You doubtless used the deactivation feature, not the deletion feature. The former is the default, and Facebook doesn't go out of their way to advertise the existence of the latter, but it's there and you can take advantage of it. I've tried to log into my account with my old password, no dice, and "forgot password" doesn't work either when I provide my e-mail address.
Of course, that isn't to say that they don't still have copies of my data floating around, though their data use policy seems to suggest they really do delete most of it: When you delete your account, it is permanently deleted from Facebook. It typically takes about one month to delete an account, but some information may remain in backup copies and logs for up to 90 days. You should only delete your account if you are sure you never want to reactivate it. You can delete your account at: https://www.facebook.com/help/contact.php?show_form=delete_account Certain information is needed to provide you with services, so we only delete this information after you delete your account. Some of the things you do on Facebook aren’t stored in your account, like posting to a group or sending someone a message (where your friend may still have a message you sent, even after you delete your account). That information remains after you delete your account.
Facebook explicitly says they do not allow you to delete your account.
I left Facebook a few months ago and specifically requested deletion, not deactivation. There was a 14 day waiting period, during which time I could log back into my account and reset the clock, but supposedly at the end of those 14 days my account was gone for good. From what I can tell they still allow you to do this: "If you don't think you'll use Facebook again, you can request to have your account permanently deleted. Please keep in mind that you won't be able to reactivate your account or retrieve anything you've added."
Frankly leaving social media was the best thing I ever did. It's a bit of a PITA with regards to those friends who seemingly only know how to communicate via FB, but even they eventually came around and started calling, texting, or e-mailing me. Only one of my friends really whined about it, because she doesn't have a cell and can't text, but she eventually got used to e-mailing me.
I just don't think B5 stands the test of time very well. The resolution to the Shadow War was one of the biggest deus ex machina endings ever, the Minbari were hard to swallow as a serious civilization (it would have been awesome to see humanity eclipse them in a spinoff series rather than continue to play second fiddle to a bunch of religious fanatics), the telepathy nonsense is annoying (as it is in Star Trek, but at least there it's not central to the entire series), and two of the lead characters (Sheridan and Deleen) were Messianic megalomaniacs that needed to brought back down to reality by their respective Governments but somehow managed to elevate themselves over and above their own people.
B5 wasn't the best military themed Sci-Fi series, that honor probably goes to Battlestar Galactica. It wasn't the best at exploring the human condition, that honor goes to Star Trek. It was cool in the beginning from a space geek standpoint when they paid heed to real world physics, but that aspect of the show was largely forgotten by the third season, and some of their tech ideas (like this crazy notion that we're all going to evolve into beings of energy, or that biological ships could be superior to conventional building methods) were as dumb as the particle-of-the-week technobabble laden Star Trek episode.
The best plot line was the Earth Civil War and that got short charged by JMS when he thought the show was going to get axed in Season 4. He was a one hit wonder in any case, just watch Season 5, Crusade, or (god help you) The Lost Tales. I still want my $12.00 back for that stupid two story disk.
No, it was perfectly consistent, did you read my other gripes about her character? Strong she was not. Which Star Trek female had PTSD? Which Star Trek female whined as much as Ivanova?
At the expense of a corrupt Earth government and effectively for the people of Earth.
My issue with Ivanova and Sheridan was what they did after the Civil War, setting themselves up as a higher power, withholding advanced technology from humanity, and so on. Sheridan fancied himself a Messiah and drove me absolutely up the wall towards the end of the series. Ditto for Deleen. Ivanova was PTSD addled victim, Garibaldi and Franklin were both addicts, hell now that I think of it was there a single likeable human character on that show? There were some great alien characters (Mollari and G'Kar) but human ones? I guess JMS is a misanthrope, because I can't recall a recurring human character that I genuinely liked. Marcus maybe, he never had any illusions of godhood from what I recall, or let down people who trusted him with their lives on a regular basis.
I like strong female characters that know how to handle themselves.
