on. No SWAT Team for me, then.
suer duper
mine is. according to your mom anyways
oh wait...NEIN!
like yours? our is your CORN hole special?
nine
My PI hole sez no. (don't ask what my CORN hole sez)
Curved TV's aren't better? I can't believe it!
Maybe that's because you already bought one?
Look, everyone knows robots eat old people's medicine for fuel. If they didn't have an Old Glory plan, that's their problem.
That's nice. After all, what does it take to pause something, and close a popup these days? 8 seconds, 10 seconds? Apparently that's too much effort.
That is nice, isn't it? But you're repeating yourself.
I've long been in the habit of quickly bouncing off sites that use annoying advertising tactics like breitbart.com. Personally, I wouldn't link to such a site in this or any other forum. But that's just me. You obviously feel differently.
In any case, the FACT that Andrew Breitbart was an ideological blowhard had nothing to do with my comment to your post. I just don't like douchey sites that pull that kind of cheap advertising crap.
Why are you using the internet without an adblocker anyway? Besides pure laziness.
Not that it's any of your business, but on my personal devices I DO use an adblocker. This might come as a shock to you, but sometimes folks access the internet on computers they don't own. It just so happens that I was using my sister-in-law's laptop when I followed that link you posted. The fact that you so quickly resorted to an insult without considering that possibility says way more about the rigor of your thinking than mine.
Cheers!
you had me until breitbart
That's nice, now go read the article and what will you see?
Yeah...uh, by the time I closed the annoying pop-ups and stopped the auto-playing video commercial that was loaded, I decided NOT to read the article. Chew on that reality.
So we won't have super hi res images inside of Rebecca Woodard?
Had she came through the Mexican border and dropped an anchor baby, she would be set to a path of citizenship no doubt.
Or, she could've come through before that Reagen policy thingy. What was that called back then? Oh yeah, AMNESTY.
(the chance of R hero being elected today, ZERO)
you had me until breitbart
If we start doing things like this, don't whine when the China does the same thing.
can't tell if serious
Reserves are not production, they are an estimate of what is possible to extract using available technology.
[snippage of a lot of smart stuff]
I'm trying to figure out whether you agree with me or not. You don't have to read my post too closely to see that I'm asserting two points: 1) the global market for oil won't be budged by this "news", and 2) The effect on the CA economy by this "news" will not be felt for a while (if ever).
In any case, my reply to GGP was aimed at debunking the notion that anyone (consumers) will feel an impact at the pump in the short/near term.
If you agree, great! If you were just trying to show off your knowledge, mission accomplished. Otherwise, I've read your reply several times and there doesn't seem to be a direct refutation of my assertions. Try again?