If you selectively quote, you can make anyone say anything you like, or simply get yourself confused because you removed important context. Such as in this case.
The London Pride march this year saw scenes where an activist lesbian group hijacked the front of the parade, laying down in front of it, protesting "trans activism" which they claimed "erased lesbianism". They then led the march after refusing to move from the head of the parade, so spectators were bemused to see anti-trans posters and slogans leading the LGBTQ+ event...
The problem with saying "I 100% believe they have signed their first tourist to the moon" is that SpaceX and Musk already announced this, but for the Falcon Heavy in February 2017, saying two unnamed persons had paid significant deposits for the circumlunar trip. Is this going to be an annual announcement?
I have a similar gmail account name, I got in earrly and got a good one, and I've not only received some juicy emails intended for other "me's", I've been threatened with legal action for receiving them. One guy has also demanded I turn over my account to him, as he is entitled to it, and threatened to sue me if I didn't. Haven't heard anything about that one in a few years.
The most annoying part are the companies who get your address added as a point of contact for something and never accept it was never intended to be you. I got so pissed off with one of my alter egos who refused to fix his mistake, even blaming me for receiving the emails and threatening me, that I cancelled his business broadband...
iOS autocorrect strikes again - I have no idea what's Amy's way of thinking is, but I do know the fraudsters are trying to capitalise on that *way* of thinking...
Yeah, not always. In the UK there is a big problem with "crash for cash" which tries to capitalise on that the Amy of thinking, where fraudsters will overtake you, pull back in much too close and then slam their brakes on immediately, giving you no chance to avoid them. The fraudsters will then claim for all sorts of medical, psychological and other compensations from you.
The rise of dash cams is slowly bringing them under control.
Similarly here - we need to full details before we can be sure who is to blame, but a car merging into moving traffic might bear some responsibility, especially if the traffic they are merging into is moving significantly faster than they are...
We shall see what the outcome of the investigation is.
I unfortunately believe that UBI won't end up being the utopian approach to welfare that many seem to think its aimed at being.
In the UK, since the 1990s there has been a big rise in private landlords who refuse to rent to "DSS recipients" (although its not been called DSS for years, the term these days refers to anyone receiving housing benefit). Yes, its illegal discrimination, but it still happens and its on the increase rather than the decrease.
And you can't really blame the private landlords for doing it, as they have some very good reasons.
Coupled with the rise of refusal to rent to housing benefit recipients is the various changes that successive governments have put in place - and the biggest of them all was the switch from local governments paying housing benefit directly to the landlords to instead paying that benefit to the tenant, who is supposed to pay their rent just like anyone else. It was done as a means of "empowering" those on welfare, to give them more visibility of their money and let them feel more in control.
Unfortunately, it led to a massive rise in evictions for non-payment of rent. A lot of those tenants stopped paying their rent and instead bought big screen TVs, holidays, luxury items etc and then used the courts to stall eviction processes (which can take months), leaving landlords with huge debts that were never going to be cleared.
Housing benefit also hasn't risen in line with other government changes which have made owning property to rent significantly more expensive - for instance, landlords can no longer claim tax relief on income that covers the mortgage payments, so to cover that loss rents have to rise, but housing benefit has stayed stagnant meaning more tenants cannot afford to pay the market rate.
So now its hard to find property to rent if you are on housing benefit, either because no one wants to rent to you or because you are priced out of the market by the very government that is supporting you.
UBI might benefit some astute people, but I think using it to replace normal welfare without checks and balances in place will simply lead to more of the above - a lot of people will treat it as free money for luxury items and we are back to square one.
When Boeing launched the brand new 7E7 (which later became the Boeing 787), there was an almost titanic battle between various states as to where Boeing was going to situate the production lines, and eventually the issue was decided when Washington State passed tax relief laws which gave Boeing massive discounts for planes produced there.
