Democrats have been smarter than Republicans though. They've put all the groups they care about into protected classes to whom you cannot refuse service. Republicans never bothered to make racists or assholes a protected class.
Google does not sell your data to advertisers. That would be the height of stupidity. The data they've collected is how they are able to make a fortune selling ads. They're not going to sell that data.
Google is getting a prominent place as the defaut search engine and creating a competitive ecosystem to generally create a successful web, which is their arena.
That said, the risk of melting ice is rising sea level. Unless the ice completely melts, the raised bedrock mitigates the detrimental effects of melting ice caps.
You're leaving out the part where crop circle design has gotten way more complicated over the years and the classic farmer explanation no longer applies to many of the more complicated "circles".
It's interesting that you claim Pythagoras the mystical cult leader was a scientist, but the engineers who built Stonehedge are relegated to only doing it for religious reasons.
I think you're missing the forest for the trees. Ignore the small squares; the larger square demonstrates the proof using a variation of the classic https://www.dbai.tuwien.ac.at/...
I wouldn't be so sure. While it's only showing an isosceles right triangle, it's a simple thought experiment for someone to explain how it applies to other triangles. The basics are there; it demonstrates that the squared hypotenuse is the sum of the other squared sides. It's easy enough for a maths instructor to walk a student through construting a similar solution to another right triangle. It could simply be that the Sumerian/Akkadian/Babylonian/Assyrians found the diagram more obvious for students if limited to the isosceles case.
Those people are lazy worthless non-contributive members of society. Unless those people have moved to a rural area and attempted to get a job farming, they're not worth any of our concern.
Not surprising. Tesla has been shifting to humans over automation. They probably had some difficulty working around the existing layout and instead of reworking much of their factory floor I'm guessing they decided to move people outside. Heat from bodies may also make the factory uncomfortable if it wasn't designed for it.
Tesla's approach has been to move fast and break things. Controls slow you down. While it would be irresponsible to not have controls around the on-board autopilot software, it's less clear-cut when it comes to developing your manufacturing. There are trade offs either way.
Which is what makes Tesla an outlier. The institutional short sellers are thinking ahead a year at most. Tesla's thinking ten or twenty years down the line. That's both what makes Tesla potentially valuable fundamentally, it's what drives their investors to think long term, and it's why there's such a disconnect between long/short investors.
It's weird how so many people think $1000 for an iPhone is the market finding the right price, while a $340... no wait $350... hold on, $360 share in a company is irrational or manipulative.
(continued from parent; stupid interface)...price is rising, then the 25% shorted stock is RATIONALLY going to lead to a short squeeze which drives the price higher.
Bullshit. You seem to think technical trading is irrational.
The truth is this is not a market (not just TSLA, the wider market) to be focusing on fundamentals. Technicals are in charge, and their impact is growing with the ever increasing supply of retail and automated investment.
To be more clear, while the fundamentals of Tesla may not support the current price (which is just speculation as Tesla has no direct comparisons; the closest is probably AAPL), the fundamentals are all turning positive. If fundamentals are improving and the pr
And people like me buying stock on the assumption that the short squeeze will send the price higher, and lending it out to short sellers at profit to keep the squeeze going.
Slashdot Mirror
Democrats have been smarter than Republicans though. They've put all the groups they care about into protected classes to whom you cannot refuse service. Republicans never bothered to make racists or assholes a protected class.
Google does not sell your data to advertisers. That would be the height of stupidity. The data they've collected is how they are able to make a fortune selling ads. They're not going to sell that data.
Google is getting a prominent place as the defaut search engine and creating a competitive ecosystem to generally create a successful web, which is their arena.
I switched to FF a couple months ago because I finally got sick of Chrome's wonky special and completely broken handling of scroll direction.
The thing about games with rebindable controls is that sometimes they don't bother even coming up with a reasonable default. That's when they lose me.
That said, the risk of melting ice is rising sea level. Unless the ice completely melts, the raised bedrock mitigates the detrimental effects of melting ice caps.
You're leaving out the part where crop circle design has gotten way more complicated over the years and the classic farmer explanation no longer applies to many of the more complicated "circles".
It's interesting that you claim Pythagoras the mystical cult leader was a scientist, but the engineers who built Stonehedge are relegated to only doing it for religious reasons.
I think you're missing the forest for the trees. Ignore the small squares; the larger square demonstrates the proof using a variation of the classic https://www.dbai.tuwien.ac.at/...
I wouldn't be so sure. While it's only showing an isosceles right triangle, it's a simple thought experiment for someone to explain how it applies to other triangles. The basics are there; it demonstrates that the squared hypotenuse is the sum of the other squared sides. It's easy enough for a maths instructor to walk a student through construting a similar solution to another right triangle. It could simply be that the Sumerian/Akkadian/Babylonian/Assyrians found the diagram more obvious for students if limited to the isosceles case.
Leftist? LOL!
International Citizen Ejection. It's the front line in America's War on Brown People.
Those people are lazy worthless non-contributive members of society. Unless those people have moved to a rural area and attempted to get a job farming, they're not worth any of our concern.
Not surprising. Tesla has been shifting to humans over automation. They probably had some difficulty working around the existing layout and instead of reworking much of their factory floor I'm guessing they decided to move people outside. Heat from bodies may also make the factory uncomfortable if it wasn't designed for it.
How hard is it to just hire competent people though? Tesla's problems are notable, perhaps critical, but not difficult to overcome.
Tesla's approach has been to move fast and break things. Controls slow you down. While it would be irresponsible to not have controls around the on-board autopilot software, it's less clear-cut when it comes to developing your manufacturing. There are trade offs either way.
Which is what makes Tesla an outlier. The institutional short sellers are thinking ahead a year at most. Tesla's thinking ten or twenty years down the line. That's both what makes Tesla potentially valuable fundamentally, it's what drives their investors to think long term, and it's why there's such a disconnect between long/short investors.
If they pay dividends, there is inherent value in the stock tied to the state of the company, but your point is still true in general.
You mean how AIG stock closely tracked their fundamental risks?
But which fundamentals? Is Tesla like Ford or is Tesla like Apple? That's the essential argument.
It's weird how so many people think $1000 for an iPhone is the market finding the right price, while a $340... no wait $350... hold on, $360 share in a company is irrational or manipulative.
(continued from parent; stupid interface) ...price is rising, then the 25% shorted stock is RATIONALLY going to lead to a short squeeze which drives the price higher.
Bullshit. You seem to think technical trading is irrational.
The truth is this is not a market (not just TSLA, the wider market) to be focusing on fundamentals. Technicals are in charge, and their impact is growing with the ever increasing supply of retail and automated investment.
To be more clear, while the fundamentals of Tesla may not support the current price (which is just speculation as Tesla has no direct comparisons; the closest is probably AAPL), the fundamentals are all turning positive. If fundamentals are improving and the pr
And people like me buying stock on the assumption that the short squeeze will send the price higher, and lending it out to short sellers at profit to keep the squeeze going.
Possible but unlikely. Much more likely to be an employee who shorted the stock and is trying to save themselves or enrich themselves.