I said you have to have some reasonable proof of harm to restrict my liberty.
So then nuclear waste is fine. Never "proven" to be harmful. Also note, cigarette smoke has still never been "proven" to be harmful to the smoker, but second hand smoke has been proven to be harmful.
"Proof of harm" is a idiotic standard. It just falls back the plutocracy that is American Libertarianism. If you can spend enough to "prove" something, then you win. Even if it's not true.
By your shitty misanthropic standard, vaccines did cause autism, for about 2 years. There was a peer reviewed study proving vaccines caused autism. It was a fraud, and later retracted and discredited. But for a piece of time, your "proof" standard would have been met by something 100% false.
THat's how that always works. The evil people like you, move the goalposts for personal gain, then lie about it, and move the goalposts whenver they like.
You are saying that caustic chemicals aren't "harm" if you and only you say so. If you spray me with chemicals, I, as the person subjected to them, get to decide. You literally chemicals and my literal nose. It doesn't matter if it's aerosolized caramel flavor, aerosolized anthrax or nitric acid.
I don't care if you think it's safe, I don't want it. If you could do it without exhaling and all the second hand vape, people wouldn't mind. I don't want to know that today is your caramel day and yesterday was peppermint. You stench may be pleasing to you, but nobody else, and your figurative fist is touching my literal nose. Isn't that the libertarian line in the sand?
Most newspapers have transitioned into a hybrid online/paper model. The cable TV model can follow. They have the rights to shows in the area. But they don't have any local streaming setup. There are piles of options they refuse to even consider, sounds like the newspapers, right after subscriptions flatlined and before the cliff.
No, it's dumb. We as humans absolutely try to learn to communicate with other species at both ends.
When's the last time you've seen someone bark at a dog to communicate? Yes, I know, the yelp/howl of a stepped on foot is different than the bark/growl at a stranger/sound. But learning what they are saying isn't the same as communicating in their language. Like the Arrival aliens learn at least a few words of English, but never speak it. Like us with dogs.
They directly used them in the final act. It's a shitty, contrived "twist" for the plot and a cop out for the ending.
So you are really angry at the ending, so you justify hating the rest of it, or you really hated all of it before you ever got to the ending?
Either way, one could argue that they were using their telepathic abilities and future vision the whole time, you just didn't like/recognize it. How did she learn their language? Was it her hard study, or was it telepathic guidance? Maybe they knew English the whole time, after all, if they learn it in the future, they always knew it, and they also knew that they needed to teach her the language slowly and help guide her dreams to give her the dedication and mindset to open her mind to their language. That's implied multiple times in the movie. All our "suspense" is fake, because the Aliens knew the ending before it started, but needed to guide it to reality, even if it makes them look like dicks to sexconker.
Why do we train dogs to learn commands in English, but we don't try to learn Dog?
I don't know the answer to that, but sometimes it's easier for the "lesser" creature to learn words than for the "superior" organism to learn. And the multi-time isn't a form of life-omniscience, but a form of moving a single consciousness through the life of that consciousness. The future may be unknowable until it's set, or something like that. It wasn't until after he told her what she said that she remembered saying it. Or something like that, it was a plot advancement device, not good science. The deliberate obfuscation of the present and "time travel" was the point. The director wanted us as confused as the character, so makes it deliberately obtuse to try and confuse the audience.
"on the internet" matters when it's an issue of Bob lying to sell a widget on Amazon. If Bob was in a store selling widgets, the fraud is clear. If Bob is effectively anonymous and Amazon is the seller, with Bob's referral code, once the product arrives and the fraud is detected, taking action against Bob is almost impossible.
It's not about "legal" but "enforceable". They are different, but related.
The story that the translation happens in the earbuds is simply lie. Questioning the obvious like doesn't mean one has an agenda. Default in the cloud, with options for on the phone. It was a lie by omission in the article. Why are you supporting their lies?
Putting everything on a single chip to "save cost" makes it impossible to turn off the spy features. They are done in hardware when the UI reports them as off. So you have to trust the OS, whether it's iOS or Android or Windows CE/Pocket/Mobile/Phone/Mobile.
An unarmed Black man is 10x more likely to be shot than an unarmed white man. The rate at which Black people commit crime has *nothing* to do with that.
And Blacks don't commit 40% of violent crime. They are just convicted more often, since Blacks commit more crime, they are prosecuted more aggressively. It's the tautology club. We assume they are worse, so we make it so.