The laws were ridiculous, with Boeing supporters claiming straight faced that the tax relief could be claimed by any aircraft manufacturer, so it wasn't state aid to Boeing (this was the height of the Airbus-Boeing state aid battle, initiated by the US government).
Problem was, the tax relief laws stated requirements that covered exactly the range of seats that the Boeing 787 was being marketed at, exactly the efficiency gains the Boeing 787 was being marketed at, exactly the production timescales the Boeing 787 was being marketed at, and all in all all the restrictions added up to eliminate all aircraft except for the Boeing 787...
Ironically, Boeing ended up missing both the production timescales and the efficiency gains cited as requirements in the law, but they still received the tax relief...
And that's the problem, people like you saying "there is a discussion to be had" over some pretty black and white topics, like Nazis ("fine people")...
Not everything has to be discussed to death just because it allows people like you to put forward their questionable view points. It's your stance which forces media companies to "show both sides of the argument" which results in a climate change denier sitting alongside a climate change expert as if they were an equal side in the discussion, when in fact the fact of climate change is supported 90:1 in the scientific community.
The problem with saying Patriot is a good system is that multiple recent independent studies into its effectiveness during the First Gulf War have cast serious doubt on its success - US Army claims of 80% accuracy were independently found to rather be between 0% and 10%...
The system has indeed been developed into a decent platform, but only in the years after the FGW, during which it was basically entirely redesigned.
It sounds like the US credit checking system is broken then - I don't need to supply the British equivalent (NI Number) when applying for credit, nor do I need to apply for credit to sign up for cable or satellite TV...
Rather than simply accepting the broken system, you might want to think about how it should be changed.
Google wasn't fined for a closed system, they were fined for requiring vendors shipping Android devices and wanting to use he Play Store to also ship Chrome and Google Search, exclusively. They were also fined for making payments to vendors to facilitate this restriction, and finally they were also fined for restricting these vendors from shipping any device without the Play Store if they shipped a device with the Play Store.
The idea that this is about a closed App Store system simply isn't true.
Apple isn't subject to the same fines because they aren't forcing third party vendors to act in such a way which furthers their own, unrelated products.
Microsoft bashing of Java? Are you sure you know the history there? For a long time, Microsoft shipped the best JVM on Windows, better than Suns - but then Sun got pissed that Microsoft was extending Java on the Windows platform and considered it a breach of contract. The resulting court case and settlement saw the MS JVM dropped and Microsoft creating.Net instead, where Sun had no contractual control.
I think you mean Mars... it takes an atmosphere to cause global warming, and that's one thing the moon doesn't have. At all. Nada. It doesn't have the gravity to sustain one, it all floats off into space.
Commercial airlines fly a *lot* of military personnel around for cost, so if you removed that benefit then the US military would definitely suffer significantly.
You can't put regional pilots on mainline contracts, the mainline unions restrict the airlines from doing so (see the scope restrictions), just as they restrict the mainline airlines from using smaller aircraft more economically by flying them further (mainline unions would rather see 737s flown uneconomically at the shorter end of their range than allow an E175 to be flown in such a way that it competes with the 737).
This is a *lot* more nuanced than simply "pay them more". In many cases, airlines are restricted in what they can offer in certain segments of the pilot market because the unions would want that increase across the spectrum.
Slashdot Mirror
If you don't selectively quote, it makes sense.
If you selectively quote, you can make anyone say anything you like, or simply get yourself confused because you removed important context. Such as in this case.
Sneezing can permanently paralyse you, no car accident needed.
That's the standard in the UK due to health and safety laws - the UK has been wheelie bin based for at least 15 years now.
When I was living in Berlin in the 1980s, we had wheelie bins and automatic lifters then.
The London Pride march this year saw scenes where an activist lesbian group hijacked the front of the parade, laying down in front of it, protesting "trans activism" which they claimed "erased lesbianism". They then led the march after refusing to move from the head of the parade, so spectators were bemused to see anti-trans posters and slogans leading the LGBTQ+ event...
