And yet, they didn't ban Leslie Jones for encouraging targeted harassment of someone who was mean to her - that tweet is still up. That is against Twitter's ToS, but they didn't make her take it down or do anything to her.
Now, to be sure, she got a lot of abuse, and she didn't deserve that. But I think Twitter should at least try to enforce its ToS evenly.
There is, in fact, already an easy solution to prevent being targeted by trolls while still using Twitter - just protect your account. Only people you accept can see anything you post then. Blocklists are also available, for those who want to use them.
There are certainly problems with the F-35 program - you've pointed out quite a few (although other pilots have different opinions on it). However, none of what you say actually refutes this story directly - that is, there's nothing that says the stealth on the plane is actually worse than the article makes it out to be.
Given that, in some cases, you can get put on the sex offender list for public urination (more common if a minor sees you, but that's not always necessary) or, in some states, for having sex with a 17 year old when you're 18, or if you're a minor sending explicit pictures of yourself to another minor, this law is ridiculous. The sex offender list needs to be seriously revamped.
Given the Gawker-Thiel relationship, why should I believe literally anything Gawker says about him? Even if he's interested in parabiosis, so are many scientists. That doesn't mean he's going to run out and steal blood from kids.
I think the end of the quote - "Let’s see if that happens. That’ll be next." indicates that he was being sarcastic. Moreover, saying "I hope you can do this" isn't the same thing as asking someone to do it.
Trump is scarier, but let's keep in mind that the POTUS has limited power. It's possible Trump would do less damage simply because Congress (where even most of the GOP members hate him) would tell him to get bent.
Powell used his less, and there's no evidence he sent or stored classified information on his private account. The rules were also different when he was SoS.
They're arguably too big to handle well in most large democracies, since - while the money could certainly be made available - bureaucrats and politicians would interfere at many levels. See: corn-based ethanol as an example.
Also, the government certainly didn't fund all the basic science that made these things possible. They funded a good chunk of it, but private industry does research too.
Oh, I don't think everybody is tapping the phones of the leaders of allied countries - that does seem to be limited to the US. And it's generally bad form to try to recruit people in allied agencies to make leaks. That doesn't mean they won't plant a few bugs, eavesdrop, or use their satellites to check things out though. You certainly don't spy on your allies as much as you do your enemies, but you do it a little bit.
On a more serious note, some people do actually rely on guns to feed their family. Not many, but some. And the CDC disagrees with you on the self defense statement.
Ah yes, normal rifles were completely useless in Iraq and Afghanistan. That's why the US had no problems with the local populace and American soldiers haven't been there in years.
I think it's the latter; as I recall, home video cameras (the ones that wrote to tape) went up to ~60 fps. That was faster than TV, and so when people watched it, it looked different and wrong to them. This actually discouraged movie studios from shooting at higher framerates because it reminded test audiences of their home videos, and thus they thought it looked lower quality, even though it was actually better.
Slashdot Mirror
And yet, they didn't ban Leslie Jones for encouraging targeted harassment of someone who was mean to her - that tweet is still up. That is against Twitter's ToS, but they didn't make her take it down or do anything to her.
Now, to be sure, she got a lot of abuse, and she didn't deserve that. But I think Twitter should at least try to enforce its ToS evenly.
There is, in fact, already an easy solution to prevent being targeted by trolls while still using Twitter - just protect your account. Only people you accept can see anything you post then. Blocklists are also available, for those who want to use them.
There are certainly problems with the F-35 program - you've pointed out quite a few (although other pilots have different opinions on it). However, none of what you say actually refutes this story directly - that is, there's nothing that says the stealth on the plane is actually worse than the article makes it out to be.
Given that, in some cases, you can get put on the sex offender list for public urination (more common if a minor sees you, but that's not always necessary) or, in some states, for having sex with a 17 year old when you're 18, or if you're a minor sending explicit pictures of yourself to another minor, this law is ridiculous. The sex offender list needs to be seriously revamped.
Given the Gawker-Thiel relationship, why should I believe literally anything Gawker says about him? Even if he's interested in parabiosis, so are many scientists. That doesn't mean he's going to run out and steal blood from kids.
I think the end of the quote - "Let’s see if that happens. That’ll be next." indicates that he was being sarcastic. Moreover, saying "I hope you can do this" isn't the same thing as asking someone to do it.
And yet, that's still not asking the hackers to find the emails.
Here are a few citations that explicitly state what she did was a criminal offense.
Trump is scarier, but let's keep in mind that the POTUS has limited power. It's possible Trump would do less damage simply because Congress (where even most of the GOP members hate him) would tell him to get bent.
I meant firing in terms of laying them off, but I guess I could have made that clearer.
Shooting at cops from a sniper vantage point, or ambushing them in their car, does not count as "shooting back". It's just shooting.
So buy a brand that lets you work on them then? If no other brands are doing that, why not?
Powell used his less, and there's no evidence he sent or stored classified information on his private account. The rules were also different when he was SoS.
I think usually it's drug money, or profits from racketeering, smuggling, etc. Sometimes it's coupled with tax dodges or fraud.
I don't see how firing some squid causes death, but maybe in Trump's America it does.
They're arguably too big to handle well in most large democracies, since - while the money could certainly be made available - bureaucrats and politicians would interfere at many levels. See: corn-based ethanol as an example.
Also, the government certainly didn't fund all the basic science that made these things possible. They funded a good chunk of it, but private industry does research too.
A living doppelgänger? Nope, I don't have one of those.
It's not a strawman of what Barsteward said.
Oh, I don't think everybody is tapping the phones of the leaders of allied countries - that does seem to be limited to the US. And it's generally bad form to try to recruit people in allied agencies to make leaks. That doesn't mean they won't plant a few bugs, eavesdrop, or use their satellites to check things out though. You certainly don't spy on your allies as much as you do your enemies, but you do it a little bit.
Allies spy on each other all the time. "Trust, but verify" and all that.
#AllAmendmentsMatter
On a more serious note, some people do actually rely on guns to feed their family. Not many, but some. And the CDC disagrees with you on the self defense statement.
To be fair, Vietnam had tanks and a remarkably good Air Force.
Ah yes, normal rifles were completely useless in Iraq and Afghanistan. That's why the US had no problems with the local populace and American soldiers haven't been there in years.
False.
I think it's the latter; as I recall, home video cameras (the ones that wrote to tape) went up to ~60 fps. That was faster than TV, and so when people watched it, it looked different and wrong to them. This actually discouraged movie studios from shooting at higher framerates because it reminded test audiences of their home videos, and thus they thought it looked lower quality, even though it was actually better.