Only if you follow Party Dogma like a good little Communist would elsewhere instead of facts. Ghaddafi didn't change right up until the day he was killed. All that changed is that he was accepted. Should I mention Reagan dealing with Iran again? Will that cure the Dogma driven fake imbecility?
Indeed, you do imagine that while I imagine that they are not going to care any more than they already have That spyware is already active on many execs laptops which came with the "pro" versions instead of a wishful thinking "Enterprise" label.
Trump has repeatedly declared war on the press. Some have accepted the declaration and see themselves as an "opposition" since cuddling up to get interviews is only delivering deception instead of factual news. Expect things to get very ugly.
Finally! It's about time that they made that piece of shit fit to be used in the business environment since it's getting more difficult to get MS Windows 7.
In Australia we used to eat chocolate Yowies (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yowie_(chocolate)) Japanese visitors looked at us with odd expressions when we mentioned them.
The Iran thing is pretty stupid really since it's over a decade since we made up with Libya, Russia and all the rest that did far more to hurt us than Iran ever did. Extra stupidity since we depend on their military support in Syria today. The "no deal with Iran" thing is just a pointless way to draw a difference between Democrats and Republicans. Now that the election is over we can ignore something that has not mattered ever since Carter was President.
If European countries are so enamored w/ trading w/ Iran, that's fine: just don't expect to do any business w/ the US.
Remember Reagan? He did deals with Iran. Are you going to attack his memory for it? How's that as an example of how to deal with pointless Party "branding" that keeps on digging up a dead issue. Look past election tub thumping and return to the real world.
There is the very slim possibility that he will ally himself with Putin and Assad and finally take an active role in actually fighting back against ISIS
And fighting our current allies in Syria that we were backing against Assad. It's a huge win for Putin and a huge stain on our reputation if he can trick Trump into doing that backstab. Trump is a babe in the woods who treats everything like a game and Putin is a professional spy turned gangster turned Tsar who will eat Trump for breakfast. I put the possibility at a lot more than slim. On the rest I agree with every word.
Why help them? They've been running a price war to deliberately drive US small oil producers out of business and the ideals of that Kingdom are even more opposed to those of the USA than what the Iranians have. Not to mention that 9/11 was due to people who were pissed off about US involvement in Saudi Arabia.
We are getting nothing but pain from that Kingdom.
I should add that those store owners that did that back then had strong beliefs that they considered just as valid too, and they sometimes even claimed that their bigotry was supported by God.
There's a lot of that shit about, it may be gays this week but remember that the guy running Enron said he was doing God's work by cheating Californians out of their money. Maybe it will be you getting picked on by someone taking God's name in vain next time.
On the flipside I've been trying to avoid most on the content of the 80's since I was 12 but it's being broadcast on repeat. Can we just let it go now?
The people who make decisions in programming now love that stuff because they grew up on it so we are stuck with it. Now you know how we felt about seemingly endless 1950s and 1960s nostalgia with a pile of disappointing and pointless remakes.
It appears to be film not tape so the resolution will be whatever it is scanned at with a practical limit of a few times the grain size on the film. That's still not going to be a massive amount of data per reel especially if it's monochrome.
Thanks. From reading that page Gay is definitely the new Black - it sounds like the sort of stuff I saw as a kid. "We don't serve your kind here" is stuff I heard every now and again when someone without white skin dared to wander into some stores.
That's a mighty big shift of the goalposts but do you really think a traitor like North has got your back if you decide you need to fight? I suppose he's more likely than all those weekend weenies in the NRA who couldn't shoot anywhere near as well as my sister or those nanny state NRA idiots who wanted the government to put armed guards in schools - you definitely don't want those losers to watch your back. Looks like you've got nothing. Those guys in Afganistan had their shit together far more than you and were better armed than you but some kids from a refugee camp bulldozed over them and set up an extreme fundamentalist loonie regime.
Having the guns and liking to fight just doesn't seem to be enough to be more than a faded red stain on the pages of history.
I just hate to see the bakery owners be pressured to bake a cake
Has this elaborate scenario ever happened or is it the bullshit it appears to be? I feel bad for Smurfs myself if we are going to feel sympathy with fiction.
