They’ll only investigate the ones from Yemen and Libya. They have to ask for everyone's because otherwise some ridiculous Federal judges will tell them they can't look into applications from Yemen and Libya.
Stories like this prove the US is nowhere near full employment. We will be at full employment when employees feel comfortable saying no to working nights and weekends.
It’s like 2 out of 200 rats got cancer in the control group and 4 in the exposure group. But rates of cancer don’t seem to increase with amount of exposure.
Can someone familiar with these methodologies explain the criteria for statistical significance of these numbers?
What is the hypothetical mechanism for low-level non-ionizing radiation to cause tumors?
We get it. You don't like free speech and you don't want it to continue. You've expressed that very clearly. No need to keep finding new ways to say it.
If banning guns and sending government agents out to take guns from people by force isn't bullying innocent gun owners, then banning the Koran and sending government agents out to confiscate Korans by force isn't bullying innocent Muslims.
Of course it’s bullying them. You should stop advocating it. You should stop trying to justify it. Don't bully innocents.
(That goes for Conservatives bullying innocent Muslims and innocent gays too — just in case someone is keeping score.)
You can just say you believe speech controls by government and that you don’t believe in free speech.
You want to pick and choose who can speak, when, and how much they can speak, how much they can spend, how they group together and organize their finances, where the money comes from, etc., etc.
We have free speech instead. We will keep it. We don't need your input on how we live our lives. We hear it. The answer is no. We have the 1st Amendment to protect us from people like you.
Instead, how about town halls, and actually showing up to them?
How about we have speech that's free rather than speech that fits into the narrow realm of your personal approval?
There is an unanswered question that the courts haven't addressed, which amounts to the volume of speech, and if we're equal, then how does one temper the campaign expenditures that buy the airwaves and ad sales, to the detriment of our poor ears and eyes? Campaign expenditure limits would be lovely,
Whereas free speech is messy but necessary, regardless of how you judge the equality of the outcome.
including public lists of campaign donors. Then we'd know who's funding campaign and balloted issues.
Say what? I'm not sure how you construe "we need to stop letting our kids get killed" as "bullying."
Gun owners are innocent. That’s why sending government agents after them is bullying. Gun owners are just as innocent of shooting kids as Muslims are innocent of terrorism and gays are innocent of molesting children. Safety isn't a justification to go after innocent Muslims or innocent gays or innocent gun owners.
Why do you support government persecution of innocent gun owners? You support it because they're not like you.
Lots of questions about a dozen things that have nothing to do with Facebook. No actual answers to any of them. But yeah, bad feels are the only thing that matters so congrats on successfully communicating them and helping people to forget the original poster's question.
TV comedians and news broadcasters and Hollywood actors like Obama. That's the main difference.
The fact that you're asking it as an informational question shows that you misunderstand the political and social discussion. Emotion rules. Information is irrelevant.
You mean 50 years ago? I had neither of those 50 years ago.
Liberals support a vast police power over individuals. Why do we have to submit to the gun control police OR the historical sex police (or, for that matter, the plastic bag police)? Why don't liberals stop bullying people so you don't have to defend bullying people? Conservatives have (mostly) stopped. Liberals are ramping it up.
Gun ownership is a civil right.
So is freedom of religion, yet the right wingers have no problems denouncing Islam every time there's a terrorist attack (even when the attack was perpetrated by white Christian dudes against other white Christian dudes -- they still try to find a way to either blame Islam or shift the conversation to "Muslim terrorists."
"Denouncing" is free speech. Liberals denounce whites and Christians and try to divide us all the time. They should stop it (in my opinion), just like the Conservatives trying to divide should stop it.
You should stop defending the bad guys with "everybody does it" arguments. I'm not defending them. I'm saying everybody should stop doing it.
It's not about posting. FB tracks nearly every web site you go to, whether you post or not. They track your location when you use their app, whether you post or not. They know what everyone around you posted, everyone you've associated with, everything posted about you.
Right. Because liberals are constantly campaigning for increased police power,
A.k.a. Gun control. So yes.
Also licensing laws for professions, telling people what health care they must purchase, prohibiting plastic grocery bags, mandatory recycling, etc., etc. etc.
more government surveillance
Snowden caught which president’s administration spying?
and less protection of civil rights
Gun ownership is a civil right.
while conservatives campaign against them.
Oh, wait a minute, it's the other way around.
50 years ago maybe you could make this argument. The facts don't support it now, and they haven't for a long time.
Slashdot Mirror
They’ll only investigate the ones from Yemen and Libya. They have to ask for everyone's because otherwise some ridiculous Federal judges will tell them they can't look into applications from Yemen and Libya.
Instead of putting your email and twitter handle on a Visa application? Seems like a dumb decision-making process, but ok.
I don't think we'll miss you. We have lots of weird, irrational people here already.
Early April fools jokes are low.
Your doctor doesn't want you to know about it.
Stories like this prove the US is nowhere near full employment. We will be at full employment when employees feel comfortable saying no to working nights and weekends.
It’s like 2 out of 200 rats got cancer in the control group and 4 in the exposure group. But rates of cancer don’t seem to increase with amount of exposure.
