"Fertile" means able to have children. Gays are just as able to. You mean "less likely." (Though some have children via surrogates or artificial insemination.)
Native Hawaiians aren't Native Americans. The latter are people indigenous to the Americas (north, central, or south), i.e., the continental land mass. Hawaii isn't even on the same tectonic plate.
Why is it that nobody reads ONLY what I actually write? I never said *I* am making any such argument either way. I said that the person who I responded to could make such an argument. I *never* said it would be a good argument.
And really [Objective C] in the above list exist only because Apple decided they wanted to try for developer lockin.
Objective C was developed by Brad Cox and Tom Love at their then company Stepstone. It was then used by NeXT for NextStep. It got into Apple only because NeXT was bought by Apple and NextStep was the basis for Mac OS X. It had nothing to do with developer lock-in.
And your an idiot because you can't read. I never advocated for Obama pardoning Snowden. I only countered the bogus claim that Snowden had to be tried and convicted before he could be pardoned. So, again, yes, Obama can pardon him, but I never said it was likely.
A presidential pardon may be granted at any time, however, and as when Ford pardoned Nixon, the pardoned person need not yet have been convicted or even formally charged with a crime.
... the age of exploitation is over. And unless those people, companies, entities, with their Corporate Social Responsibilities, especially those with the power to influence vast masses, start putting the priorities of the Planet, which has so far given us the privilege - not right - to exist and be making all that $$$, it ain't going to benefit anyone.
You know that, at least in the US, the pro-business Republicans now control the Presidency and both houses of Congress, right? The age of exploitation is just getting started. (They even tried to get rid of their own independent ethics board.)
Usenet is a decentralized protocol and posts are cooperatively replicated among participating servers. I don't see why Twitter couldn't do the same thing.
So, before electronic storage, the police shouldn't have had access to paper storage? Why memorize a phone number if you can write it down?
The problem with encryption is not that the police shouldn't have access to the data (with a warrant), it's that there's no way to grant only the police access. Those who want strong encryption believe keeping the data private from third parties is the greater good.
My current GF (who is, of all things, an orthodontist) is into this shit.
Get out while you still can (easily). Assuming you eventually marry her and have kids, do you want either arguments over whether to medicate your kids if they truly need some medication prescribed by a doctor or here secretly withholding medication from your kids and giving them quack remedies instead?
The key words are "that indicates," i.e., the text of the ad must indicate a preference or discrimination. It does not say anything about to whom you show the ad.
The law was written well before anyone could place housing ads on the internet. The closest non-internet equivalent would be if you posted your ad on telephone poles except in predominantly non-white neighborhoods. But even that isn't illegal. So if that isn't, why is not showing an ad to certain people online illegal?
You might be able to argue that it should be illegal, but, as written, it's not.
I never said anything about real-time vehicle tracking. That's not the same as system status updates. Vehicle tracking here is provided by Nextbus.com, a private company that provides vehicle tracking for many transit agencies under contract. And yes, we have apps for that too, but ALL such apps get their data from Nextbus. Some apps also get status updates, but that data comes from Twitter.
So your comment has absolutely nothing to do with what I said.
My primary use-case is getting real-time status updates from my local public transit agency (that I commute on daily). I wouldn't like to see that go away.
To fix Twitter, just remove all direct messaging. All the harassment would stop. Sure, people could still tweet all manner of vile things, but only people who have opted in to follow them would see it.
as long... as the plutocrats and their champagne caviar cocktails arrive safely.
When most cars are self-driving, including less expensive cars, I'd suppose that they'd all prioritize passenger safety.
I'm pretty sure Pedestrians (in the US) have right of way in just about every situation.
It's only in crosswalks (including unmarked ones at corners), so not just any old place. Jay walking is still illegal. Pedestrians are also forbidden on freeways.
Flip the situation around and see what your response is. Would you be okay with it if Facebook and Google were pushing hard for a (R) candidate in a close election?
There's a difference between liking it and believing it's within their right to do. In my original post, I never said whether I liked it. I only questioned why people are thinking they have no right to do it.
So, while am still not saying whether I would like your hypothetical flipped case, yes, I believe they would have a right to do it. Whether I like it or not is irrelevant.
... except with Facebook and other forms of social media, their purpose is supposed to be to give a voice to EVERYONE who wants to use it and contribute content.
