What could the company possibly say that wouldn't possibly come back to harm them?
"Pretty soon we'll be posting openings for technologies X, Y, and Z, so bone up on those" would be a start. Or "Customer service representatives need to be understandable on the phone. Here are some videos about improving your speech."
No independent testing? This is one of three devices built by three separate groups that exhibit similar behavior. I do believe that is the definition of independent testing. Now, as to whether it every becomes useful, who knows.
Except it may very well be a warp drive if that is how it generates its thrust. Just because it is neither a FTL warp drive or a bubble drive does not mean it isn't a warp drive.
Not during the Grand Jury hearing he doesn't. Which given the lack of any power that hearing has, is what the criminal equivalent would be.
Are you saying Americans would be happier if you broke up the country?
As a whole, the EU is similar to the US in population and geographical size but is older and more socialist. Canada is also on the happiest list. It's also a nation of immigrants, quite a bit younger than the US, and similar in geographic size, although about 1/10th the population. Also much more socialist than the US.
The OP is correct, the common factor seems to be the type of economic system.
well, its apple. so, not a JTAG port but a PRICETAG port, perhaps?
it isn't the total, it is which legislation it involved.
Oh, one side always thinks the other side is worse. Actually, both sides think that way. And that is how you know you're on one side or the other side.
Here is my question, which is worse? Deleting 18.5 minutes of audio recordings or erasing an entire email server used by the Secretary of State for Official Purposes?
Both are equally wrong. For the same reasons. One guy had to resign in shame, the other is running for president and proud of her accomplishments. Which side is worse? Meh, I can't hardly tell them apart.
You've got to wonder if Obama released a statement that read "I like puppies. They're cute.", how quickly would Republicans line up to declare that puppies are evil spawns of Satan and real Americans own cats, not dogs.
Personally, I think dogs are a pain in the ass and it annoys me how dogs are generally favored as pets, so I really wish Obama would do exactly this.
Then again, this probably isn't a good idea: then all the Democrat voters will suddenly be dog lovers (because they'll support anything the Democratic party tells them to, even if it only benefits their rich constituents like in the media companies), and all the Republican voters will suddenly be cat lovers, and I don't really want to hang out with Republicans. Democrats annoy me sometimes, but I can stand them far better than I can Republicans. At least the Democratic voters aren't always talking about how the Rapture is about to happen.
I know plenty of people who know how to Google something, spew it forth as if it is some universal truth, only to be 100% wrong, because they don't know anything about anything. These are the people who know how to Google, but don't know enough to be able to tell the good vs the bad.
There are three kinds of people
1) People who don't know Google or how to use it
2) People who think they know something because they Googled it
3) People who actually know something, and use Google to enhance their information.
#3 people are the only ones who can have an engaging conversation about the topic without needing to use Google.
It is easy to say science isn't political, however it is political if you want government funding.
I want research that says X, I get my buddies in the Y party to create a funding bill for research that says X. I can create science that says X, and get more funding, therefore I say X. If I say not X, I don't get any more funding, and have to find a new job flipping hamburgers at McD's.
Science isn't political
The one day you'd sell your soul for something, souls are a glut.