I don't believe that "put into remission" and "caused" are anywhere near the same thing.
Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
I still miss sawfish. So customizable, and the undo feature on window move/resize was awesome.
Also note that the image is in color which suggests to me that this is geared at least partly toward the owners.
Dogs aren't color blind in the "they can only see in black and white" sense that most people think. Their range of color perception is more limited than humans', but they still can perceive colors.
According to the DogTV faq, they'd messed around with the color and contrast of the images so they're more apparent to dogs.
Name a state that doesn't have it set up this way. +1 if you manage to find a state that has things fun to do besides drink.
Washington abolished the state-run liquor monopoly during last year's election; you can buy any kind of alcohol at stores here, although they have to be larger than some arbitrary square footage. We also just legalized marijuana for recreational use.
Do I get my +1?
Utah can't secede unless it takes Idaho or Arizona with it, because it would be landlocked.
Just because a state is on the US border doesn't mean it's on the ocean. There are other countries in the world, and it turns out we're next to some of them.
So if I pray in the name of your code, it can intercede? Sweet!
I don't have any interest in carrying a phone in my pocket that's recharged via lightning bolt from the wall.
Link to Original Source
Link to Original Source
And I'm not convinced it was used correctly. Given the definition ("to clear from alleged fault or guilt"), typically I would expect the subject of exculpate to be an entity rather than the behavior itself. "Not that it exculpates them for this behavior." A better choice might've been "absolve".
Posting to undo mod. This is not "interesting".
If you think that's a fitting headline, I don't believe you actually read the story.
The money the IRS is losing is money they paid out to criminals filing returns with fraudulent information and claiming a refund. This is ultimately going to cost citizens (both for the initial false payouts and for the costs to clean up the mess), and the only people who win here are the criminals taking advantage of a broken system.
But they could flag for more careful review anything that didn't match (ie, any return going to an address that's inconsistent with any of the W2's or previous addresses on file) and expedite any returns that ARE consistent. It would be a way for them to focus their fraud prevention efforts, rather than just saying, "Oh it's too difficult to track, so we'll just mail out a return to anywhere, no questions asked."
Replying to undo moderation.
Regarding the "plot" to kill the ambassador, even the article you linked is titled "US Says". There's an alternate view of what went down there.