So all one bunch with the same ideals? Do you really want to sell weapons to terrorists like one of the NRA leaders, Oliver North did? The thing that stops you from being a traitor is that the NRA is a bunch of anarchists that don't actually work together.
Such a process resulted in the losses I gave as examples above. An afternoon drama for children didn't seem all that important culturally so Dr Who episodes that could be making money for the BBC were thrown away.
Twitter says it doesn't tolerate "hateful conduct". That's pretty vague.
That is vague by design. More accurately they do not tolerate anything that risks advertising revenue.
Does Twitter consider that statement hateful?
If you were a famous person tweeting it and that annoyed enough people and they did not feel so good about using Twitter, then yes Twitter would consider that statement hateful. Twitter want their users to "enjoy the experience" so something that bursts a comfortable bubble could make the users spend less time with Twitter's application looking at their advertisements.
Framing it as a free speech issue as the summary suggests is more than just a little naive, so while your examples are very good in another context they are just not relevant. You are free to say things without getting locked up but Twitter will pick and choose what they block.
The people in Afganistan had more guns and like fighting more yet the Taliban fucked them over. One guy with a gun, even a big expensive one, is not Steven Segal, he's target practice for a platoon or if especially annoying a target for an air strike. Loners or small bands with guns don't win anything. Huge numbers of people working together, guns or not, are what you need to win.
Is she perhaps talking about a device that can access stored digital tape media with a mechanical arm or something
Yes. People call LTO6 tape autoloaders with a storage library "robots".
Going back to old TV, the opening sequence of each episode of the show "The Prisoner" depicts the idea of that sort of "robot" being used for paper card storage instead of a few dozen tapes.
Yes, some things are historically significant and should be preserved, but early forms of "breakfast TV" shouldn't be on that list.
Episodes of Dr Who and The Goodies are gone because they were not on that sort of list. Significant or not a non-trivial number of people would have wanted to see them and even shell out cash to do so. As an example, a restored version with animation of Dr Who "Power of the Daleks" was recently in cinemas.
Choosing a narrow list has already lost us some interesting material so it's probably a good idea not to tightly restrict this time either. There will be gems among all the muck.
Slashdot Mirror
Only if you follow Party Dogma like a good little Communist would elsewhere instead of facts. Ghaddafi didn't change right up until the day he was killed. All that changed is that he was accepted.
Should I mention Reagan dealing with Iran again? Will that cure the Dogma driven fake imbecility?
Indeed, you do imagine that while I imagine that they are not going to care any more than they already have
That spyware is already active on many execs laptops which came with the "pro" versions instead of a wishful thinking "Enterprise" label.
Most crypto exchanges are located outside of the US. "They" have no jurisdiction there.
Have you heard of FIFA?
Trump has repeatedly declared war on the press.
Some have accepted the declaration and see themselves as an "opposition" since cuddling up to get interviews is only delivering deception instead of factual news.
Expect things to get very ugly.
No I just think you are being unrealistic about the "care factor" of those execs you think will send in the lawyers with guns blazing.
There was that city in Germany and a few other things over the years. It has happened more than once already.
Finally!
It's about time that they made that piece of shit fit to be used in the business environment since it's getting more difficult to get MS Windows 7.
In Australia we used to eat chocolate Yowies (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yowie_(chocolate))
Japanese visitors looked at us with odd expressions when we mentioned them.
The "no deal with Iran" thing is just a pointless way to draw a difference between Democrats and Republicans. Now that the election is over we can ignore something that has not mattered ever since Carter was President.
Remember Reagan? He did deals with Iran. Are you going to attack his memory for it? How's that as an example of how to deal with pointless Party "branding" that keeps on digging up a dead issue. Look past election tub thumping and return to the real world.
And fighting our current allies in Syria that we were backing against Assad.
It's a huge win for Putin and a huge stain on our reputation if he can trick Trump into doing that backstab. Trump is a babe in the woods who treats everything like a game and Putin is a professional spy turned gangster turned Tsar who will eat Trump for breakfast.
I put the possibility at a lot more than slim.
On the rest I agree with every word.
Why help them?
They've been running a price war to deliberately drive US small oil producers out of business and the ideals of that Kingdom are even more opposed to those of the USA than what the Iranians have.
Not to mention that 9/11 was due to people who were pissed off about US involvement in Saudi Arabia.