So you've chosen to pick the character that turned to mush after her unconsummated lover sacrificed himself for her? Ivanova was cool, but Kira Neryes kicks her ass in the "strong female" department.
Ivanova turns to mush after her lover(s) dies, Kira keeps going. Ivanova has PTSD after watching her Mother get tortured to death by the Psi-Corps, while Kira picks up a phaser and starts fighting after her Father is tortured to death. Ivanova defers to the Minbari dominated Interstellar Alliance at the expense of Earth, Kira defends her people against everybody, including the Federation when necessary.
First Duty was a good episode, perhaps even a great one, easily in TNG's Top 20. Final Mission was good too. There were also some perfectly watchable Wesley episodes, like The Game, and the evolution of his character in Journey's End hinted at bigger things to come.
In fact, all of the bad Wesley episodes were in the first two seasons, which with few exceptions (Q Who, Measure of a Man) were filled with all sorts of suckitude that usually had nothing to do with Wil Wheaton or Wesley Crusher.
That's true, it takes a lot of backbone to order the torture and rape of a prisoner of war a few weeks after you shoot your XO in cold blood.... err, n/m, wrong series.:)
Useless Trek Trivia: Michelle Forbes was originally seen taking Nana Visitor's role on Deep Space Nine, in a continuation of the Ro character. She declined, because she didn't want the commitment of full time production, but it would have been interesting to see how different DS9 would have turned out if she had accepted the role. There's a throwaway line by O'Brien in the DS9 pilot, where he asks Sisko "Have you ever served with any Bajoran women?", hinting at Kira's (and Ro's) aggressive personality.
More Star Trek musing: Jean-Luc Picard was the best captain, and Patrick Stewart probably the best Actor out of all the Star Trek series, and TNG will always hold a special place in my heart. That said, DS9 had the richest set of characters, both regular and supporting. DS9 had more relatable characters (O'Brien), more ruthless ones (Garek), more tortured souls (Odo, Kira), all alongside the usual happy-go-lucky Federation types.
No-fly lists simply shouldn't exist, regardless of whether or not they can work. The idea that you can be considered too dangerous (Without a trial!) to fly and yet not dangerous enough to arrest is absurd. As others have said, this is just used for oppression.
There was one case of the no-fly list being used against US Sen Edward Kennedy, proof that it is a tool that can be exploited for political retaliation and oppression.
He was on the list because of someone with a similar name, not because DHS wanted to oppress him. Remember the old adage, "Never attribute to malice that which can be attributed to incompetence."
It makes sense that they're doing this in Pittsburgh, as opposed to New York City, Boston, Chicago, or Los Angeles, all jurisdictions with very tough gun control laws, thus precluding the team from having any gunshot victims to test their method on.
Sarcasm aside, it's interesting that they're waiting for gunshot and/or stabbing victims. Wouldn't this technique be applicable to any physical trauma resulting in massive amounts of bleeding that you might need time to repair?
It's not a captive market per say, there's different companies you can purchase gasoline from. To answer your question, because it's profitable? Market how superior your gas is, reel them into the station to buy that, making some profit, then hope they come inside and buy some overpriced convenience store stuff, making LOTS of profit.
consumer
noun consumer; plural noun: consumers
1. a person who purchases goods and services for personal use.
2. a person or thing that eats or uses something.
The F-14 was fine for what it was designed for, high speed interception of aircraft and long range engagement using the AIM-154 Phoenix missile.
It was not a dogfighter, regardless of what the movie Top Gun tried to show, it handled like a pig and could not out turn the Mig-29 or Su-27.
You're glossing over the issues the F-14A had with the TF30 engine. The spin that killed Goose in Top Gun wasn't a made up Hollywood plot device, that could and did happen in the real world, because of single engine compressor stalls, and the F-14 didn't reach its full potential until the F-14B variant, with the F110 engine.
I would also submit that you're selling the Tomcat short in the dog fighting arena. Turning radius is only one measure of a dogfighter, at the end of the day teamwork and training matters a lot more, and in those two areas I would put the USN up against any operator of the Mig-29 or Su-27.
