Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).
- - Whether it is censorship or not is not based on if the entity censoring is a government entity at all, but rather the act of editing or hiding information.
- - This is a basic definition, something of that effect in pretty much every fucking dictionary definition
- - All Google owning the servers means is they can censor certain things legally - whether it is moral or not IS up to opinion, but going by any textbook definition, it is still censorship.
- - Why do I feel like the OP might be too stupid to understand all this?
just because a passenger is a customer that should be treated with respect does NOT mean that the passenger doesn't have to follow crewmember instructions.
Irrelevant since a gate agent is not a member of the flight crew.
1. Place phone near the part you wish to pleasure. 2. Keep moving phone volume setting from no sound to vibrate, which on the HTC one at least makes it vibrate briefly
If done fast enough, the vibration is continuous, w/o breakage.
I don't care if the losses to piracy are small. I don't want any losses at all.
Ok, tell me when you woke up from your unrealistic pipedream then.
True... because the Nazis were known for throwing you in a concentration camp due to your political views without due process, that's ALL they did/were known for. *rolls eyes*
People who discount Nazi analogies purely because they think Nazis were only about the concentration camp, genocide aspect, and miss the buildup to that point and the things being put upon citizens, really need a better understanding - as there was more to them than just THAT specific act of horror, little things, a creep in power, the attitudes, the power grabs, and more.
Its a slippery slope that DC is right to avoid with a flat out denial.
I see the potential for a slope, but that would be with the type of request IMO - and on that level you still have the power to say yes or no. So they would need to come up with some criteria, if they did, that would end the potential slope right there.
What the f*$# is wrong with us? How much longer are we going to be in denial that there's a thing called "rape culture" and we ought to do something about it? ... To paraphrase the great John Oliver, listen up, fellow self-pitying nerd boys — we are not the victims here. We are not the underdogs. We are not the ones who have our ownership over our bodies and our emotions stepped on constantly by other people's entitlement. We're not the ones where one out of six of us will have someone violently attempt to take control of our bodies in our lifetimes.'"
A while back, I had a dream where I found a shitload of cash - I recall in the dream saying "Let me put it in this draw,I'll get it later - and the person I was with saying "Yeah, but this is a dream, you'll look there and nothing will be there," to which I replied "Damn, you're right." I woke up after a few more things occurred in said dream, not as soon as I was aware I was dreaming. I was in control of my dream, aware I was dreaming, and this is just one example of things I go through almost every night.
Sometimes this is awesome, sometimes this is terrifying, sometimes it's neither extreme, just fun. To actually have more control
Privacy in public is a contradiction
Yeah, if you believe privacy only equals physical privacy, which is ignorant - protip: Privacy != just physical, you have privacy of mind and thought - somebody asks you for your opinion on something for example, you need not say it, so IMO "privacy in public places doesn't exist" is only true if talking PHYSICAL privacy - without that quantifier, this is a bullshit notion, IMO
Yet again its forced outrage against basically something which is common sense
*sighs*... I hate these phrases - faux outrage, forced outrage, since they are used in the least applicable places. Misleading outrage isn't forced - it's still misleading, but it's still real. I's like when you mishear that somebody was banging your GF, and you momentarily get pissed before the person repeats themselves... the outrage in that split second was no less real.
It's loss of opportunity to economically exploit one's work in both cases
Personally, just a side note, I've seen people use that alone to justify the position of it being theft - it annoys the hell outta me since the criterion those people use is idiotic - legitimate, legal competition does the same, but their reasoning would label it such. Heh, sidetracks from the discussion at hand, pay no mind.