Travel restrictions should NEVER prevent people from going home. In fact, they should encourage going home ASAP. I still can't believe how badly some countries fucked this up.
What benefit is there to stranding travelers in your country? They're going to be pissed off, they might run out of money and you'll have to support them, etc... Just let them go home. This isn't complicated.
I lean pretty hard left but I have to agree on this. I'm still seeing so much bitchery about masks, it's unbelievable.
One person I know wears an N100 respirator everywhere she goes and is constantly ranting on social media about how she doesn't care what people think and that people who don't wear masks are "selfish" and she wants nothing to do with them. Even though I don't care what she wears, we still had a huge falling out over this because I simply don't care about masks anymore and only wear one if required by the venue.
Then you have the extreme opposite, people who harass mask wearers and rant against vaccines on social media.
Like come on, people, grow up. If you want to wear a mask, wear one. If you want to get vaccinated, do it. If you don't, don't. We're past the emergency phase of the pandemic and individual choice is the way things are going to be going forward, whether you like it or not.
You don't need a car in NYC, and if you're able-bodied, can get around the entire city without one, pretty much. Those with disabilities may need vehicles to get around but it's not a large percentage of the city population.
However, all cities need trucks to deliver our stuff, and those trucks need places to park while making the deliveries. The laws should be adjusted so trucks have an easier time parking to load and unload, while at the same time making it more difficult for passenger cars so fewer people try to drive them into the city.
When Flickr said they were going do delete older photos from non-paying members several people I know FREAKED THE HELL OUT about it, saying that they were going to lose those photos forever if they didn't pay and that Flickr was basically extorting them.
I asked one of them "well what about the copy in your own photo library" and he said he doesn't have space to keep all his photos.
So yeah, people really depend on services like this to archive their stuff. It's absolutely insane to me, but they do, and they're just one unfortunate company decision away from losing their memories/recordings/etc.
If hardware manufacturers make it impossible to determine if a system is running as a VM, software makers like these won't be able to place restrictions on software based on it being on a VM or not. This is a good thing as virtualization shouldn't be discouraged.
1: It is common knowledge (and common sense!) by now, but here are a couple of links. (I don't know what sites you'd trust, but I'm sure a google search will yield similar conclusions for sites you'd find trustworthy).
https://safestart.com/news/4-reasons-backing-parking-spaces-safer/
https://www.geotab.com/blog/reverse-parking/
https://www.vox.com/2016/8/1/11926596/safer-back-into-parking-spaces
To sum it up: When you back into the space you have a very limited area to worry about, and the chance of someone or something moving into/around that area is very small. When backing out of the same space you have a very limited view of what is going on where you're backing out (moving pedestrians and cars obscured by the cars parked next to you for instance).
2. Your willingness to take responsibility is meaningless. Sure, a dented fender can be repaired and repainted, but I'm sure whoever you have baked into in the past and will back into in the future would rather be without the hassle no matter how willing you are to pay for your mistake. Then there is the matter of when you run over a person.
7) I'm round. Round is a shape.
The ones not backing in are the assholes. You are a lot more likely to hit someone/something while backing out of the space then when backing in. Many workplaces have safety regulations that require you to back into the space for a reason. It should be the law.
Yeah people love to talk about how great underground wiring is, not having poles and cables running overhead but the cost of running new cable or repairing existing cables is five times as much.
It's easy to put in when building a new subdivision but have fun 30 years down the line when it needs upgrading or replacement...
Don't leave out menstruation, then!
You do know that all telescopes and antennae searching for intelligent life are actually pointed away from Earth, right? Just sayin'.
1. Serious/relevant polls
2. Goofy/funny polls
3. I don't care as long as CowboyNeal is one of the options.
People (kids especially) will see their beloved characters and be happy about it. I don't think anybody is going to be whining about continuity at a theme park. And if they do, there's always the Please Please Pleese Get a Life Foundation.
>Swell nice to hear the largest providers are doing well. It would be a shame if anyone wanted to compete and had to fight for scraps or if people wanted a prefix to run their own shit and their ISP charged them extra. What's there not to love about a completely unnecessary multi-billion dollar market (e.g. tax) bankrolled by customers?
Just wanted to say I agree completely. It sucks that Amazon owns so much IPv4 space and thus has so much sway over the market. That doesn't change the fact that they do, though, and that this is hindering IPv6 adoption because people can just spin up a few instances and say "Well I have IPv4 working why bother with v6 when it works fine?"
I wish we could have ripped this bandaid off 20 years ago.
It's more that it's a bidirectional chicken-and-egg problem, but backwards.
There's no motivation on the client side to use IPv6 because if you have IPv4, whether directly or through NAT, you can access the entire Internet. You're not "missing out" on anything other than incoming connections if you're on NAT, and most people don't need that capability.
There's no motivation on the server side to use IPv6 because if you have IPv4, everyone can reach you. Period. There's still a lot of IPv4 space available, it's just owned by big cloud providers like AWS where people tend to put their services up anyway.
Full IPv6 adoption will not happen until it becomes a lot more painful to not use IPv6, and sadly that's not going to happen anytime soon. Mobile providers use IPv6 by necessity due to the sheer number of clients, and many are already pure IPv6 and using 464XLAT to get to IPv4. In the end this is NAT with extra steps. We get closer every year, but each year we travel about half the distance, so we're not getting there any time soon.
Love may laugh at locksmiths, but he has a profound respect for money bags. -- Sidney Paternoster, "The Folly of the Wise"
