There is no tautology here, but ok. The most you can claim is that I made a clarification which wasn't accurate. I'll allow for your anger since you seem to be taking this entirely too personally rather than admitting that I am only thinking of practical considerations on the subject. If you want to claim that there is no specific medical reasons for the policy, you better find a way to say which medical risks are present (and why) and which are not present (and why). And you better do it specifically. Because medical considerations was exactly the justification given by the President. Instead you see all these arguments as if the President cited risks to unit cohesion as the justification (which he did not).
No such restriction exists in Ukraine. Welcome to Putin's Russia, everyone supporting the RF takeover in Ukraine. You don't have to learn Ukrainian anymore. You can continue speaking Russian as you always did. Just don't set your sights on reading anything in English.
Sounds to me like transgenders could face the same problems as anybody else.
That's because logic and reason don't work on you. In fact, anyone trying to explain something logically to you is wasting their time. This is exactly the situation in which ad hominems are not logical phallacies. They are the appropriate response. YOU can't follow logical arguments. So the problem is not with the arguments. It's with you.
It's not just hormones. They are immunocompromised. And even when they are only taking hormones, they need medical observation. This isn't like missing a toothbrush.
And they can be asked to deploy to military zone at army's discretion. Being in armed services comes with the expectation that you have to be battle ready.
Taking them home is nothing. They are on immunosuppressants. How do you expect that people with compromised immune systems can be sent to lie in the dirt somewhere? They can still be civilian contractors, but they can't be active duty soldiers.
Yup, and I think that's what causes most people to "full body shiver":
I was thinking of taking the high road on this, but you are dumb enough to think that people not contradicting you actually means that what you say has merit. So I won't do that. In other words, fuck off you fucken fuck.
You can't compare successful OS's to Vista. It's just not a fair comparison. Vista failed at the library level. It lacked os-level tools to ensure stability because 64-bit system calls were not universally available. So if you used 64-bit Vista, most applications were unstable by default.
Not to excuse it, but just a hint, try the right-click menu on the Start button. It pretty close to what you get from the regular start button in Win 7 (of course, minus the sane programs menu and minus the eye-candy UI).
The problem is that Windows 10 is vastly different from person to person. You can both be on the same build and one can get true aero to work in taskbar and the other cannot. The inability to edit what's in the startmenu as easily as you could do it in Win7 is also just a nuisance. Having to always worry about telemetry being too intrusive is also a step back. You CAN customize it to almost be what you want it to be, but you have to constantly work on it. Win 7 UI just worked.
The company's CEO was promoted because he successfully created the Azure platform. And then both Azure and the company suffered. Azure stagnated at the same market share while Microsoft hasn't gained a successful leadership team. In fact, it lost it.
Windows 10 is pushing users to accept the paradigm that your PC is just a cloud terminal. Which is entirely out of the question for anyone who makes any niche technical products or has legitimate secrecy needs. Which makes Windows 10 the domain of the clueless or those who hope for security through obscurity (really through over-complexity).
Meanwhile, half the researchers were reassigned to pure development roles and slowly left. The company repositioned for here-and-now reaping of profits from what they already developed and can control. But they lost any ability to lead the future.
Windows 7 was the best UI. Windows 8 was a drivers upgrade with downgrade in UI. Windows 10 is... well, you can't even tell what it is because any experience with it is different depending on who you are. And, of course, there is the slow creep of its worst telemetry practices to earlier versions of the OS and its flagship office tools.
And this hot mess is exactly what you'd expect when you lack leadership.
No, "comrade" is just a weaker form of "friend". It's somewhere around "buddy". It was used as a formal greeting meant to convey familiarity in the Soviet Union. "Comrade" is an English word, but has never been in common use as a greeting. Russians wouldn't have the first idea of what you said if you said that word itself. It's a translation of a Russian word into a close-by-meaning, but less-commonly-used English equivalent. Spanish "amigo" probably better conveys the meaning of the Russian word that "comrade" is supposed to translate. In post-Soviet Russia, "tovarisch" has been phased out of formal use. So an entire generation (and a half) has already grown Russia without using that word as normative for anything. People who try to ascribe to Russians some sort of Soviet tendencies come off lightly deranged.
They literally emailed the information and that information from them was released.
No, if the sentence was "...information received from...." (or something like that) that would be appropriate. As it was written, "from" was not grammatically correct. And editors should, by all means, catch that.
