Stop being loyal to brands cause they certainly arnt loyal to you.
Define loyalty ? Brands position themselves as being certain things, and as long as they maintain that they are "loyal to you".
Nvidia is a good example of a computer hardware company that has maintained it's brand values, if you have one of their cards for whatever reasons you are going to to get good performance from it. ATI/AMD not so much. They have had crap drivers for windows going all the way back to win 95. That's another feature of understanding a brand.
It'll be more than that. Lawyers are most likely taking on this case without any payment from the plaintiffs. They are the ones risking millions and years of courts costs upfront for major payday down the line. Amount is that high not to limit plaintiffs damages themselves and to cover pessimistic amount of legal fees. Google's legal strategy could be to drag this case along the courts for a decade. Can you image how much legal bill that'll accrue? People always complain about bloodsucking lawyers but in cases like this they aren't the bad guys. They actually allow the little guys to fight back..
Sure they are. Googles lawyers are bloodsuckers for abusing the system and being willing to use delay as a strategy, the plaintiffs lawyers are bloodsuckers for being willing to let that run up their fees, which they will get while plaintiffs get nothing. The entire legal profession are bloodsuckers for their nod nod wink wink attitude towards this.
Seeing as the Fake News idea is being promoted by people who won't even come out into the open.
In other words, the individuals behind this newly created group are publicly branding journalists and news outlets as tools of Russian propaganda – even calling on the FBI to investigate them for espionage – while cowardly hiding their own identities.
The credentials of this supposed group of experts are impossible to verify, as none is provided either by the Post or by the group itself. The Intercept contacted PropOrNot and asked numerous questions about about its team, but received only this reply: “We’re getting a lot of requests for comment and can get back to you today =) [smiley face emoticon].” The group added: “We’re over 30 people, organized into teams, and we cannot confirm or deny anyone’s involvement.”
And if you really want to stop fake news, you can ask questions. A good one to start with, is where is the proof that Russia did any of this ?
Do individuals have the right to pick up people and offer them a ride for a fee, or does the government have the right do define a class of people with that right.
There is also the question of does the consumer have the right to decide what is in their best interest or does the government ?
Very primitive with lots of promise. It's going to be awhile before development costs are going to be low enough to get down to mass market price points.
Right now it's still a singing frog. Nobody cares if it sings well, it's just incredible it sings.
2. She used the server to store and transmit material with above top secret clearance. In violation of federal law and agreements she signed.
We have the emails recovered and released by the state dept.
3) She changed her email retention policy before any subpoenas, it's not her fault if the provider screwed up
LOL you mean her provider that went to reddit with his OH shit moment ? Or the orders to her provider post subpoenas
The Gowdy video, seriously? You trust a document forger? No that's whole thing is a shell game trying to say Clinton said things she didn't by willfully misinterpreting her words.
Wasn't aware Hillary was a document forger, but lying under oath is still lying under oath.
I just want every state in the union checked for voter fraud. When I say voter fraud I mean, dead voters, districts with more votes than population, bussed voters, illegal aliens voting.
You know, all the things the Dmocrats have been fighting to prevent anyone so much as checking for the past 40 years.
Are you just putting out deliberate lies and hoping nobody knows better ?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the Russians hack the DNC email server AFTER Clinton moved the emails to the correct server?
So much wrong so little space.I am sorry this is beyond my ability to correct You can try and correct yourself. A good start would by trying to come up with reasoning on how the DNC problems have anything to do with Hillary's email.
I doubt even 5% of the emails were even interesting so I doubt that Hillary wanted to prevent emails being released under FOI act.
You may doubt all you like, other people find the work email of the Secretary of State immensely interesting.
I'm not sure if the emails she destroyed were personal or not -- I'm sure if it were a big deal, the FBI would have said so.
They did say so. Comey recommended against prosecution on the basis of intent, which funny enough isn't part of the law and wasn't enough to protect this sailor from doing far less http://dailycaller.com/2016/08...
There's no proof that Hillary under oath -- she just gave an answer you don't like.
When you give different answers that contradict each other to the same question, that's called lying. So when you say you had nothing to do with wiping a server and then say well I only wiped personal information that's lying.
Not a big time Hillary fan, but after 30 years of lawsuits and legal hassles, I'm fairly sure if she were in the least bit dirty, something would have stuck by now.
Sure guilty people never avoid justice, I mean just ask the bankers responsible for the 2008 meltdown.
Here you go 1. She set up an email server with the intent to avoid document retention and freedom of information laws. 2. She used the server to store and transmit material with above top secret clearance. In violation of federal law and agreements she signed. 3. When legally subpoenaed for the email she destroyed the information. In violation of laws regarding obstruction of justice 4. She lied under oath about what she did and the circumstances around what she did. That's perjury.
Slashdot Mirror
Stop being loyal to brands cause they certainly arnt loyal to you.
Define loyalty ? Brands position themselves as being certain things, and as long as they maintain that they are "loyal to you".
Nvidia is a good example of a computer hardware company that has maintained it's brand values, if you have one of their cards for whatever reasons you are going to to get good performance from it. ATI/AMD not so much. They have had crap drivers for windows going all the way back to win 95. That's another feature of understanding a brand.
It'll be more than that. Lawyers are most likely taking on this case without any payment from the plaintiffs. They are the ones risking millions and years of courts costs upfront for major payday down the line. Amount is that high not to limit plaintiffs damages themselves and to cover pessimistic amount of legal fees. Google's legal strategy could be to drag this case along the courts for a decade. Can you image how much legal bill that'll accrue? People always complain about bloodsucking lawyers but in cases like this they aren't the bad guys. They actually allow the little guys to fight back..
