Comment Corner Drug Store (Score 1) 701
How did Bruce Wayne get away with unlicensed nuclear reactor under his house and where did he get fuel?
From the corner drug store. Duh.
How did Bruce Wayne get away with unlicensed nuclear reactor under his house and where did he get fuel?
From the corner drug store. Duh.
Goes to show you don't necessarily have to get someone for what you want to get them for to have the same outcome.
Any Nexus branded device running Cyanogenmod. Or any non-Nexus device that CM supports (there are literally dozens)
MUCH more importantly, though, ads are draining your BANDWIDTH. It's important, because it's also a simple demonstrable harm. If you pay $30 per month for your internet bandwidth, and the ads use up half of it (conservative estimate)
In which universe do you live where ads on a webpage total up to half of the bandwidth to deliver said webpage?
Because Google purposely don't allow you to block the ads in android (*)
They don't make it easy but they don't make it all that difficult either. Buy a Nexus, Developer Edition, or one of the multitude of carrier branded phones that are rootable. Install one of the multitude of ad blocking apps that are available, AdFree being my personal favorite. Problem solved.
It's really all about appearances. If an employee leaves and then wants to come back as a contractor right away, it creates the appearance of impropriety. For example, let's say you are being audited and you tell the IRS that you cannot participate in the Audit because your computer crashed two days after receiving the audit letter. The appearance there is that you received the letter and then destroyed incriminating evidence.
The IRS does not like this one bit, and takes such maneuvers seriously. Anything that an entity or person does that seems suspicious will be assumed to be criminal, especially the "convenient" loss or destruction of evidence.
I'm so happy with that. I don't like blue light and many of those LEDs were far too bright.
Electrical energy is also free, apparently.
So, he says, you should make sure you buy new hardware only when necessary, not just because of the "Ooh... shiny!" factor"
What's new about this advice? Was it not as useful and applicable 50, 100, and 1000 years ago?
Employing a Marxist theory of capitalism to refute socialism? Fascinating.
Yes, employing an opponent's own theory to prove him wrong is, usually, the most reliable way to deliver defeat in detail to him. Because, although all of us may have different views on life, the views must be self-consistent to be respectable.
Seriously? Twitter? Even if your link really lead to an accusation of a strike on hospital (which it does not), would it have been credible? How about a more reliable source? Oh, sorry, you can't use that, because that page begins with Israel's explanation: "The Israeli military said it had targeted a cache of anti-tank missiles in the hospital's "immediate vicinity".
And we know very well, from sources both impartial and even those biased towards the Arabs, that Hamas does use such civilian buildings for weapons-caches.
Enron. Bernie Madoff.
Duly punished by bankruptcy and prison time.
Asset Backed Paper Commodities.
The only lies exposed by that fiasco is that of the mortgage applicants lying on their loan-applications. Most of those folks have never been to Wall Street.
High Frequency Theft.
No lies there. In other words, fail.
I don't believe that socialism (or capitalism) inherently create more cheating.
I simply believe that once people believe the system is unfair
Your two paragraphs contradict each other. Socialism — with it promise of equal results, rather than opportunity — is unfair, hence, it would create more cheating. Having grown up in the USSR, I still carry the notion, that cheating the government is perfectly Ok (as long as you can get away with it, of course). Because the government was a repressive beast, that cheated its citizenry on everything... My person may be anecdotal evidence, but the Economist's article puts more solid statistics behind it.
Fascism was the one from Italy, remember? It was the nazis with the gas chambers.
While not all Fascists were Nazis, all Nazis were Fascists. And, whenever your kind uses the term "fascists" to denounce someone, they never bother with the fine distinctions between Hitler, Mussolini and Franco — instead attributing the very worst features of all of them to whatever/whoever it is they are denouncing. Hence my question: Where are the gas chambers? And until you can present anything remotely similar, using the term is not called for. Mildly speaking.
The fascists were content with torture chambers, executions and shipping the "undesirables" to other countries to do the dirtiest work.
Oh, if that's, what's bothering you, then Eastern Germany (and the rest of USSR-dominated regimes) were far more "fascist" than the US ever was. Because they were using these methods not on (very) special occasions, but routinely and on massive scale.
If A = B and B = C, then A = C, except where void or prohibited by law. -- Roy Santoro