THAT is not the title on the front page of the publication. At the very least, the editors should be putting "sic" after a grammatical mistake when they are reposting it. The whole point of editors is to polish up what's published. Unlike comments, which afford to have mistakes because they are drafts and don't represent the publication, that which the editors put on the front page is the very face of the publication.
It is supposed to be "White House Releases Sensitive Personal Info ______Of______ Voters Concerned About Privacy". Just because you are linking to an article which has a grammatical error in the title, doesn't mean you should keep the error. That is, unless the post itself is about the error.
While I don't like the militarism of the current Russian state, I take issue with calling people in it comrades. US Democratic Party has more "comrades" in it than the Russian Federation. The Russian Federation is committed to a capitalist economy. The Democratic Party is pushing for more and control of the industry by the Democratic Party bureaucrats. It's probably why they try to lumb Republicans and Russians together in this modern fantasy of collusion. They see an ideological enemy in both of them.
While ussr (let's keep in lower case just to show it the disrespect that it is due) was multi-ethnic, it was without a doubt Russian nationalist. There were 4 classes of citizens: Russians (1st class), individuals of other slavic ethnicities (2nd class), anyone from central Asia (3rd class) and Jews (4th class). Soviet Union has no successors. It split into its components. The mythology that there is some historic Russian Empire which included Ukraine and that Soviet Union was once its successor is just that -- a fantasy. It has no more validity than the idea that the caliphate will reformulate at some point. And since this mythology is mostly being peddled by the current administration of the Russian Federation, it is this myth which is nationalist propaganda designed to justify its invasion of Ukraine. In reality Kremlin invaded Ukraine to increase dwindling Russian population to fill in its demographic gap in the early 90s and mid 90s generation. There is only 145 mil people living in the Russian Federation. Any idea that 45 million of people living in Ukraine will somehow want to join them to be their servants is bombastic fantasy not based in reality.
Slashdot Mirror
There is no tautology here, but ok. The most you can claim is that I made a clarification which wasn't accurate. I'll allow for your anger since you seem to be taking this entirely too personally rather than admitting that I am only thinking of practical considerations on the subject. If you want to claim that there is no specific medical reasons for the policy, you better find a way to say which medical risks are present (and why) and which are not present (and why). And you better do it specifically. Because medical considerations was exactly the justification given by the President. Instead you see all these arguments as if the President cited risks to unit cohesion as the justification (which he did not).
No such restriction exists in Ukraine. Welcome to Putin's Russia, everyone supporting the RF takeover in Ukraine. You don't have to learn Ukrainian anymore. You can continue speaking Russian as you always did. Just don't set your sights on reading anything in English.
Antirejection medication is immunosuppressant.
to the fact that slashdot is owned by Dice, which only profits when people are constantly looking for work.
Sounds to me like transgenders could face the same problems as anybody else.
That's because logic and reason don't work on you. In fact, anyone trying to explain something logically to you is wasting their time. This is exactly the situation in which ad hominems are not logical phallacies. They are the appropriate response. YOU can't follow logical arguments. So the problem is not with the arguments. It's with you.
Now watch for an argument that is now known as "because reasons".
It's not just hormones. They are immunocompromised. And even when they are only taking hormones, they need medical observation. This isn't like missing a toothbrush.
And they can be asked to deploy to military zone at army's discretion. Being in armed services comes with the expectation that you have to be battle ready.
Taking them home is nothing. They are on immunosuppressants. How do you expect that people with compromised immune systems can be sent to lie in the dirt somewhere? They can still be civilian contractors, but they can't be active duty soldiers.
Yup, and I think that's what causes most people to "full body shiver" :
I was thinking of taking the high road on this, but you are dumb enough to think that people not contradicting you actually means that what you say has merit. So I won't do that. In other words, fuck off you fucken fuck.
The President is the commander-in-chief. So the generals of the US armed forces are his generals.
In other words, we'll make life difficult for the companies which haven't paid us off, but will leave you alone if you are a big Democratic donors.
You can't compare successful OS's to Vista. It's just not a fair comparison. Vista failed at the library level. It lacked os-level tools to ensure stability because 64-bit system calls were not universally available. So if you used 64-bit Vista, most applications were unstable by default.
Not to excuse it, but just a hint, try the right-click menu on the Start button. It pretty close to what you get from the regular start button in Win 7 (of course, minus the sane programs menu and minus the eye-candy UI).
