It ensures the content holding the ads is the real content (as otherwise a certificate error would appear if a MITM attack was happening), including the links to Google's Ad code, which also would be protected against MITM attacks via certificates. So no, it preserves all adverts served over HTTPS.
The fact there are side effects means you are either woefully ignorant about the procedure, or are lying. Neither one is going to lead to a very fruitful discussion, so we should probably stop right here.
There you go again. And now "the left" is involved? What a shocker! I wonder how many of your other fears you can shoe-horn into this massive conspiracy, while silently ignoring the institutional barriers male-dominated society has forced on women for tens of centuries. I'm waiting for you to blame the Muslims for the institutionalized sexism prevalent throughout most western democracies, and the US especially.
So you don't understand what the word "feminism" means, and think you can shoe-horn your own fantastical definition into place and scream and point at the monster you just created. Fantastic. So rational.
No-one is asking to hold the men back. The women are simply asking for a chance to compete with the men. If the men are so amazing, then there should be no problem. As it is, most people saying women and men shouldn't compete are men, not women. And there are more sports than just NFL, so your argument hold precisely no water.
With every post you are showing us just how ignorant and frightened of the world you are. It's tragic. You didn't learn that opinion from a book on the subject (written in the last few decades), so clearly you either get your medical learning from idiots or you simply make it up. Either way you are proudly embracing ignorance when it comes to understanding the world, which would go a long way to explain the fucked up view you have of it.
Apart from all the evidence which says you are entirely wrong, you are absolutely correct. Idiot. You are proudly peddling stereotypes as if it's not only logically acceptable, but as if it's going to help the discussion. It's pathetic, stilted, immature attitudes like yours which caused the problems faced by women you seem to enjoy denying so much. You really hate your mother, it seems. How sad.
Sure, just like the goths and vampires in South Park: the differences might be massive between the two groups, but to everyone else they look and behave identically. MRAs and PUAs are both misogynistic beyond belief, and seem to revel in that fact. That's enough for most decent people to simply walk away from the shit-fest and let these poor fools drown in their own mess.
Not really - MRAs use some of the right words, but they are focussing on their perception of a small tilt in power away from men, ignoring the fact that men hold the vast amount of power and privilege.
With a decent prison system focussed on rehabilitation and not just retribution, putting someone away for life is far from disgusting and terrifying. The US's justice system is fucked from top to bottom - killing people isn't going to make it better.
And save your bravado for people who believe it. We all know you'd do no such thing, as you are clearly a pussy, who is fine with killing people who are of no threat to you simply because you are scared. Poor baby.
What if it turns out your hypothetical bomber was pressured into performing this act otherwise a larger bomb would go off somewhere else? You've just condemned someone who saved lives to die, for revenge.
So you'd not worry about possibly innocent people being killed. Tsarnaev didn't worry about them dying either - you're in good company.
So the courts should behave as badly as those they are trying? I fail to see how anyone beyond 8 years of age could think what you propose is anything except sheer insanity. You are willing to throw the reputation of the US on the ground and take a big ol' shit on it because you are angry. Attitudes like yours are arguably doing more damage to the US than this bomber ever could have managed. You are calling for barbarous behaviour as you seem to think it's the only workable, fair solution - a point of view you share with Tsarnaev.
I don't think the OP was retarded - I think he understood the very basic reasoning behind why the US likes to target weddings, but was attempting to highlight the horrific hypocrisy of the drone strikes when compared to the domestic application of "justice".
Calling it justice doesn't magically make it justice. It's revenge, pure and simple. It does nothing to help the relatives outside of satisfying their blood lust. Hell, even some of the family members of one of the kids who died said the death penalty was not desirable.
But there is always a question of guilt, which is why the appeals process exists. An admission of guilt is not proof of guilt. People have confessed to things they've not done, or have failed to mention massive coercion upon them by more powerful entities. Just saying.
The bats don't have to be hit by the blades to die - the pressure differences in the turbulence caused by the blades can make their lungs explode. They just need to fly past at the wrong moment. It's called "barotrauma" by some, and is not particularly nice.
It's pretty simple logic. If you are worried that rare condors will die after hitting windmills, the real problem isn't the windmills killing them, but that the condors are endangered in the first place. Fix that problem, and the windmills killing them ceases to be a problem and you have a thriving condor population. Just getting rid of windmills because they could possibly kill endangered species while doing nothing to stop them being endangered leaves us without windmill energy, and still with endangered condors.
Self defense? Only if you are a scared pussy. Seriously. That is an absolutely pathetic claim. He's already not going to attack anyone else, so you are not increasing protection, just killing because you are angry.
Slashdot Mirror
It ensures the content holding the ads is the real content (as otherwise a certificate error would appear if a MITM attack was happening), including the links to Google's Ad code, which also would be protected against MITM attacks via certificates. So no, it preserves all adverts served over HTTPS.
