The trashing of the Gulf was an accident and a mistake. This was a malicious ignoring of Peruvian law to access a sacred site to further their own egos. There was no mistake involved here.
Yes... Well, your last snark is exactly why this is a bad thing. Facebook's algorithms will no doubt have false positives and Facebook will **no doubt** keep these statistics. As with other stats, these can find their way out of Facebook's altruistic hands.
That last, by the way, was a snark. At least the word altruistic.
Word processing as well. I write, and having more than half a page up at a time is worthless. I'd much rather be able to easily read the text and a complete line.
With a large screen, normal users will have a browser up and then maybe their finance app or a game up. Or perhaps, we're both making up what "normal users" do.
If you honestly think that someone paying you to do some work is a little Napoleon, you truly haven't thought out what a government that has total control over your economics will be like. Hint: Big Napoleon.
Slashdot Mirror
*Every* generation has altered the living conditions passed to the next. Now that your main point is collapsed, mind swallowing your own ad hominem?
Whitehead's theory of gravitation is still about gravity. So, everything from "Clearly" on is straw.
No this. Thankfully Florida told him to cram it. On the other hand, his messes *can* be cleaned up. This can't.
Way to miss the point. The complaint is they defaced a national treasure.
If one is going to self-loath, keep it pointed inward.
Frank Zappa: "Facetiae does not translate to print."
Since they're being detained, they may not have a choice in that "apology". Peru doesn't seemed impressed with their sincerity.
If you believe they're trying to save the earth, perhaps you should speak with an ex-founder of theirs.
It takes a true imbecile to make that leap.
The trashing of the Gulf was an accident and a mistake. This was a malicious ignoring of Peruvian law to access a sacred site to further their own egos. There was no mistake involved here.
The context is in *making* people take things, not voluntary consumption.
Everything in moderation - including moderation.
Yes... Well, your last snark is exactly why this is a bad thing. Facebook's algorithms will no doubt have false positives and Facebook will **no doubt** keep these statistics. As with other stats, these can find their way out of Facebook's altruistic hands.
That last, by the way, was a snark. At least the word altruistic.
Didn't say they couldn't. Just pointing out that *anyone* claiming what "normal" users do is spouting opinion, not fact.
Utter bullshit. I've had two and three monitors for years. No problems at all.
Word processing as well. I write, and having more than half a page up at a time is worthless. I'd much rather be able to easily read the text and a complete line.
With a large screen, normal users will have a browser up and then maybe their finance app or a game up. Or perhaps, we're both making up what "normal users" do.
If and only if they also do not visit the site. Not being willing to spend money does not equal worthless as their time has worth.
You are incorrect, sir. It is a hint of ding.
Otherwise known as plant food.
Just altering the words of a phrase in no way negates the point of his statement.
Don't expect me to work on your favored project.
If you honestly think that someone paying you to do some work is a little Napoleon, you truly haven't thought out what a government that has total control over your economics will be like. Hint: Big Napoleon.
Cites would have been nice to verify your stories.
That's an interesting way of saying you can't think of one.