The problem is that Windows 10 is vastly different from person to person. You can both be on the same build and one can get true aero to work in taskbar and the other cannot. The inability to edit what's in the startmenu as easily as you could do it in Win7 is also just a nuisance. Having to always worry about telemetry being too intrusive is also a step back. You CAN customize it to almost be what you want it to be, but you have to constantly work on it. Win 7 UI just worked.
It's a significantly worse UI than Windows 7.
The company's CEO was promoted because he successfully created the Azure platform. And then both Azure and the company suffered. Azure stagnated at the same market share while Microsoft hasn't gained a successful leadership team. In fact, it lost it.
Windows 10 is pushing users to accept the paradigm that your PC is just a cloud terminal. Which is entirely out of the question for anyone who makes any niche technical products or has legitimate secrecy needs. Which makes Windows 10 the domain of the clueless or those who hope for security through obscurity (really through over-complexity).
Meanwhile, half the researchers were reassigned to pure development roles and slowly left. The company repositioned for here-and-now reaping of profits from what they already developed and can control. But they lost any ability to lead the future.
Windows 7 was the best UI. Windows 8 was a drivers upgrade with downgrade in UI. Windows 10 is... well, you can't even tell what it is because any experience with it is different depending on who you are. And, of course, there is the slow creep of its worst telemetry practices to earlier versions of the OS and its flagship office tools.
And this hot mess is exactly what you'd expect when you lack leadership.
No, "comrade" is just a weaker form of "friend". It's somewhere around "buddy". It was used as a formal greeting meant to convey familiarity in the Soviet Union. "Comrade" is an English word, but has never been in common use as a greeting. Russians wouldn't have the first idea of what you said if you said that word itself. It's a translation of a Russian word into a close-by-meaning, but less-commonly-used English equivalent. Spanish "amigo" probably better conveys the meaning of the Russian word that "comrade" is supposed to translate. In post-Soviet Russia, "tovarisch" has been phased out of formal use. So an entire generation (and a half) has already grown Russia without using that word as normative for anything. People who try to ascribe to Russians some sort of Soviet tendencies come off lightly deranged.
They literally emailed the information and that information from them was released.
No, if the sentence was "...information received from ...." (or something like that) that would be appropriate. As it was written, "from" was not grammatically correct. And editors should, by all means, catch that.
If they wanted to dox me, they already have my real email address. I don't consider posts on slashdot to be anonymous (only pseudo-anonymous).
Yeah, in *that* sentence "from" would appropriate. In the one used in the heading of the article, it would not.
Ur gonna complain about THAT?
THAT is not the title on the front page of the publication. At the very least, the editors should be putting "sic" after a grammatical mistake when they are reposting it. The whole point of editors is to polish up what's published. Unlike comments, which afford to have mistakes because they are drafts and don't represent the publication, that which the editors put on the front page is the very face of the publication.
It is supposed to be "White House Releases Sensitive Personal Info ______Of______ Voters Concerned About Privacy". Just because you are linking to an article which has a grammatical error in the title, doesn't mean you should keep the error. That is, unless the post itself is about the error.
While I don't like the militarism of the current Russian state, I take issue with calling people in it comrades. US Democratic Party has more "comrades" in it than the Russian Federation. The Russian Federation is committed to a capitalist economy. The Democratic Party is pushing for more and control of the industry by the Democratic Party bureaucrats. It's probably why they try to lumb Republicans and Russians together in this modern fantasy of collusion. They see an ideological enemy in both of them.
While ussr (let's keep in lower case just to show it the disrespect that it is due) was multi-ethnic, it was without a doubt Russian nationalist. There were 4 classes of citizens: Russians (1st class), individuals of other slavic ethnicities (2nd class), anyone from central Asia (3rd class) and Jews (4th class). Soviet Union has no successors. It split into its components. The mythology that there is some historic Russian Empire which included Ukraine and that Soviet Union was once its successor is just that -- a fantasy. It has no more validity than the idea that the caliphate will reformulate at some point. And since this mythology is mostly being peddled by the current administration of the Russian Federation, it is this myth which is nationalist propaganda designed to justify its invasion of Ukraine. In reality Kremlin invaded Ukraine to increase dwindling Russian population to fill in its demographic gap in the early 90s and mid 90s generation. There is only 145 mil people living in the Russian Federation. Any idea that 45 million of people living in Ukraine will somehow want to join them to be their servants is bombastic fantasy not based in reality.