You honestly don't see the difference between a hate organisation with a history of violence and murder, and a religious observance which encompasses no intrinsic ill will towards anyone? Wow.
They are no replacement for the Knowledge. It's not just road routes, but understanding and predicting traffic flows, using local knowledge to preempt problems GPS units can only ever react to.
As you've not surveyed every single company, you can't expect anyone to take your post on face value. I'm sure you might feel what you wrote is true...
Plenty of other people seem to have managed to get one... You frequently make a lot of sense on Slashdot, but this time something seems to have flipped in your head:) You sound unnervingly similar to a kid complaining about their favourite Pokemon being sold out...
Some plants like extra CO2 and their growth will increase as it does. With food crops it's common for the crops to grow more with extra CO2, but to have lower nutritional yields, meaning the extra growth is wasted. There is a lot more to this than you seem to realise.
Now imagine the power hate has over people with guns - people who are already committed to being able to kill someone, and who see that as a valid way of solving problems...
There is a reason soldiers are given guns as their primary weapon and not a car or knife. As long as a soldier's primary weapon is a gun, this argument carries no weight.
It depends on which country you are in. I happen to live in Germany where taxis are usually awesome - recent model Mercedes, informed drivers, commercial insurance, commercial license, efficient service. Uber offers nothing but the promise of cheaper fares at the expense of safety, something countries which have put lots of effort into making taxi services safe and functional are reluctant to encourage for obvious reasons.
Take it up with NASA and get a medal. Of course, they might tell you that you don't know what you're on about, but then you might just accept that as evidence of just how right you are.
A poor person gets stuck with a public defender, a rich person gets an amazing lawyer. That means an innocent person without money is more likely to go to prison than an innocent rich person. Or do you seriously think OJ would have gotten off if he was poor and Johnnie Cochran and his team were replaced with a court-appointed public defender? Because if you don't think that's the case, you agree with the person you condemned and owe them an apology.
Common sense is frequently not reasonable and rational, just like your meandering post. Hint: When you are condemning something, condemn that one thing - don't start off vaguely criticising it and then wander off and attack the next scary thing that pops in your head. That makes you look unfocused, and your argument pallid.
If you are prosperous, the government won't tax you down to the level of a welfare recipient, and conversely if you are a welfare recipient the government won't subsidise you to the level of a prosperous entrepreneur. Your explanation is so black and white it's lost all value, as reality lies somewhere in between, which your argument ignores entirely.
You should look in to that education thing yourself as you seemed to have skipped quite a bit. On a side-note, if liberalism needs a police state, why does your ideology of choice need lying?
Slashdot Mirror
You honestly don't see the difference between a hate organisation with a history of violence and murder, and a religious observance which encompasses no intrinsic ill will towards anyone? Wow.
They are no replacement for the Knowledge. It's not just road routes, but understanding and predicting traffic flows, using local knowledge to preempt problems GPS units can only ever react to.
You can usually get the raw SQL out of it somehow. It's no excuse. You also have access to the SQL server logs, including the queries run against it.
As you've not surveyed every single company, you can't expect anyone to take your post on face value. I'm sure you might feel what you wrote is true...
The word is "Ãoeber". Uber is not a German word.
"Engaging in obviously dangerous behaviour with the expectation of it not leading to danger for anyone" is precisely what happened here.
"Hahaha! They *bang* have so *bang**bang* few murders this one person is *bang* complaining about *bang**bang* knives! Hahahaa!"
Plenty of other people seem to have managed to get one... You frequently make a lot of sense on Slashdot, but this time something seems to have flipped in your head :) You sound unnervingly similar to a kid complaining about their favourite Pokemon being sold out...
Some plants like extra CO2 and their growth will increase as it does. With food crops it's common for the crops to grow more with extra CO2, but to have lower nutritional yields, meaning the extra growth is wasted. There is a lot more to this than you seem to realise.
Your sig seems to indicate you are sick of yourself...
And none of that has anything to do with the comment you replied to, at least not in the way you seem to think it does...
Now imagine the power hate has over people with guns - people who are already committed to being able to kill someone, and who see that as a valid way of solving problems...
There is a reason soldiers are given guns as their primary weapon and not a car or knife. As long as a soldier's primary weapon is a gun, this argument carries no weight.
Logic is everything. You have nothing.
Something being a societal construct doesn't mean it's mutable.
The problem is "race" is such a nebulous term. It has no scientific underpinning, at least not when used in this topic.
You might want to read about this before continuing to post, as you're just embarrassing yourself.
It depends on which country you are in. I happen to live in Germany where taxis are usually awesome - recent model Mercedes, informed drivers, commercial insurance, commercial license, efficient service. Uber offers nothing but the promise of cheaper fares at the expense of safety, something countries which have put lots of effort into making taxi services safe and functional are reluctant to encourage for obvious reasons.
That's not particularly fair - simply stating that it's impossible to know everything does not imply it's worthless to try.
You are basing your entire argument on guesses. That might allow you to come to comfortable conclusions, but they are not based in reality.
In the time you spent writing that question you could have answered it yourself.
Take it up with NASA and get a medal. Of course, they might tell you that you don't know what you're on about, but then you might just accept that as evidence of just how right you are.
A poor person gets stuck with a public defender, a rich person gets an amazing lawyer. That means an innocent person without money is more likely to go to prison than an innocent rich person. Or do you seriously think OJ would have gotten off if he was poor and Johnnie Cochran and his team were replaced with a court-appointed public defender? Because if you don't think that's the case, you agree with the person you condemned and owe them an apology.
Common sense is frequently not reasonable and rational, just like your meandering post. Hint: When you are condemning something, condemn that one thing - don't start off vaguely criticising it and then wander off and attack the next scary thing that pops in your head. That makes you look unfocused, and your argument pallid.
If you are prosperous, the government won't tax you down to the level of a welfare recipient, and conversely if you are a welfare recipient the government won't subsidise you to the level of a prosperous entrepreneur. Your explanation is so black and white it's lost all value, as reality lies somewhere in between, which your argument ignores entirely.
You should look in to that education thing yourself as you seemed to have skipped quite a bit. On a side-note, if liberalism needs a police state, why does your ideology of choice need lying?
You guys should get some data protection regulation with teeth. You're missing out.