Comment Electrical Tape (Score 0) 140
If the Dealer won't remove this from the car you are purchasing, just pu a piece of black electricians' tape.
Better yet, recall that YOU OWN THE VEHICLE. Simply remove the device(s).
If the Dealer won't remove this from the car you are purchasing, just pu a piece of black electricians' tape.
Better yet, recall that YOU OWN THE VEHICLE. Simply remove the device(s).
number of dimensions? in what way?
current quantummumbojumbo that has already de-evolved into multiverse, current tech singularity ai-blabla etc already resemble ancient philosophical debates... in that they're silly to most people and seemingly also silly to those familiar in actual research and not "futurology" or whatever.
For me, still one. I never use a hub when away from my desk, and always use one when I'm at my desk. Think of it as a docking station and that's pretty much my usage pattern. If I can get a thinner or lighter laptop by throwing away the "extra" ports, I'd leap at the chance.
"Robins, who filed a class-action lawsuit, claimed that Spokeo had provided flawed information about him, including that he had more education than he actually did, that he is married although he remains single, and that he was financially better off than he actually was. He said he was unemployed and looking for work, and contended that the inaccurate information would make it more difficult for him to get a job and to get credit and insurance."
Um, what? All these inaccuracies would help him get a job, unless he's trying for a very low position.
Yes
Nevermind. I see someone else explained it in a lower post.
Came here to say the same thing.
It's slow/unusable on the original Nexus 7, but on the 2013 version, it's fine.
Somewhat confused here. The summary says the Nexus 7 was first released in 2013, but you're implying the 2013 he a new edition and there was an earlier Nexus 7 tablet?
If Verizon is in fact breaking a contract it has with ESPN then all I can say is that it is a horrible contract.
It's nothing new. The NFL Network did (and probably still does) something similar. They had a contractual requirement that they be part of the "basic cable" package and not a special sports tier, and at the same time wanted to get paid per viewer, which means that they get paid for every subscriber that a carrier has, regardless of whether they want the channel or not.
ESPN and Verizon both realize the same thing, lots of people don't care about sports and lots of people are aware that ESPN is one of the most expensive channels to carry. Consumers want out of paying for crap they don't care about, Verizon wants to hold onto video subscribers, and ESPN wants to keep their gravy train rolling.
People realize that 111 million people tuned in for the superbowl in the US right? out of a population of 320 million? a good portion of that 1 in 3 americans loves the hell out of their cable package with sports.
Talk about a leap of logic. There's lots of people (myself included) for whom the Super Bowl is the only football game they're interested in watching.
To suggest that someone wants a year-round pay channel based on the viewership of a single night makes you sound like an ESPN shill.
1g of Xylitol is enough to kill 3 dogs in half an hour.
That is the oddest mortality unit I've heard in a long time.
More fat people drink the diet version
Sales of diet Pepsi are falling because half of them are buying Pepsi Max instead. Not sure how it differs from the diet option. They both taste equally bad to me.
Also, yes, we do buy more than we used to buy. That is called keeping the economy running, and if we weren't buying all those gadgets and trinkets and things *you* don't think are necessary our economy would be in even worse shape. As for the credit card debt, if wages were at least keeping even with what they have historically been people wouldn't have to fall back on so much credit debt now would they.
So what happens when credit cards are all maxed out and people have to lower their spending? Why companies will have to lay off people, leading to even less demand, leading to more layouts, and so forth until the economic tailspin turns into an outright economic and social collapse. Yet no company can unilaterally rise wages to ward off this disaster, because even if it made them more competitive due to a workforce that wouldn't hate them quite so much, the shareholders would complain, since the money could be going to them instead.
If only there were a party who could simply order everyone to rise wages, like it or not, to meet some kind of minimum standard high enough to keep the market working. Or, even better, simply pay a minimal income unconditionally to everyone.
Hawking, who appeared via hologram,
Wait, what?
fortune: No such file or directory