The F4F Wildcat turned like a truck but still managed a 6 to 1 kill ratio against the Japanese, even during the dark days of 1942, and held a positive kill ratio against the nimble Zero. Teamwork (see Thach Weave), ruggedness, and the design flaws of the Japanese fighters gave it all the edge it needed to carry out its mission.
The Tomcat was the spiritual successor to the Wildcat, with a lot of the same design philosophies, and wouldn't bet against it when facing any competing fighter of the day.
Yes, both the Germans and Japanese used bolt-repeaters, and both were at technological (though not industrial) parity with the USA.
The Western Allies had the Germans and Japanese beat in electronics (primitive electronic computers, widespread employment of mechanical computers for fire control machines, proximity fuses, and radar), aerospace design (particularly by war's end), and practical nuclear fission.
The Germans had the Allies beat in a select few technological areas, rocketry and chemical weapons come to mind. The former of course came too late to affect the result and the latter was never used for fear of retaliation. The Japanese didn't beat the Allies in any technological realm, theoretical or practical, though they did have a few bits of engineering (the Type 93 torpedo) that came as a very rude surprise for the Allies.
Granted, the United States Federal Government won't literally beat you with a hose, but they will take away your freedom until you comply with the lawful orders of the courts. The Government will go over your finances with a fine toothed comb, accounting for any and all assets you currently or previously owned, including bitcoin. If you obtained any of those assets via fraud you're going to be on the hook for repayment, plus criminal and civil penalties on top of the fraudulent earnings.
Want to play the "I lost them" card? You can try, but you're still going to be on the hook for the full amount Uncle Sam thinks you owe your victims, plus the aforementioned penalties, and you're not wiping any of that away with a bankruptcy. It will follow you until the day you die.
Bitcoin doesn't spend at the prison commissary, nor am I aware of any reputable criminal defense attorneys that accept payment in bitcoin.
We're tied for third lowest homicide rate in the country, so why would I want to carry a firearm?
I don't care about what you want to do, I care about what I can do. Nobody forces you to carry a firearm if you live in any of the gun-friendly States.
Well, we do not require transvaginal ultrasounds for women who want to get abortions.
You also make it virtually impossible for the average citizen to carry a firearm for self-defense, an activity that's allowed with very few questions in 43 of the 50 States. You can't even legally carry pepper spray in MA without a license, something that I'm pretty sure is allowed without a license in every other State in the Union.
Thanks, but no thanks. Plenty of States to choose from that don't regulate self-defense or abortion.
You still haven't answered the questions. Is your name John Kerry perhaps? You seem naive enough about geopolitics to be our Secretary of State, though I'm guessing not, since your posts aren't ten paragraphs of rambling gibberish.:D
You can't put NATO/EU "observers" in harms way without answering some really hard questions that you're glossing over. You've also glossed over the political reality in Europe and North America, which is presently disinclined (to say the least) to engage in interventionism of any kind.
I suggested strategically placed personnel (observers) that would render any offensive action an act of war by Russia.
You can't put boots on the ground in the Ukraine without answering the questions I posed to you in the previous message. Actually you need to answer a lot of questions beyond those, but that's beside the point. What happens if you deploy them and Putin seizes more territory? Do they engage the Russian forces? Call Washington/Brussels/wherever and ask for instructions? Have you given this any thought at all besides "Since not even Putin is crazy enough to do that"???
Excellent idea by the way, rolling the dice on war with a nuclear armed state, relying on the sanity of Vladamir Putin to keep things from escalating out of control. What could possibly go wrong?
Slashdot Mirror
You doubtless used the deactivation feature, not the deletion feature. The former is the default, and Facebook doesn't go out of their way to advertise the existence of the latter, but it's there and you can take advantage of it. I've tried to log into my account with my old password, no dice, and "forgot password" doesn't work either when I provide my e-mail address.
