Comment Re:Who, The Donald? (Score 1) 43
That Goldwater girl was never liberal enough to want it.
That Goldwater girl was never liberal enough to want it.
You certainly can, if you have the money. An M16 can be legally acquired in most states, it'll just cost you 10x or more than an AR15, and a lot more paperwork.
It's not about not being able to make an educated guess she'd bet on, but getting the official reason. At that point, it's possible to make a case that the reason is unconstitutional.
That's really what all of this is about: Government action without oversight, and it's hard to sue to change that without proof of harm. She has proof of harm right there: All she needs now is a target to use that hammer against.
I love how they say that Mercury switches can detonate explosives, as if any other switch can't.
A mercury switch operates on gravity. Tilt a package (like, say, pick it up carelessly, or rotate it to face the label up to read who sent it) to complete the circuit.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
So, mercury switches are more interesting to law enforcement than other types.
So does a pinball tilt switch, and you can build one with just wire and a weight. Should anyone who purchases wires or weights be "more interesting to law enforcement"?
Her email address is not a common one so we do not believe that it is someone accidentally using it;
Well I would hope that her address isn't common--it had better be unique! In any case, I agree with those saying that it's probably someone typo-ing their email address. If you really think that the cable company has her email address in their system, initiate your own password reset. The password reset confirmation email will go to her email box, and you can log into the account from there and see what's going on.
When people sign up for things using one of my email addresses, I simply recover the password through email, then login, cancel the account, change the password and move on.
There is a jackass in NYC who shares my name, and has signed up for things like Spotify and Netflix using a variation of my gmail address (minus the periods, which do not matter to gmail). I cancel everythng he orders using my email address.
I get the same thing, but I've found, if you simply cancel the account, the jackass tries to make a new one the next day. I've found it's better to reset the password. After he tries to reset the password a few times, he'll go away.
Better yet is if it's tied to an account ID rather than an email, change the email to something at mailinator.com or another throw-away address. Then you don't even get the account reset attempts.
Taylor, if you're out there, just know that the NSA, Google, and now me, know all about your wild side.
No, it's Becky.
Do you have some fucked up 3D animation hentai running on OpenGL or DirectX?
In a world where we have VR headsets there's a possibility their answer is yes.
His point still stands.
Advertisers are buying ad impressions for certain demographics. The advertisers are buying more ads for these jobs that target males.
It isn't Google doing this - they're just offering the advertising tools. It's the purchasers of the ads that are causing this to happen.
This is not complex.
OTOH, Google is allowing advertisers to target males in their employment ads, which is illegal under the Civil Rights Act. It's no different than if someone said "I want you to show this employment ads, but only to whites." If you say, "sure, no problem," then you're culpable too.
The requirements are so high because of AMA lobbying: they keep them that way, limit medical schools, and make sure that patients must see physicians even for problems that could be addressed by nurses or pharmacists.
What kinds of problems are those? As far as I know, patients can see nurses for minor problems that can be addressed by nurses (specifically nurse practitioners). The clinics in pharmacies and supermarkets (e.g., CVS Minute Clinic, Walgreen's Healthcare Clinic, The Little Clinic, Rediclinic) are generally staffed by nurse practitioners and physician assistants.
No thanks, I prefer to have less latency. Also, no word on resolution, but unless it uses HDMI 2.0 or DisplayPort, it's not going to be HiDPI. Who would want a non-HiDPI, 30Hz screen these days?
You certainly wouldn't use it for gaming or watching videos, but for having a couple of documents open simultaneously? It's just fine. I used to use a 64MB USB GPU that would stutter horribly if there was any video frame within the monitor, but worked perfectly for displaying Excel or Word documents.
I have to strongly disagree. I've been using Linux-based OSes intermittently since around the time 2.2 was released and have run some of my machines exclusively on Debian or its derivatives since 2004. It used to be a pain to deal with, particularly multimedia and WiFi drivers, but these days it's almost guaranteed that more will work out of the box on Ubuntu than does on a fresh Windows install.
My current laptop is 100% functional on Ubuntu 12.04 or newer with no messing around required. WiFi works, GPU works, SD reader works, etc. My home-built desktop requires a slightly newer distro to support accelerated graphics out of the box and still depends on binary drivers to get useful 3D performance thanks to its Geforce 970 graphics, but otherwise is also fully supported. Both of those require a pile of drivers to work fully even on the latest beta versions of Windows, some of which are very hard to find thanks to OEM-only components where the vendors don't provide standalone downloads. The closest I got in either case to going out of my way for Linux compatibility is choosing nVidia graphics over AMD, but in both cases I'd have done the same even for a Windows-only box because they simply had the better offerings.
I haven't been required to even go as far as dropping to the command line or editing a config file to get something working in years. The last time I had to do anything like that was back when VDPAU was a new thing and I was trying to get a XBMC running with hardware video decoding and HDMI audio output on a fairly new nVidia graphics card. nVidia's ALSA support was pretty flaky at the time so every kernel update required recompiling a few things to get sound back.
I still do tend to use consoles and config files to set things up the way I like them because I know what I'm doing and can get it done faster, but it's in no way required. If I was setting up a new PC for my grandmother I'd probably use Ubuntu rather than Windows because she could do everything on the internet exactly the same as she currently does but wouldn't be able to fuck it up by clicking on every stupid popup she gets.
First of all, Iran COULD NOT USE the bomb if it had one.
Why? 1. They can't bomb Jerusalem, which is as holy to them as to jews and Christians. Their own people would slaughter them. AND they'd kill most of the Palestinians in the Occupied Territories of the West Bank. 2. Israel is smaller than the US state of New Jersey. At one point, I believe it's a total of ->17mi- wide. What this means is using the bomb *anywhere* in Israel means fallout on Jerusalem. 3. Following 2, it *also* means fallout on the Palestinians. 4. Oh, yes - the winds would mean that fallout would COME BACK TO IRAN.
Therefore, the ONE and ONLY purpose that Iran would want the bomb is MAD with Israel (who has a bunch of bombs, and would cheerfully use it on Iran, if they didn't think there'd be no Israel left afterwards.
Oh, yes, and with all the climate-change deniers here, *no* *one* could imagine that maybe Iran's worried about when their oil fields are played out, and planning to do things with the money while they have it to prepare for the future, no, no, that's *way* more than next quarter....
mark
Although I agree with your overall points and analysis that Iran, at best, wants a bomb for defensive Mutual Assured Destruction purposes, I will point out that they don't give a flying fark about the Palestinians. Specifically, Iran is 90-95% Shi'ite, while Palestine is primarily Wahhabi Sunnis. Although they're both Muslim, it's like Catholic vs. Protestants in Ireland. In fact, not just 'don't give a flying fark' - Iran would gleefully wipe out Palestine if they could, but that (i) prevailing wind and (ii) mutually assured destruction from Israel are insurmountable problems.
Work continues in this area. -- DEC's SPR-Answering-Automaton
