You really mean "wrought havoc". Just adding 'ed' on the end of a verb to make a past participle is lazy, particularly when one already exists.

Licence all the old soaps: Sons and Daughters, The Young Doctors, etc.. Hell, go for broke and add in The Sullivan's. It can be just like the 80s in UK all over again!

There's enough Prisoner: Cell Block H to probably cover 7.5% on its own. Then there's Neighbours along with Home and Away...

Doesn't help when:
1. us-east-1 is the default region
2. Customers blithely accept the default instead of taking 5s to consider if that is the most appropriate one based on their location. Chances are high that it isn't.

/r/electronsgonewild, the subreddit you never knew you needed

I saw the headline and immediately thought "oh, please, please be that song"

He's just looking for someone who can push him
And then just touch him.

It's a lot of effort considering Butterchurn is a thing, so making a new visualiser from scratch instead of just forking (or contributing to) an existing project smacks of NIH syndrome.

That's what happens if you leave Wensleydale exposed to cosmic rays for billions of years.

A meaning that hasn't been used for 400 years is just one that is used incorrectly. "Pernicious" is available if the esteemed doctor wants an apt big word to impress illiterate plebs.

Also unsure how "fastidious" can be used as a description of a virus.

As a fellow Brit, I concur with the rider that said fucking should be performed repeatedly and sideways.

Texas is a not more accessible to those who would go to NY to see exhibits in multiple museums. Yeah, I'll just add another leg of my tour because something I wanted to see has been moved 1600 miles, said no-one ever.

* owned not opened. Missed that auto-correct.

Can't help but notice the government didn't fall over themselves trying to save British Leyland before what was left over eventually got owned by Tata. I do, however, remember them falling over themselves to save "British" Steel, completely coincidentally also opened by Tata...

No, because it is still unauthorised access to confidential systems because the employee cannot give authorisation for the access to an outside party. Merely having login details isn't sufficient. And as for "voluntarily", I rebut with "coerced", which is illegal in its own right.