There's no evidence that Facebook is censoring anything. The only grief they received was over the Trending Topics thing (which nobody really cares about anyway) --- and this case isn't related to that.
... when Apple decide they don't care about the Apple watch any more and shut down the servers that enable it to work, it could well stop functioning altogether; many pieces of modern tech are like this.
Yes, many tech devices are like that, but the Apple Watch isn't one of them: it tethers to the iPhone, but the iPhone isn't like that either. The only relevant servers are for iCloud that enable cloud backups and iPhone-to-Mac syncing for things like contacts and events, but even those aren't required for the phone or Mac to work.
Slashdot Mirror
Everything you said is equally true of Lyft, but Lyft is nowhere near as scummy of a company as Uber.
"Fertile" means able to have children. Gays are just as able to. You mean "less likely." (Though some have children via surrogates or artificial insemination.)
Native Hawaiians aren't Native Americans. The latter are people indigenous to the Americas (north, central, or south), i.e., the continental land mass. Hawaii isn't even on the same tectonic plate.
[citation needed]
Why is it that nobody reads ONLY what I actually write? I never said *I* am making any such argument either way. I said that the person who I responded to could make such an argument. I *never* said it would be a good argument.
There's also Objective C++. You could write just your UI code in Objective C and write all the rest of your application in C++ if you want.
You can make your argument about developer lock-in for Swift, but not Objective C.
Objective C was developed by Brad Cox and Tom Love at their then company Stepstone. It was then used by NeXT for NextStep. It got into Apple only because NeXT was bought by Apple and NextStep was the basis for Mac OS X. It had nothing to do with developer lock-in.
And your an idiot because you can't read. I never advocated for Obama pardoning Snowden. I only countered the bogus claim that Snowden had to be tried and convicted before he could be pardoned. So, again, yes, Obama can pardon him, but I never said it was likely.
So, yes, Obama can pardon Snowden.
You know that, at least in the US, the pro-business Republicans now control the Presidency and both houses of Congress, right? The age of exploitation is just getting started. (They even tried to get rid of their own independent ethics board.)
That didn't stop Facebook from buying Instagram for 1 billion. It's more to do with Snap not wanting to sell.
Usenet is a decentralized protocol and posts are cooperatively replicated among participating servers. I don't see why Twitter couldn't do the same thing.
At worst, faithless electors pay a relatively small fine.
The problem with encryption is not that the police shouldn't have access to the data (with a warrant), it's that there's no way to grant only the police access. Those who want strong encryption believe keeping the data private from third parties is the greater good.
Get out while you still can (easily). Assuming you eventually marry her and have kids, do you want either arguments over whether to medicate your kids if they truly need some medication prescribed by a doctor or here secretly withholding medication from your kids and giving them quack remedies instead?
The law was written well before anyone could place housing ads on the internet. The closest non-internet equivalent would be if you posted your ad on telephone poles except in predominantly non-white neighborhoods. But even that isn't illegal. So if that isn't, why is not showing an ad to certain people online illegal?
You might be able to argue that it should be illegal, but, as written, it's not.
It takes work to extract and transport resources. It takes work to grow, harvest, and transport food. So it's all work.
So your comment has absolutely nothing to do with what I said.
To fix Twitter, just remove all direct messaging. All the harassment would stop. Sure, people could still tweet all manner of vile things, but only people who have opted in to follow them would see it.
When most cars are self-driving, including less expensive cars, I'd suppose that they'd all prioritize passenger safety.
It's only in crosswalks (including unmarked ones at corners), so not just any old place. Jay walking is still illegal. Pedestrians are also forbidden on freeways.
If Twitter eliminated mentions so that it was only a one-way broadcast (its primary use-case), all of the attacks would disappear.
There's a difference between liking it and believing it's within their right to do. In my original post, I never said whether I liked it. I only questioned why people are thinking they have no right to do it.
So, while am still not saying whether I would like your hypothetical flipped case, yes, I believe they would have a right to do it. Whether I like it or not is irrelevant.
There's no evidence that Facebook is censoring anything. The only grief they received was over the Trending Topics thing (which nobody really cares about anyway) --- and this case isn't related to that.
Yes, many tech devices are like that, but the Apple Watch isn't one of them: it tethers to the iPhone, but the iPhone isn't like that either. The only relevant servers are for iCloud that enable cloud backups and iPhone-to-Mac syncing for things like contacts and events, but even those aren't required for the phone or Mac to work.