Of course, that isn't to say that they don't still have copies of my data floating around, though their data use policy seems to suggest they really do delete most of it: When you delete your account, it is permanently deleted from Facebook. It typically takes about one month to delete an account, but some information may remain in backup copies and logs for up to 90 days. You should only delete your account if you are sure you never want to reactivate it. You can delete your account at: https://www.facebook.com/help/contact.php?show_form=delete_account Certain information is needed to provide you with services, so we only delete this information after you delete your account. Some of the things you do on Facebook aren’t stored in your account, like posting to a group or sending someone a message (where your friend may still have a message you sent, even after you delete your account). That information remains after you delete your account.
Try using Google Play to get a for-pay Android app.
I bill those directly to my Verizon Wireless account. :)
Facebook explicitly says they do not allow you to delete your account.
I left Facebook a few months ago and specifically requested deletion, not deactivation. There was a 14 day waiting period, during which time I could log back into my account and reset the clock, but supposedly at the end of those 14 days my account was gone for good. From what I can tell they still allow you to do this: "If you don't think you'll use Facebook again, you can request to have your account permanently deleted. Please keep in mind that you won't be able to reactivate your account or retrieve anything you've added."
Frankly leaving social media was the best thing I ever did. It's a bit of a PITA with regards to those friends who seemingly only know how to communicate via FB, but even they eventually came around and started calling, texting, or e-mailing me. Only one of my friends really whined about it, because she doesn't have a cell and can't text, but she eventually got used to e-mailing me.
This whole traveling to other planets is useless
You do know that Planet Earth has a finite future, right?
I just don't think B5 stands the test of time very well. The resolution to the Shadow War was one of the biggest deus ex machina endings ever, the Minbari were hard to swallow as a serious civilization (it would have been awesome to see humanity eclipse them in a spinoff series rather than continue to play second fiddle to a bunch of religious fanatics), the telepathy nonsense is annoying (as it is in Star Trek, but at least there it's not central to the entire series), and two of the lead characters (Sheridan and Deleen) were Messianic megalomaniacs that needed to brought back down to reality by their respective Governments but somehow managed to elevate themselves over and above their own people.
B5 wasn't the best military themed Sci-Fi series, that honor probably goes to Battlestar Galactica. It wasn't the best at exploring the human condition, that honor goes to Star Trek. It was cool in the beginning from a space geek standpoint when they paid heed to real world physics, but that aspect of the show was largely forgotten by the third season, and some of their tech ideas (like this crazy notion that we're all going to evolve into beings of energy, or that biological ships could be superior to conventional building methods) were as dumb as the particle-of-the-week technobabble laden Star Trek episode.
The best plot line was the Earth Civil War and that got short charged by JMS when he thought the show was going to get axed in Season 4. He was a one hit wonder in any case, just watch Season 5, Crusade, or (god help you) The Lost Tales. I still want my $12.00 back for that stupid two story disk.
Yes, that was inconsistent with the character
No, it was perfectly consistent, did you read my other gripes about her character? Strong she was not. Which Star Trek female had PTSD? Which Star Trek female whined as much as Ivanova?
At the expense of a corrupt Earth government and effectively for the people of Earth.
My issue with Ivanova and Sheridan was what they did after the Civil War, setting themselves up as a higher power, withholding advanced technology from humanity, and so on. Sheridan fancied himself a Messiah and drove me absolutely up the wall towards the end of the series. Ditto for Deleen. Ivanova was PTSD addled victim, Garibaldi and Franklin were both addicts, hell now that I think of it was there a single likeable human character on that show? There were some great alien characters (Mollari and G'Kar) but human ones? I guess JMS is a misanthrope, because I can't recall a recurring human character that I genuinely liked. Marcus maybe, he never had any illusions of godhood from what I recall, or let down people who trusted him with their lives on a regular basis.
I like strong female characters that know how to handle themselves.
So you've chosen to pick the character that turned to mush after her unconsummated lover sacrificed himself for her? Ivanova was cool, but Kira Neryes kicks her ass in the "strong female" department.