So, we should be happy with innocent unarmed Black men being shot by cops, because Blacks deserve it because Black on Black crime exists. I hear, I understand. I disagree. You fix what you can, and the easy target would be to start with the government, who is provably treating some people differently.
If the goals in PCCA are "fake", why bother to pull out? Simply ignore it and move on. Done. But doing the smart thing is something Donnie John has never been accused of.
Every source I find on the matter indicates that there existed some white slavery, but not in the US, and that "white slavery" in the US existed, as an illegal sex trafficking, and the theory is the idiot racists confused the two to believe that there were white slaves.
There were not white slaves in the US, so "white slavery" as a response to BLM makes no sense.
All Lives Matter. That's the core of BLM. BLM is just pointing out the lives not treated the same as others.
anti-BLM activists would have you believe that if a Black house is on fire, then All Houses Matter, and the fire department should pre-wet the neighbour house as much as the one on fire, and no fireman should enter the burning house to save anyone, as that wouldn't be fair to those in the surrounding houses.
BLM is simply stating that sometimes, the house on fire needs more attention.
I applied to a job once where they said "CS degree and 5 years experience." It was for a help desk position helping bank customers login to online banking. I figured it was a typo and applied. I don't have a CS degree. I got a call later, it was both. But they were having trouble filling the positions, so they were letting me interview, if I added documentation to demonstrate an equivalent level of education. Anyplace that far out of touch is not a place anyone would be happy working.
Slashdot Mirror
You don't understand your own link. You'd be correct if I stated "God is AI *because* you can't prove otherwise." I didn't.
"You can't prove otherwise" was a taunt to those who might disagree, not a supporting statement. Your assertion of "invalid" is invalid.
God is an AI. You can't prove otherwise.
Christians worship technology. The Bible was built around rules for the Bronze Age. 'Cause that shit was high-tech in Old Testament days.
I said you have to have some reasonable proof of harm to restrict my liberty.
So then nuclear waste is fine. Never "proven" to be harmful. Also note, cigarette smoke has still never been "proven" to be harmful to the smoker, but second hand smoke has been proven to be harmful.
"Proof of harm" is a idiotic standard. It just falls back the plutocracy that is American Libertarianism. If you can spend enough to "prove" something, then you win. Even if it's not true.
By your shitty misanthropic standard, vaccines did cause autism, for about 2 years. There was a peer reviewed study proving vaccines caused autism. It was a fraud, and later retracted and discredited. But for a piece of time, your "proof" standard would have been met by something 100% false.
THat's how that always works. The evil people like you, move the goalposts for personal gain, then lie about it, and move the goalposts whenver they like.
You are saying that caustic chemicals aren't "harm" if you and only you say so. If you spray me with chemicals, I, as the person subjected to them, get to decide. You literally chemicals and my literal nose. It doesn't matter if it's aerosolized caramel flavor, aerosolized anthrax or nitric acid.
Fuck off and take your Fascism with you.
So you think acid attacks should be legal, after all, the acid isn't a literal fist. It's just a chemical hitting your literal nose.
So you can slap people in public spaces? After all, that's a non-damaging harm, like vaping.
Go the fuck back to reality.
I don't care if you think it's safe, I don't want it. If you could do it without exhaling and all the second hand vape, people wouldn't mind. I don't want to know that today is your caramel day and yesterday was peppermint. You stench may be pleasing to you, but nobody else, and your figurative fist is touching my literal nose. Isn't that the libertarian line in the sand?
What is Central Park? Is it more than what's bounded on the south by 59th St and east by 5th Ave, and Central Park West, and Central Park North?
So, just like Ikea?
Game consoles can hold 10 games and no multimedia at 1 TB high res games. There are lots that would like to see more.
Most newspapers have transitioned into a hybrid online/paper model. The cable TV model can follow. They have the rights to shows in the area. But they don't have any local streaming setup. There are piles of options they refuse to even consider, sounds like the newspapers, right after subscriptions flatlined and before the cliff.
No, it's dumb. We as humans absolutely try to learn to communicate with other species at both ends.
When's the last time you've seen someone bark at a dog to communicate? Yes, I know, the yelp/howl of a stepped on foot is different than the bark/growl at a stranger/sound. But learning what they are saying isn't the same as communicating in their language. Like the Arrival aliens learn at least a few words of English, but never speak it. Like us with dogs.