You literally cannot make this shit up.
https://www.independent.co.uk/...
ARM. Nuff said really.
The problem with saying "I 100% believe they have signed their first tourist to the moon" is that SpaceX and Musk already announced this, but for the Falcon Heavy in February 2017, saying two unnamed persons had paid significant deposits for the circumlunar trip. Is this going to be an annual announcement?
I have a similar gmail account name, I got in earrly and got a good one, and I've not only received some juicy emails intended for other "me's", I've been threatened with legal action for receiving them. One guy has also demanded I turn over my account to him, as he is entitled to it, and threatened to sue me if I didn't. Haven't heard anything about that one in a few years.
The most annoying part are the companies who get your address added as a point of contact for something and never accept it was never intended to be you. I got so pissed off with one of my alter egos who refused to fix his mistake, even blaming me for receiving the emails and threatening me, that I cancelled his business broadband...
iOS autocorrect strikes again - I have no idea what's Amy's way of thinking is, but I do know the fraudsters are trying to capitalise on that *way* of thinking...
Yeah, not always. In the UK there is a big problem with "crash for cash" which tries to capitalise on that the Amy of thinking, where fraudsters will overtake you, pull back in much too close and then slam their brakes on immediately, giving you no chance to avoid them. The fraudsters will then claim for all sorts of medical, psychological and other compensations from you.
The rise of dash cams is slowly bringing them under control.
Similarly here - we need to full details before we can be sure who is to blame, but a car merging into moving traffic might bear some responsibility, especially if the traffic they are merging into is moving significantly faster than they are...
We shall see what the outcome of the investigation is.
Wouldn't solve a thing - these people don't have $10,000 to drop on rent and security deposits, so they wouldn't get the property anyway.
And getting a sitting tenant out against their will is incredibly difficult, and can take years of court proceedings, all while no rent is being paid.
I unfortunately believe that UBI won't end up being the utopian approach to welfare that many seem to think its aimed at being.
In the UK, since the 1990s there has been a big rise in private landlords who refuse to rent to "DSS recipients" (although its not been called DSS for years, the term these days refers to anyone receiving housing benefit). Yes, its illegal discrimination, but it still happens and its on the increase rather than the decrease.
And you can't really blame the private landlords for doing it, as they have some very good reasons.
Coupled with the rise of refusal to rent to housing benefit recipients is the various changes that successive governments have put in place - and the biggest of them all was the switch from local governments paying housing benefit directly to the landlords to instead paying that benefit to the tenant, who is supposed to pay their rent just like anyone else. It was done as a means of "empowering" those on welfare, to give them more visibility of their money and let them feel more in control.
Unfortunately, it led to a massive rise in evictions for non-payment of rent. A lot of those tenants stopped paying their rent and instead bought big screen TVs, holidays, luxury items etc and then used the courts to stall eviction processes (which can take months), leaving landlords with huge debts that were never going to be cleared.
Housing benefit also hasn't risen in line with other government changes which have made owning property to rent significantly more expensive - for instance, landlords can no longer claim tax relief on income that covers the mortgage payments, so to cover that loss rents have to rise, but housing benefit has stayed stagnant meaning more tenants cannot afford to pay the market rate.
So now its hard to find property to rent if you are on housing benefit, either because no one wants to rent to you or because you are priced out of the market by the very government that is supporting you.
UBI might benefit some astute people, but I think using it to replace normal welfare without checks and balances in place will simply lead to more of the above - a lot of people will treat it as free money for luxury items and we are back to square one.
When Boeing launched the brand new 7E7 (which later became the Boeing 787), there was an almost titanic battle between various states as to where Boeing was going to situate the production lines, and eventually the issue was decided when Washington State passed tax relief laws which gave Boeing massive discounts for planes produced there.