Can someone familiar with these methodologies explain the criteria for statistical significance of these numbers?
What is the hypothetical mechanism for low-level non-ionizing radiation to cause tumors?
We get it. You don't like free speech and you don't want it to continue. You've expressed that very clearly. No need to keep finding new ways to say it.
If banning guns and sending government agents out to take guns from people by force isn't bullying innocent gun owners, then banning the Koran and sending government agents out to confiscate Korans by force isn't bullying innocent Muslims.
Of course it’s bullying them. You should stop advocating it. You should stop trying to justify it. Don't bully innocents.
(That goes for Conservatives bullying innocent Muslims and innocent gays too — just in case someone is keeping score.)
You can just say you believe speech controls by government and that you don’t believe in free speech.
You want to pick and choose who can speak, when, and how much they can speak, how much they can spend, how they group together and organize their finances, where the money comes from, etc., etc.
We have free speech instead. We will keep it. We don't need your input on how we live our lives. We hear it. The answer is no. We have the 1st Amendment to protect us from people like you.
Instead, how about town halls, and actually showing up to them?
How about we have speech that's free rather than speech that fits into the narrow realm of your personal approval?
There is an unanswered question that the courts haven't addressed, which amounts to the volume of speech, and if we're equal, then how does one temper the campaign expenditures that buy the airwaves and ad sales, to the detriment of our poor ears and eyes? Campaign expenditure limits would be lovely,
Whereas free speech is messy but necessary, regardless of how you judge the equality of the outcome.
including public lists of campaign donors. Then we'd know who's funding campaign and balloted issues.
So you can blacklist people.
So the news media gets 100% of the power, because every other form of communicating with voters is illegal.
No thanks. We have 1st Amendment free speech rights anyway. Courts probably won't accept your ideas for abridging them.
Mozilla Foundation will rely on illegally leaked IRS records for their decision-making. None of this Facebook stuff -- because privacy.
TLDR. But for this
Why don't liberals stop bullying people
Say what? I'm not sure how you construe "we need to stop letting our kids get killed" as "bullying."
Gun owners are innocent. That’s why sending government agents after them is bullying. Gun owners are just as innocent of shooting kids as Muslims are innocent of terrorism and gays are innocent of molesting children. Safety isn't a justification to go after innocent Muslims or innocent gays or innocent gun owners.
Why do you support government persecution of innocent gun owners? You support it because they're not like you.
Lots of questions about a dozen things that have nothing to do with Facebook. No actual answers to any of them. But yeah, bad feels are the only thing that matters so congrats on successfully communicating them and helping people to forget the original poster's question.
TV comedians and news broadcasters and Hollywood actors like Obama. That's the main difference.
The fact that you're asking it as an informational question shows that you misunderstand the political and social discussion. Emotion rules. Information is irrelevant.
Sorry you found out about Facebook's business model.
Conservatives want to regulate your penis/vagina.
You mean 50 years ago? I had neither of those 50 years ago.
Liberals support a vast police power over individuals. Why do we have to submit to the gun control police OR the historical sex police (or, for that matter, the plastic bag police)? Why don't liberals stop bullying people so you don't have to defend bullying people? Conservatives have (mostly) stopped. Liberals are ramping it up.
Gun ownership is a civil right.
So is freedom of religion, yet the right wingers have no problems denouncing Islam every time there's a terrorist attack (even when the attack was perpetrated by white Christian dudes against other white Christian dudes -- they still try to find a way to either blame Islam or shift the conversation to "Muslim terrorists."
"Denouncing" is free speech. Liberals denounce whites and Christians and try to divide us all the time. They should stop it (in my opinion), just like the Conservatives trying to divide should stop it.
You should stop defending the bad guys with "everybody does it" arguments. I'm not defending them. I'm saying everybody should stop doing it.
It's not about posting. FB tracks nearly every web site you go to, whether you post or not. They track your location when you use their app, whether you post or not. They know what everyone around you posted, everyone you've associated with, everything posted about you.
Name calling is not an argument. People aren’t going to surrender to totalitarians like you for fear of being name-called.
Now can you figure out why Michael Isikoff's book about the collusion between Trump and Russia is selling way more than 12 Rules?
Telling gullible people exactly what they want to hear has paid off many times throughout history.
Right. Because liberals are constantly campaigning for increased police power,
A.k.a. Gun control. So yes.
Also licensing laws for professions, telling people what health care they must purchase, prohibiting plastic grocery bags, mandatory recycling, etc., etc. etc.
more government surveillance
Snowden caught which president’s administration spying?
and less protection of civil rights
Gun ownership is a civil right.
while conservatives campaign against them.
Oh, wait a minute, it's the other way around.
50 years ago maybe you could make this argument. The facts don't support it now, and they haven't for a long time.
Old man shakes fist at cloud
The question is poorly stated. There's no "here's what I'm looking for: [description of what he's looking for]" section.
Wireless video with wire standards like HDMI and USB-C, with power? It doesn't make sense unless you guess the part he's leaving out of the question.
Why should land owners want to sell? The train is being built for other people, not for them.
It's still corrupt to do it for cash. And still a breach of trust. The written policy may help protect them from legal recourse.