They directly used them in the final act. It's a shitty, contrived "twist" for the plot and a cop out for the ending.
So you are really angry at the ending, so you justify hating the rest of it, or you really hated all of it before you ever got to the ending?
Either way, one could argue that they were using their telepathic abilities and future vision the whole time, you just didn't like/recognize it. How did she learn their language? Was it her hard study, or was it telepathic guidance? Maybe they knew English the whole time, after all, if they learn it in the future, they always knew it, and they also knew that they needed to teach her the language slowly and help guide her dreams to give her the dedication and mindset to open her mind to their language. That's implied multiple times in the movie. All our "suspense" is fake, because the Aliens knew the ending before it started, but needed to guide it to reality, even if it makes them look like dicks to sexconker.
Why do we train dogs to learn commands in English, but we don't try to learn Dog?
I don't know the answer to that, but sometimes it's easier for the "lesser" creature to learn words than for the "superior" organism to learn. And the multi-time isn't a form of life-omniscience, but a form of moving a single consciousness through the life of that consciousness. The future may be unknowable until it's set, or something like that. It wasn't until after he told her what she said that she remembered saying it. Or something like that, it was a plot advancement device, not good science. The deliberate obfuscation of the present and "time travel" was the point. The director wanted us as confused as the character, so makes it deliberately obtuse to try and confuse the audience.
"on the internet" matters when it's an issue of Bob lying to sell a widget on Amazon. If Bob was in a store selling widgets, the fraud is clear. If Bob is effectively anonymous and Amazon is the seller, with Bob's referral code, once the product arrives and the fraud is detected, taking action against Bob is almost impossible.
It's not about "legal" but "enforceable". They are different, but related.
The story that the translation happens in the earbuds is simply lie. Questioning the obvious like doesn't mean one has an agenda. Default in the cloud, with options for on the phone. It was a lie by omission in the article. Why are you supporting their lies?
The three lights in a traffic light are green, orange, and red. And the English orange is the same colour as the American yellow.
Putting everything on a single chip to "save cost" makes it impossible to turn off the spy features. They are done in hardware when the UI reports them as off. So you have to trust the OS, whether it's iOS or Android or Windows CE/Pocket/Mobile/Phone/Mobile.
An unarmed Black man is 10x more likely to be shot than an unarmed white man. The rate at which Black people commit crime has *nothing* to do with that.
And Blacks don't commit 40% of violent crime. They are just convicted more often, since Blacks commit more crime, they are prosecuted more aggressively. It's the tautology club. We assume they are worse, so we make it so.
So, we should be happy with innocent unarmed Black men being shot by cops, because Blacks deserve it because Black on Black crime exists. I hear, I understand. I disagree. You fix what you can, and the easy target would be to start with the government, who is provably treating some people differently.
If the goals in PCCA are "fake", why bother to pull out? Simply ignore it and move on. Done. But doing the smart thing is something Donnie John has never been accused of.
http://www.slate.com/articles/... https://www.nytimes.com/2017/0...
Every source I find on the matter indicates that there existed some white slavery, but not in the US, and that "white slavery" in the US existed, as an illegal sex trafficking, and the theory is the idiot racists confused the two to believe that there were white slaves.
There were not white slaves in the US, so "white slavery" as a response to BLM makes no sense.
All Lives Matter. That's the core of BLM. BLM is just pointing out the lives not treated the same as others.
anti-BLM activists would have you believe that if a Black house is on fire, then All Houses Matter, and the fire department should pre-wet the neighbour house as much as the one on fire, and no fireman should enter the burning house to save anyone, as that wouldn't be fair to those in the surrounding houses.
BLM is simply stating that sometimes, the house on fire needs more attention.
Well, shit. I put plates in my cupboard, and created a singularity.
I applied to a job once where they said "CS degree and 5 years experience." It was for a help desk position helping bank customers login to online banking. I figured it was a typo and applied. I don't have a CS degree. I got a call later, it was both. But they were having trouble filling the positions, so they were letting me interview, if I added documentation to demonstrate an equivalent level of education. Anyplace that far out of touch is not a place anyone would be happy working.
Fat good, sugar bad is the only thing this, and similar studies found. Carbs aren't bad. Sugar is, but sugar is a carb, so carbs gets a bad name.