Ivanova turns to mush after her lover(s) dies, Kira keeps going. Ivanova has PTSD after watching her Mother get tortured to death by the Psi-Corps, while Kira picks up a phaser and starts fighting after her Father is tortured to death. Ivanova defers to the Minbari dominated Interstellar Alliance at the expense of Earth, Kira defends her people against everybody, including the Federation when necessary.
No comparison between those characters.
First Duty was a good episode, perhaps even a great one, easily in TNG's Top 20. Final Mission was good too. There were also some perfectly watchable Wesley episodes, like The Game, and the evolution of his character in Journey's End hinted at bigger things to come.
In fact, all of the bad Wesley episodes were in the first two seasons, which with few exceptions (Q Who, Measure of a Man) were filled with all sorts of suckitude that usually had nothing to do with Wil Wheaton or Wesley Crusher.
That's true, it takes a lot of backbone to order the torture and rape of a prisoner of war a few weeks after you shoot your XO in cold blood.... err, n/m, wrong series. :)
Useless Trek Trivia: Michelle Forbes was originally seen taking Nana Visitor's role on Deep Space Nine, in a continuation of the Ro character. She declined, because she didn't want the commitment of full time production, but it would have been interesting to see how different DS9 would have turned out if she had accepted the role. There's a throwaway line by O'Brien in the DS9 pilot, where he asks Sisko "Have you ever served with any Bajoran women?", hinting at Kira's (and Ro's) aggressive personality.
More Star Trek musing: Jean-Luc Picard was the best captain, and Patrick Stewart probably the best Actor out of all the Star Trek series, and TNG will always hold a special place in my heart. That said, DS9 had the richest set of characters, both regular and supporting. DS9 had more relatable characters (O'Brien), more ruthless ones (Garek), more tortured souls (Odo, Kira), all alongside the usual happy-go-lucky Federation types.
There was one case of the no-fly list being used against US Sen Edward Kennedy, proof that it is a tool that can be exploited for political retaliation and oppression.
He was on the list because of someone with a similar name, not because DHS wanted to oppress him. Remember the old adage, "Never attribute to malice that which can be attributed to incompetence."
It makes sense that they're doing this in Pittsburgh, as opposed to New York City, Boston, Chicago, or Los Angeles, all jurisdictions with very tough gun control laws, thus precluding the team from having any gunshot victims to test their method on.
Sarcasm aside, it's interesting that they're waiting for gunshot and/or stabbing victims. Wouldn't this technique be applicable to any physical trauma resulting in massive amounts of bleeding that you might need time to repair?
It's not a captive market per say, there's different companies you can purchase gasoline from. To answer your question, because it's profitable? Market how superior your gas is, reel them into the station to buy that, making some profit, then hope they come inside and buy some overpriced convenience store stuff, making LOTS of profit.
consumer
noun consumer; plural noun: consumers
1. a person who purchases goods and services for personal use.
2. a person or thing that eats or uses something.
The F-14 was fine for what it was designed for, high speed interception of aircraft and long range engagement using the AIM-154 Phoenix missile.
It was not a dogfighter, regardless of what the movie Top Gun tried to show, it handled like a pig and could not out turn the Mig-29 or Su-27.
You're glossing over the issues the F-14A had with the TF30 engine. The spin that killed Goose in Top Gun wasn't a made up Hollywood plot device, that could and did happen in the real world, because of single engine compressor stalls, and the F-14 didn't reach its full potential until the F-14B variant, with the F110 engine.
I would also submit that you're selling the Tomcat short in the dog fighting arena. Turning radius is only one measure of a dogfighter, at the end of the day teamwork and training matters a lot more, and in those two areas I would put the USN up against any operator of the Mig-29 or Su-27.
The F4F Wildcat turned like a truck but still managed a 6 to 1 kill ratio against the Japanese, even during the dark days of 1942, and held a positive kill ratio against the nimble Zero. Teamwork (see Thach Weave), ruggedness, and the design flaws of the Japanese fighters gave it all the edge it needed to carry out its mission.