The fact you suggested that speaks volumes about how you see other people and just how little you care about them. Thanks for sharing!
The fact there are side effects means you are either woefully ignorant about the procedure, or are lying. Neither one is going to lead to a very fruitful discussion, so we should probably stop right here.
There you go again. And now "the left" is involved? What a shocker! I wonder how many of your other fears you can shoe-horn into this massive conspiracy, while silently ignoring the institutional barriers male-dominated society has forced on women for tens of centuries. I'm waiting for you to blame the Muslims for the institutionalized sexism prevalent throughout most western democracies, and the US especially.
So you don't understand what the word "feminism" means, and think you can shoe-horn your own fantastical definition into place and scream and point at the monster you just created. Fantastic. So rational.
No-one is asking to hold the men back. The women are simply asking for a chance to compete with the men. If the men are so amazing, then there should be no problem. As it is, most people saying women and men shouldn't compete are men, not women. And there are more sports than just NFL, so your argument hold precisely no water.
With every post you are showing us just how ignorant and frightened of the world you are. It's tragic. You didn't learn that opinion from a book on the subject (written in the last few decades), so clearly you either get your medical learning from idiots or you simply make it up. Either way you are proudly embracing ignorance when it comes to understanding the world, which would go a long way to explain the fucked up view you have of it.
Apart from all the evidence which says you are entirely wrong, you are absolutely correct. Idiot. You are proudly peddling stereotypes as if it's not only logically acceptable, but as if it's going to help the discussion. It's pathetic, stilted, immature attitudes like yours which caused the problems faced by women you seem to enjoy denying so much. You really hate your mother, it seems. How sad.
Sure, just like the goths and vampires in South Park: the differences might be massive between the two groups, but to everyone else they look and behave identically. MRAs and PUAs are both misogynistic beyond belief, and seem to revel in that fact. That's enough for most decent people to simply walk away from the shit-fest and let these poor fools drown in their own mess.
Not really - MRAs use some of the right words, but they are focussing on their perception of a small tilt in power away from men, ignoring the fact that men hold the vast amount of power and privilege.
You once said women shouldn't be scientists. I don't think you are too informed of what you speak.
Save your breath - he's already made his mind up. He's not interested in facts, merely justifying his blood lust to himself and others.
A semi-illiterate person confusing fact with fiction and spewing xenophobic nonsense? No way! What are the chances!?
Keep it on topic - check your political sport team affiliation at the door like grown-ups.
With a decent prison system focussed on rehabilitation and not just retribution, putting someone away for life is far from disgusting and terrifying. The US's justice system is fucked from top to bottom - killing people isn't going to make it better.
And save your bravado for people who believe it. We all know you'd do no such thing, as you are clearly a pussy, who is fine with killing people who are of no threat to you simply because you are scared. Poor baby.
What if it turns out your hypothetical bomber was pressured into performing this act otherwise a larger bomb would go off somewhere else? You've just condemned someone who saved lives to die, for revenge.
So you'd not worry about possibly innocent people being killed. Tsarnaev didn't worry about them dying either - you're in good company.
So the courts should behave as badly as those they are trying? I fail to see how anyone beyond 8 years of age could think what you propose is anything except sheer insanity. You are willing to throw the reputation of the US on the ground and take a big ol' shit on it because you are angry. Attitudes like yours are arguably doing more damage to the US than this bomber ever could have managed. You are calling for barbarous behaviour as you seem to think it's the only workable, fair solution - a point of view you share with Tsarnaev.
I don't think the OP was retarded - I think he understood the very basic reasoning behind why the US likes to target weddings, but was attempting to highlight the horrific hypocrisy of the drone strikes when compared to the domestic application of "justice".
Calling it justice doesn't magically make it justice. It's revenge, pure and simple. It does nothing to help the relatives outside of satisfying their blood lust. Hell, even some of the family members of one of the kids who died said the death penalty was not desirable.
But there is always a question of guilt, which is why the appeals process exists. An admission of guilt is not proof of guilt. People have confessed to things they've not done, or have failed to mention massive coercion upon them by more powerful entities. Just saying.
The bats don't have to be hit by the blades to die - the pressure differences in the turbulence caused by the blades can make their lungs explode. They just need to fly past at the wrong moment. It's called "barotrauma" by some, and is not particularly nice.
It's pretty simple logic. If you are worried that rare condors will die after hitting windmills, the real problem isn't the windmills killing them, but that the condors are endangered in the first place. Fix that problem, and the windmills killing them ceases to be a problem and you have a thriving condor population. Just getting rid of windmills because they could possibly kill endangered species while doing nothing to stop them being endangered leaves us without windmill energy, and still with endangered condors.
Self defense? Only if you are a scared pussy. Seriously. That is an absolutely pathetic claim. He's already not going to attack anyone else, so you are not increasing protection, just killing because you are angry.
Precisely the same as incarceration, except far more expensive...
So it's about revenge and not justice then, right?