You are wrong. I am not a climate scientist. Almost all the people here are not climate scientists. However, if 97% of climate scientists [nasa.gov] around the world agree on something, it tends to sway me into their favor.
That again? 72 people. Do you know exactly what it is those 75 people actually agree on?
The problem is faceless Wall Street, which will sue if they don't feel the CEO is doing their duty to artificially buoy the stock price in the short term.
They will, huh? When has that happened, exactly?
and virtually every city has 'clubs' where people do various things, and find inside connections to get jobs. kiwanis, the lions club and a zillion more on wikipedia if you look for them there.
They tell us that
We lost our tails
Evolving up
From little snails
I say it's all
JUST WIND IN SAILS
Are we not men?
STOP IT!
You can't TAX the WIND!!!
The main difference for me is maybe that I don't want to use anything coming out of the Facebook corner of the planet and hence I have no beef with them. If a page insists in only allowing me in if I have a Facebook account, it's usually trivial for me to simply do without said page.
It's kinda different with Google. Google offers a fair lot of services, some of them even very useful. And them constantly trying to shove some useless services of theirs up my rear is kinda annoying when all I want to do is use one of their useful ones. Part of this is due to them buying up a few of the more useful and/or entertaining platforms of the internet.
Facebook only did that so far with a select few, and (since I don't use any of them anymore, I can't really vouch for that) as far as I know, they don't use them to shove "oh, and hey, here, use that $craptastic_other_garbage_of_ours or you can't use $what_you_actually_want_to_use anymore" in your face.
Because you're not their user, you're their product. The idea wasn't to be comfortable for you, the idea was to get as much information out of you as possible. What they did was basically a rip-off of the MS tactics: Use their most powerful, most successful product to muscle into another market they were late for, that was already taken by someone else and that they wanted. What Windows was for MS in their attempt to wedge into the browser business, YouTube was for Google in their attempt to squeeze themselves into social networking.
Google's disadvantage here is that social networks have one huge drawback (for a company) compared to operating systems: They allow people to, well, network. And tell each other how to show a company the finger that tries to force you to do something you don't want to do. People talked. People told each other not only how to circumvent Google's plans (that would have been a minor nuisance that could have eventually been patched) but, worse, that there are alternatives that are by no means more complicated or different to use. And THAT WAS a huge problem for Google. Other than making people switch away from Windows to a different OS, switching to another mail provider, another video platform or another $service_google_offers is rather painless. There ain't no incompatibilities to deal with or a learning curve for a new OS.
That's probably the reason just why they disconnected them. Consider for a moment how you felt if you were looking around a social network only to notice that every profile you hit is empty. Would you want to stay?
I know of no other site that respects the sanctity of the indelible, un-editable comment as well as Slashdot does.
One of the reasons I stayed.
servers aren't all unique, some need to provide the internet archive with 50 petabytes of storage(on 7 TB/disc spinning rust if they are using raid 1+0), some need to be secure against outside hacks and obvious indoor hacks, some need to host the 'cloud', some need to be able to route 3000 petabytes of data a day(route not store)....
1, 2, 3, (deep breath)...
"HONEYPOT!"
An authority is a person who can tell you more about something than you really care to know.