The Tomcat was the spiritual successor to the Wildcat, with a lot of the same design philosophies, and wouldn't bet against it when facing any competing fighter of the day.
Yes, both the Germans and Japanese used bolt-repeaters, and both were at technological (though not industrial) parity with the USA.
The Western Allies had the Germans and Japanese beat in electronics (primitive electronic computers, widespread employment of mechanical computers for fire control machines, proximity fuses, and radar), aerospace design (particularly by war's end), and practical nuclear fission.
The Germans had the Allies beat in a select few technological areas, rocketry and chemical weapons come to mind. The former of course came too late to affect the result and the latter was never used for fear of retaliation. The Japanese didn't beat the Allies in any technological realm, theoretical or practical, though they did have a few bits of engineering (the Type 93 torpedo) that came as a very rude surprise for the Allies.
I'm surprised to hear it has "cooled" with it's greatest distance from the Sun being a mere 69,816,900 km.
The dark side of Mercury is a balmy -280F. Hard to retain any meaningful amount of heat when you have no atmosphere. :)
You may want to familiarize yourself with the concept of rubber hose cryptography.
Granted, the United States Federal Government won't literally beat you with a hose, but they will take away your freedom until you comply with the lawful orders of the courts. The Government will go over your finances with a fine toothed comb, accounting for any and all assets you currently or previously owned, including bitcoin. If you obtained any of those assets via fraud you're going to be on the hook for repayment, plus criminal and civil penalties on top of the fraudulent earnings.
Want to play the "I lost them" card? You can try, but you're still going to be on the hook for the full amount Uncle Sam thinks you owe your victims, plus the aforementioned penalties, and you're not wiping any of that away with a bankruptcy. It will follow you until the day you die.
Bitcoin doesn't spend at the prison commissary, nor am I aware of any reputable criminal defense attorneys that accept payment in bitcoin.
Bitcoins are just an asset, like any other, and if you think the US Attorney's Office can't build an asset paper trail you're in for a rude surprise.
Have fun serving an indefinite sentence in Federal prison for contempt of court if you're ordered to turn over your bitcoin and decline to do so.
We're tied for third lowest homicide rate in the country, so why would I want to carry a firearm?
I don't care about what you want to do, I care about what I can do. Nobody forces you to carry a firearm if you live in any of the gun-friendly States.
Well, we do not require transvaginal ultrasounds for women who want to get abortions.
You also make it virtually impossible for the average citizen to carry a firearm for self-defense, an activity that's allowed with very few questions in 43 of the 50 States. You can't even legally carry pepper spray in MA without a license, something that I'm pretty sure is allowed without a license in every other State in the Union.
Thanks, but no thanks. Plenty of States to choose from that don't regulate self-defense or abortion.
I have no idea to this day if Simpson did it or not
Umm, seriously?
Let me know if you'd rather live as a female in the United States or Afghanistan under the Taliban.
You still haven't answered the questions. Is your name John Kerry perhaps? You seem naive enough about geopolitics to be our Secretary of State, though I'm guessing not, since your posts aren't ten paragraphs of rambling gibberish. :D
You can't put NATO/EU "observers" in harms way without answering some really hard questions that you're glossing over. You've also glossed over the political reality in Europe and North America, which is presently disinclined (to say the least) to engage in interventionism of any kind.
I suggested strategically placed personnel (observers) that would render any offensive action an act of war by Russia.
You can't put boots on the ground in the Ukraine without answering the questions I posed to you in the previous message. Actually you need to answer a lot of questions beyond those, but that's beside the point. What happens if you deploy them and Putin seizes more territory? Do they engage the Russian forces? Call Washington/Brussels/wherever and ask for instructions? Have you given this any thought at all besides "Since not even Putin is crazy enough to do that"???
Excellent idea by the way, rolling the dice on war with a nuclear armed state, relying on the sanity of Vladamir Putin to keep things from escalating out of control. What could possibly go wrong?