Of course there is a Berkeley in the UK - it's just north east of Bristol. Your ignorance of Britain is astounding, considering how you want to weigh in on Brexit.
It's terrible for British manufacturing, as the necessary raw materials (which largely do not come from the UK) now cost more. It's also terrible for British people who have to import a great deal of their food. But you're right - companies which sell services or which can magic commodities out of thin air will benefit at the expense of everyone else.
No, they are angry with misguided reasons. It's easy to scapegoat the voiceless refugees - they have no power, no position, nothing. They literally fled with the clothes on their back. You seem to be entirely ignoring the failed policies of France and Belgium when it came to integrating immigrants. You are also confusing "refugee" and "immigrant", which is not surprising for someone posting such hyperbolic nonsense. You talk as if the immigrants/refugees/muslims/brown people you detest are acting as a single organisation, with a single goal of destroying Europe. It's madness. You seem woefully ill-informed and scared. The coward's position is not something one should be proud to hold.
Doesn't Britain's trading with other countries fall under its membership of the EU? Should Britain leave the EU wouldn't it have to forge those trade agreements anew, from a less powerful position? That wouldn't be fun, especially as the British government has repeatedly said it is pitifully low on negotiators...
Britain would have to import materials before it can export, as it has precious little raw materials of its own. The low pound will not help in that regard. Yes, there are other markets, but currently ~45% of all UK exports go to the EU. Unless you can instantly line up comparable trade deals with the non-EU countries as soon as Britain leaves the EU, it will be OK. As that is going to be practically impossible, Britain will spend years without these trade deals, which will be hell for the small businesses trying to import/export. So yeah, if you gloss over the details and focus on a few aspects and ignore the timeframe in which they must come to fruition it can seem positive. Anything else will reveal the stark problems facing British businesses in the years to come. (Do you know how long it takes to negotiate a trade deal? Did you also know that Britain is forbidden from entering into trade talks while it is part of the EU, that no country will want to start trade talks while Britain's future relationship with the EU is unknown (as one can't negotiate when the cards are yet to be written) and so these talks will have to start after Britain has left the EU?)
Your point only makes sense if you assume nothing has changed in the last ~50 years. Instead of asking questions which have already been answered, why don't you read the many reports describing precisely why some people believe women are being put off working in this sector? Your post has all the hallmarks of a sincere post, but the very fact you are posting it destroys the veneer of your objectivity. Plus you are talking about a single recording engineer. Just one. Amazing.
He's not calling them crazy because he disagrees with them, but because they are demonstrably crazy and he disagrees with them. It's all too easy to ignore criticism if you think criticism itself has no place in a discussion.
You are trusting that the summary is correct and directly quoting the paper. If you read the article (I know, I know), you'd see the "confirms" part is not from the WHO.
I like how you put the asterisk in "hell", but then proceeded to judge the ever-loving shit out of some people, including knowing their inner motivation. You're terrible at this.
Seeing as you spent many discussions under the impression sea ice and land ice were the same thing, I think it's safe to assume you don't know what you're talking about.
We all know what "free" means. You are picking one particular definition and pretending that's the only definition. "Free" means all kinds of things, including having no price to use something.
The users are required to confirm that they read about it before they can use it, apparently. It explains precisely what it is and isn't, in no uncertain terms. It doesn't stop people misusing it, but blaming the tool seems a bit bizarre.
You are usually so logical, but on this subject something seems to have happened to you. I'm genuinely disappointed. A building isn't a solid piece of metal. You can't push hard enough at the top and expect the whole thing to topple over like a felled tree. They are extremely strong in one direction (top-bottom), and relatively weak sideways. So no, it won't topple as it simply isn't strong enough.
Read the list of occupations of those "experts" and soon you'll realise that a list of realtors and school drop-outs isn't probably the best source to cite if you want to look like you have a clue.
If you make less generalisations, you'll probably lead a happier life. Grouping disparate people together under one convenient label isn't helping you seem rational, or letting you even see the finer points of the discussion.
If it's so prevalent and obviously spyware, where are the documents describing it? Sure, there were some from the Windows 10 Tech Preview, but after that it's been strangely silent.
Slashdot Mirror
The fact you are claiming Uber is somehow a ride-sharing company speaks volumes. It's not. It's nothing close to a ride-sharing company.
Germany is still welcoming to refugees. Don't project.
Within a generation those Syrians are Germans. Your distinctions are entirely arbitrary.