We are getting nothing but pain from that Kingdom.
I should add that those store owners that did that back then had strong beliefs that they considered just as valid too, and they sometimes even claimed that their bigotry was supported by God.
There's a lot of that shit about, it may be gays this week but remember that the guy running Enron said he was doing God's work by cheating Californians out of their money. Maybe it will be you getting picked on by someone taking God's name in vain next time.
On the flipside I've been trying to avoid most on the content of the 80's since I was 12 but it's being broadcast on repeat. Can we just let it go now?
The people who make decisions in programming now love that stuff because they grew up on it so we are stuck with it. Now you know how we felt about seemingly endless 1950s and 1960s nostalgia with a pile of disappointing and pointless remakes.
It appears to be film not tape so the resolution will be whatever it is scanned at with a practical limit of a few times the grain size on the film. That's still not going to be a massive amount of data per reel especially if it's monochrome.
Thanks.
From reading that page Gay is definitely the new Black - it sounds like the sort of stuff I saw as a kid. "We don't serve your kind here" is stuff I heard every now and again when someone without white skin dared to wander into some stores.
That's a mighty big shift of the goalposts but do you really think a traitor like North has got your back if you decide you need to fight?
I suppose he's more likely than all those weekend weenies in the NRA who couldn't shoot anywhere near as well as my sister or those nanny state NRA idiots who wanted the government to put armed guards in schools - you definitely don't want those losers to watch your back.
Looks like you've got nothing. Those guys in Afganistan had their shit together far more than you and were better armed than you but some kids from a refugee camp bulldozed over them and set up an extreme fundamentalist loonie regime.
Having the guns and liking to fight just doesn't seem to be enough to be more than a faded red stain on the pages of history.
You wrote that Wayland is the future of X.
That's as ridiculous as suggesting a bridge in Alaska is the future of Miami.
No. One guy who worked on two X extensions and another guy that did a port to a Debian variant is a tiny drop in the bucket of the developers of X.
You did worse than that, you wrote the following lie:
Why are you trying to start a fight over a topic you know absolutely nothing about? Wayland is not X.
Has this elaborate scenario ever happened or is it the bullshit it appears to be?
I feel bad for Smurfs myself if we are going to feel sympathy with fiction.
What makes you think that?
So all one bunch with the same ideals? Do you really want to sell weapons to terrorists like one of the NRA leaders, Oliver North did?
The thing that stops you from being a traitor is that the NRA is a bunch of anarchists that don't actually work together.
Such a process resulted in the losses I gave as examples above. An afternoon drama for children didn't seem all that important culturally so Dr Who episodes that could be making money for the BBC were thrown away.
That is vague by design. More accurately they do not tolerate anything that risks advertising revenue.
If you were a famous person tweeting it and that annoyed enough people and they did not feel so good about using Twitter, then yes Twitter would consider that statement hateful. Twitter want their users to "enjoy the experience" so something that bursts a comfortable bubble could make the users spend less time with Twitter's application looking at their advertisements.
Framing it as a free speech issue as the summary suggests is more than just a little naive, so while your examples are very good in another context they are just not relevant. You are free to say things without getting locked up but Twitter will pick and choose what they block.
The people in Afganistan had more guns and like fighting more yet the Taliban fucked them over.
One guy with a gun, even a big expensive one, is not Steven Segal, he's target practice for a platoon or if especially annoying a target for an air strike. Loners or small bands with guns don't win anything. Huge numbers of people working together, guns or not, are what you need to win.
Sure, just like a proprietary bakery can refuse to bake a cake for a gay wedding, right?
In that case gay is the new Black.
"We don't serve your kind here" is not something to cheer for.
Yes. People call LTO6 tape autoloaders with a storage library "robots".
Going back to old TV, the opening sequence of each episode of the show "The Prisoner" depicts the idea of that sort of "robot" being used for paper card storage instead of a few dozen tapes.
Episodes of Dr Who and The Goodies are gone because they were not on that sort of list. Significant or not a non-trivial number of people would have wanted to see them and even shell out cash to do so. As an example, a restored version with animation of Dr Who "Power of the Daleks" was recently in cinemas.
Choosing a narrow list has already lost us some interesting material so it's probably a good idea not to tightly restrict this time either. There will be gems among all the muck.