The laws were ridiculous, with Boeing supporters claiming straight faced that the tax relief could be claimed by any aircraft manufacturer, so it wasn't state aid to Boeing (this was the height of the Airbus-Boeing state aid battle, initiated by the US government).
Problem was, the tax relief laws stated requirements that covered exactly the range of seats that the Boeing 787 was being marketed at, exactly the efficiency gains the Boeing 787 was being marketed at, exactly the production timescales the Boeing 787 was being marketed at, and all in all all the restrictions added up to eliminate all aircraft except for the Boeing 787...
Ironically, Boeing ended up missing both the production timescales and the efficiency gains cited as requirements in the law, but they still received the tax relief...
"I thought that cryptocurrencies would be the one and only breakthrough for ordinary hardworking people like us,"
And yet you were throwing debt at what was essentially a "get rich quick" scheme? That's not ordinary nor hardworking, that's just idiocy.
And that's the problem, people like you saying "there is a discussion to be had" over some pretty black and white topics, like Nazis ("fine people")...
Not everything has to be discussed to death just because it allows people like you to put forward their questionable view points. It's your stance which forces media companies to "show both sides of the argument" which results in a climate change denier sitting alongside a climate change expert as if they were an equal side in the discussion, when in fact the fact of climate change is supported 90:1 in the scientific community.
The problem with saying Patriot is a good system is that multiple recent independent studies into its effectiveness during the First Gulf War have cast serious doubt on its success - US Army claims of 80% accuracy were independently found to rather be between 0% and 10%...
The system has indeed been developed into a decent platform, but only in the years after the FGW, during which it was basically entirely redesigned.
It sounds like the US credit checking system is broken then - I don't need to supply the British equivalent (NI Number) when applying for credit, nor do I need to apply for credit to sign up for cable or satellite TV...
Rather than simply accepting the broken system, you might want to think about how it should be changed.
Google wasn't fined for a closed system, they were fined for requiring vendors shipping Android devices and wanting to use he Play Store to also ship Chrome and Google Search, exclusively. They were also fined for making payments to vendors to facilitate this restriction, and finally they were also fined for restricting these vendors from shipping any device without the Play Store if they shipped a device with the Play Store.
The idea that this is about a closed App Store system simply isn't true.
Apple isn't subject to the same fines because they aren't forcing third party vendors to act in such a way which furthers their own, unrelated products.
Because many foreign countries won't allow armed passengers into their airspace.
Microsoft bashing of Java? Are you sure you know the history there? For a long time, Microsoft shipped the best JVM on Windows, better than Suns - but then Sun got pissed that Microsoft was extending Java on the Windows platform and considered it a breach of contract. The resulting court case and settlement saw the MS JVM dropped and Microsoft creating .Net instead, where Sun had no contractual control.
Microsoft *loved* Java, too much for Sun.
A company doesn't have the power to stop working with individual contractors...? Since when did that happen?
I think you mean Mars... it takes an atmosphere to cause global warming, and that's one thing the moon doesn't have. At all. Nada. It doesn't have the gravity to sustain one, it all floats off into space.
Of course, I spot the time travelling mistake the moment I hit "submit"...
Actually, their longest so far is 33 days, during the Shenzhou 11 mission in 2916.
The mission you link to, Shenzhou 5, was their first crewed mission - they have orbited two space station since then, with multiple crewed missions.
Commercial airlines fly a *lot* of military personnel around for cost, so if you removed that benefit then the US military would definitely suffer significantly.
You can't put regional pilots on mainline contracts, the mainline unions restrict the airlines from doing so (see the scope restrictions), just as they restrict the mainline airlines from using smaller aircraft more economically by flying them further (mainline unions would rather see 737s flown uneconomically at the shorter end of their range than allow an E175 to be flown in such a way that it competes with the 737).
This is a *lot* more nuanced than simply "pay them more". In many cases, airlines are restricted in what they can offer in certain segments of the pilot market because the unions would want that increase across the spectrum.