Of course there is a Berkeley in the UK - it's just north east of Bristol. Your ignorance of Britain is astounding, considering how you want to weigh in on Brexit.
It's terrible for British manufacturing, as the necessary raw materials (which largely do not come from the UK) now cost more. It's also terrible for British people who have to import a great deal of their food. But you're right - companies which sell services or which can magic commodities out of thin air will benefit at the expense of everyone else.
And you've yet to show how this is a problem large enough to condemn millions to suffer...
I'm blaming the terrorists, not the religion which they share with over a billion peaceful people.
No, they are angry with misguided reasons. It's easy to scapegoat the voiceless refugees - they have no power, no position, nothing. They literally fled with the clothes on their back. You seem to be entirely ignoring the failed policies of France and Belgium when it came to integrating immigrants. You are also confusing "refugee" and "immigrant", which is not surprising for someone posting such hyperbolic nonsense. You talk as if the immigrants/refugees/muslims/brown people you detest are acting as a single organisation, with a single goal of destroying Europe. It's madness. You seem woefully ill-informed and scared. The coward's position is not something one should be proud to hold.
Doesn't Britain's trading with other countries fall under its membership of the EU? Should Britain leave the EU wouldn't it have to forge those trade agreements anew, from a less powerful position? That wouldn't be fun, especially as the British government has repeatedly said it is pitifully low on negotiators...
Britain would have to import materials before it can export, as it has precious little raw materials of its own. The low pound will not help in that regard. Yes, there are other markets, but currently ~45% of all UK exports go to the EU. Unless you can instantly line up comparable trade deals with the non-EU countries as soon as Britain leaves the EU, it will be OK. As that is going to be practically impossible, Britain will spend years without these trade deals, which will be hell for the small businesses trying to import/export. So yeah, if you gloss over the details and focus on a few aspects and ignore the timeframe in which they must come to fruition it can seem positive. Anything else will reveal the stark problems facing British businesses in the years to come. (Do you know how long it takes to negotiate a trade deal? Did you also know that Britain is forbidden from entering into trade talks while it is part of the EU, that no country will want to start trade talks while Britain's future relationship with the EU is unknown (as one can't negotiate when the cards are yet to be written) and so these talks will have to start after Britain has left the EU?)
Your point only makes sense if you assume nothing has changed in the last ~50 years. Instead of asking questions which have already been answered, why don't you read the many reports describing precisely why some people believe women are being put off working in this sector? Your post has all the hallmarks of a sincere post, but the very fact you are posting it destroys the veneer of your objectivity. Plus you are talking about a single recording engineer. Just one. Amazing.
He's not calling them crazy because he disagrees with them, but because they are demonstrably crazy and he disagrees with them. It's all too easy to ignore criticism if you think criticism itself has no place in a discussion.
You seem quite confused.
You are trusting that the summary is correct and directly quoting the paper. If you read the article (I know, I know), you'd see the "confirms" part is not from the WHO.
I like how you put the asterisk in "hell", but then proceeded to judge the ever-loving shit out of some people, including knowing their inner motivation. You're terrible at this.
You've not made an argument, just some vague claims without backing.
What's it like living such a scared, miserable life?
Seeing as you spent many discussions under the impression sea ice and land ice were the same thing, I think it's safe to assume you don't know what you're talking about.
We all know what "free" means. You are picking one particular definition and pretending that's the only definition. "Free" means all kinds of things, including having no price to use something.
120million for wifi equipment is actually quite a lot. The 100Mb/s internet connections are not funded by this.
The users are required to confirm that they read about it before they can use it, apparently. It explains precisely what it is and isn't, in no uncertain terms. It doesn't stop people misusing it, but blaming the tool seems a bit bizarre.
You are usually so logical, but on this subject something seems to have happened to you. I'm genuinely disappointed. A building isn't a solid piece of metal. You can't push hard enough at the top and expect the whole thing to topple over like a felled tree. They are extremely strong in one direction (top-bottom), and relatively weak sideways. So no, it won't topple as it simply isn't strong enough.
Read the list of occupations of those "experts" and soon you'll realise that a list of realtors and school drop-outs isn't probably the best source to cite if you want to look like you have a clue.
If you make less generalisations, you'll probably lead a happier life. Grouping disparate people together under one convenient label isn't helping you seem rational, or letting you even see the finer points of the discussion.
If it's so prevalent and obviously spyware, where are the documents describing it? Sure, there were some from the Windows 10 Tech Preview, but after that it's been strangely silent.