You realize that in 2 years he's done more to get science research funded than the last 4 terms of democratic presidents combined, right? Oh, you can't hear me under all that sand, you say?
Let's just trade the proprietary data of the state of Washington and all that ties into for free Wi-Fi. Sports fans are easily the worst of the worst when it comes to computer security, and often spread over many walks of life from executives down through stock boys. So basically what got rejected was "let's hand over all the sensitive data given to our nation's biggest idiots to our nation's largest competitor." Not seeing the issue, in fact, the WSJ should probably just be locked away for treason for even trying to "bring attention" to this nonsense in an attempt to rally their base against the corporations who called out the plot.
The sad part is all the dumbest things you don't realize you've read, which was the point of this "study." The overwhelming majority of studies have substantial flaws with the design of the underlying experimental methodology employed, but it's much more difficult to point those out to people after reading them because people tend not to take in the experimental method, the ideas leading up to it, the underlying theories, the engineering nuances of the different components involved, and the characteristics of the samples beyond a rough approximation (if that.) This is actually the exact reason pop-science shouldn't be a thing: the overwhelming majority of people to read and even to act of research studies don't actually understand any of them, so you end up with a cult-like mentality forming around the people who control the critical pathways to publishing information to the masses, from journals through news outlets.
Why would anyone expect a company to make a statement, news articles to be written about that statement, then all of the articles and statements to be pulled?
Maybe you should try following the statements they put out if you're going to speak on the subject. The only one here spreading fake information is you.
Even after admitting to putting some small random percentage of a random minority in nearly everyone's results to help steer politics the way they want?
It's Silicon Valley, Silicon Valley is never about science, it's about the cult of science used to control people.
Slashdot Mirror
The real selling point is more not being riddled with backdoors.
You keep talking.
A "shutdown" pissing contest where one side isn't impotent, this should be good.
Whether or not that is true is irrelevant in the context of what I wrote.
You realize that in 2 years he's done more to get science research funded than the last 4 terms of democratic presidents combined, right? Oh, you can't hear me under all that sand, you say?
Let's just trade the proprietary data of the state of Washington and all that ties into for free Wi-Fi. Sports fans are easily the worst of the worst when it comes to computer security, and often spread over many walks of life from executives down through stock boys. So basically what got rejected was "let's hand over all the sensitive data given to our nation's biggest idiots to our nation's largest competitor." Not seeing the issue, in fact, the WSJ should probably just be locked away for treason for even trying to "bring attention" to this nonsense in an attempt to rally their base against the corporations who called out the plot.
Its mental conditioning is straining, get back before it melts.
I most certainly didn't rip it off from it's original context, it was never a meme before. It's pure OC, go ahead, look again and behold it in all its glory.
Yes I have.
Yet you haven't.
Republicans have consistently funded NASA much more heavily than Democrats.
I made this for you.
To explore space and push for serious colonization efforts instead of bitching about trees.
is the dumbest fucking thing I've read today.
The sad part is all the dumbest things you don't realize you've read, which was the point of this "study." The overwhelming majority of studies have substantial flaws with the design of the underlying experimental methodology employed, but it's much more difficult to point those out to people after reading them because people tend not to take in the experimental method, the ideas leading up to it, the underlying theories, the engineering nuances of the different components involved, and the characteristics of the samples beyond a rough approximation (if that.) This is actually the exact reason pop-science shouldn't be a thing: the overwhelming majority of people to read and even to act of research studies don't actually understand any of them, so you end up with a cult-like mentality forming around the people who control the critical pathways to publishing information to the masses, from journals through news outlets.
Was a pretty good one.
You keep claiming that, but you haven't.
The fact you would assume my sources come from a website like that shows a lot more about your credibility than mine.
Why would anyone expect a company to make a statement, news articles to be written about that statement, then all of the articles and statements to be pulled?
Then how in the fuck do you know about it?
I have a thing that I believe most people call "memory" and I read a lot of shit on biotech.
Maybe you should try following the statements they put out if you're going to speak on the subject. The only one here spreading fake information is you.
No it's not, they openly admitted it years ago then removed the statements.
Only the optimistic ones.
Source: life.
Had no idea the number was that high.
Ask them, both 23andme and Ancestry have admitted to skewing results such that people almost always get results indicating mixed ancestry.
Even after admitting to putting some small random percentage of a random minority in nearly everyone's results to help steer politics the way they want?
It's Silicon Valley, Silicon Valley is never about science, it's about the cult of science used to control people.
I have shown that you're flat out wrong or lying many, many times
Nope, you've just shown you have a passion for following my comments and trying to detract from them (badly.)