Comment Re:Wasn't this a movie? (Score 4, Informative) 237
Actually I was alluding to common practices going back many centuries, so well done on leaping to conclusions.
Actually I was alluding to common practices going back many centuries, so well done on leaping to conclusions.
Oh, wait... I think it was books they were burning in the movie... Or people... Maybe both...
We're not spying on you. Not at all. Only spying on select traffic in the interest of national security. Don't worry.
p.s. you're out of milk
Sure. What's your noun to define, in general, a remote controlled unmanned vehicle?
We'll start a campaign to have your word replace "drone" in the Oxford English, Merriam Webster, Collins dictionaries immediately.
For paedophiles you could set it to 1.21W over 2.47 Gseconds...
Yes, that's fucking right. The fucking summary fucking written by the fucking OP, which fucking uses HIS fucking words, not the fucking FBI's
Succinctly, because I just woke up, BULLSHIT.
To be clear, I refer to "REQUIRED to give them my phone number"
How about we just wrap everybody in cotton wool and outlaw leaving the house, ever
Because outrageously stupid ideas like these make much more sense than making the fucking driving test harder so that morons don't get to drive
D'oh! I think you mean The Popular Peoples Front of Syria...
Why oh why
Duh. Because they want "the cloud" to become the new normal.
It's 1.7 TB - TERABYTES - you fucking retard
Take your fucking poncy Tibibytes and shove them up your arse.
"Oh, but we have to have the bi to specify it's BINARY Terabytes you see!"
No, you don't, you foul smelling infected festering gonad. ONLY YOU insignificant fucking worms get confused as to whether kilo is 1,000 or 1,024 depending on context.
Kinda pisses people off that nothing is actually broken but the service bill is tendered, just the same
I'm not quite sure what you're getting at here. They're pissed off because something's NOT broken? Or they're pissed off because they have to pay for somebody's time? Either way they don't sound like very rational people.
This whole "cost for cash" argument is somewhat silly. Doesn't the same "problem" apply to the banks? Surely by this logic, an electronic transaction should be cheaper than a cash transaction. Why, then, do the banks charge this exhorbitant "transaction fee"?
As a (former) small business owner, I had a gross revenue of around $600k p.a. and a net profit of around $100k p.a.
The bank wanted 2.4%. Let's assume I switched to 100% cashless - that's $15k in fees - 15% of my net profit.
Pisses me off immensely when people trivialise the cost of accepting plastic.
Simple, you measure the cost of your data bundle in libraries of congress, then divide by the weight of a library of congress...
18 baht meals? Guessing that was a long time ago... I had a 30 baht khao kha moo an hour ago and I'm already hungry again...
Dynamically binding, you realize the magic. Statically binding, you see only the hierarchy.