Sure they are. Googles lawyers are bloodsuckers for abusing the system and being willing to use delay as a strategy, the plaintiffs lawyers are bloodsuckers for being willing to let that run up their fees, which they will get while plaintiffs get nothing. The entire legal profession are bloodsuckers for their nod nod wink wink attitude towards this.
so your argument is that he is brilliant at soaking up government subsidies ?
I did
If you think I didn't you need to check your thought process.
Oh Dywolf looks like you are feeling a little insecure
Seeing as the timeframe for the effects is now 100 years out, you are also looking a little foolish.
Not as foolish as the people who originally made prediction that were within their lifespan but foolish enough.
You have my pity
Pity you only speak troll and ignoranus.
It's a hell of a lot more insulting if you spell ignoramus correctly.
Why would I bother to read anything I reply to
There we go thought it would be best to translate into English. Anyway I'll let you go on screaming "We're all gonna die"
To hack complete idiots.
Eight years ? why it's almost as if you managed to read the chart I posted with the data.
They say you know a man by the quality of his enemies.
Thankfully I have better ones than you.
But methane has an incredibly short life in the atmosphere
http://chartsbin.com/view/2407
This concludes the interruption you may now go back to your regularly scheduled doom.
Civil war veterans in NC
http://thefederalist.com/2016/...
There's plenty more, how much over the reports nobody knows because the Democrats spent decades making it impossible to find out.
https://theintercept.com/2016/...
Seeing as the Fake News idea is being promoted by people who won't even come out into the open.
In other words, the individuals behind this newly created group are publicly branding journalists and news outlets as tools of Russian propaganda – even calling on the FBI to investigate them for espionage – while cowardly hiding their own identities.
The credentials of this supposed group of experts are impossible to verify, as none is provided either by the Post or by the group itself. The Intercept contacted PropOrNot and asked numerous questions about about its team, but received only this reply: “We’re getting a lot of requests for comment and can get back to you today =) [smiley face emoticon].” The group added: “We’re over 30 people, organized into teams, and we cannot confirm or deny anyone’s involvement.”
And if you really want to stop fake news, you can ask questions. A good one to start with, is where is the proof that Russia did any of this ?
Fair enough
How does uber impact this ? Far as I can see they have to track their drivers.
The coal business is dying from natural causes in the USA, and I don't think there's anything Trump can possibly do to turn that around
Natural causes ?
Well if you call EPA regulations meant to kill coal https://www.washingtonpost.com... natural causes sure.
Do individuals have the right to pick up people and offer them a ride for a fee, or does the government have the right do define a class of people with that right.
There is also the question of does the consumer have the right to decide what is in their best interest or does the government ?
Very primitive with lots of promise. It's going to be awhile before development costs are going to be low enough to get down to mass market price points.
Right now it's still a singing frog. Nobody cares if it sings well, it's just incredible it sings.
1) There was not sufficient evidence of intent.
There was her written expression of intent
2. She used the server to store and transmit material with above top secret clearance. In violation of federal law and agreements she signed.
We have the emails recovered and released by the state dept.
3) She changed her email retention policy before any subpoenas, it's not her fault if the provider screwed up
LOL you mean her provider that went to reddit with his OH shit moment ? Or the orders to her provider post subpoenas
The Gowdy video, seriously? You trust a document forger? No that's whole thing is a shell game trying to say Clinton said things she didn't by willfully misinterpreting her words.
Wasn't aware Hillary was a document forger, but lying under oath is still lying under oath.
I just want every state in the union checked for voter fraud. When I say voter fraud I mean, dead voters, districts with more votes than population, bussed voters, illegal aliens voting.
You know, all the things the Dmocrats have been fighting to prevent anyone so much as checking for the past 40 years.
Are you just putting out deliberate lies and hoping nobody knows better ?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the Russians hack the DNC email server AFTER Clinton moved the emails to the correct server?
So much wrong so little space .I am sorry this is beyond my ability to correct You can try and correct yourself. A good start would by trying to come up with reasoning on how the DNC problems have anything to do with Hillary's email.
I doubt even 5% of the emails were even interesting so I doubt that Hillary wanted to prevent emails being released under FOI act.
You may doubt all you like, other people find the work email of the Secretary of State immensely interesting.
I'm not sure if the emails she destroyed were personal or not -- I'm sure if it were a big deal, the FBI would have said so.
They did say so. Comey recommended against prosecution on the basis of intent, which funny enough isn't part of the law and wasn't enough to protect this sailor from doing far less http://dailycaller.com/2016/08...
There's no proof that Hillary under oath -- she just gave an answer you don't like.
When you give different answers that contradict each other to the same question, that's called lying.
So when you say you had nothing to do with wiping a server and then say well I only wiped personal information that's lying.
Not a big time Hillary fan, but after 30 years of lawsuits and legal hassles, I'm fairly sure if she were in the least bit dirty, something would have stuck by now.
Sure guilty people never avoid justice, I mean just ask the bankers responsible for the 2008 meltdown.
Sorry ignorance is not an argument.
She asked Collin Powell about avoiding state regulations.
Here you go
1. She set up an email server with the intent to avoid document retention and freedom of information laws.
2. She used the server to store and transmit material with above top secret clearance. In violation of federal law and agreements she signed.
3. When legally subpoenaed for the email she destroyed the information. In violation of laws regarding obstruction of justice
4. She lied under oath about what she did and the circumstances around what she did. That's perjury.
That help ?
Oh I don't know the part of the graphs that look like someone tasered an X-Y plotter come to mind.
Or maybe the part about getting the news from CNN instead of a direct source where you would have data to make an intelligent evaluation ?
If you think I am being mean to you
I have no idea what things you find obvious. Just show why you think the data is wrong.
Just ask yourself who the fuck do you think you are to make demands like that of anyone.
Here you go,
Accuracy and Precision
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Hope that helps you.