Pray I don't alter it any further.
Having dealt with the fallout of people losing access to their accounts due to MFA, and not just from compromise, I am completely convinced that passkeys will result in the same. The whole system is completely ridiculous, and their whole claim of improved security has been demonstrated to be a fabrication.
The avian flu bit will be a nothing-burger. They are desperate to maintain regular plague-panics. The vast majority of culled flocks have no avian flu. However, the quick payout from Uncle Sam for the destroyed flocks creates a perverse incentive.
The prices will indeed come down after January 20th, as oil and other energy commodities will come down. Nobody wants to get stuck with high priced oil contracts when a perceived glut is approaching.
Exactly. They replaced a software engineer and creator of things with parasites and leeches. That's why the product suffers. Brave, on the other hand, has been innovating, adding great features regularly, especially on mobile.
Dang, you waited all of two seconds to post bullshit about "very fine people on both sides". It's been debunked with recordings, and transcripts, even by leftist "fact checkers". It's helpful, though, because it lets us know what whatever you say or believe has a 99.8% certainly of being bullshit propaganda.
I agree with the other commenter, in that it may be related to your cessation of various anti-psychotic meds.
I recall back in the old days (maybe 5 years ago, before everything became tokenized) when you could migrate or copy to a new system and everything was already logged in then as well. Unfortunately, caterwauling about MFA led to tokens that can't be transferred in the migration process, and you are stuck re-authenticating everything.
Meanwhile, the world keeps a movin', and new breaches are made every day. But hey, at least we tried, right? Screw the fact that it makes life more miserable. So, here, we have another "new" method to do what you could do back then. Remarkable.
Oh, it wasn't just actual votes. It's immaterial, as the courts refused to hear the evidence, which included sworn affidavits from various folks in the chain, and plenty of actual evidence of counting votes without observers. There are quite a few of these, even before you get to the geolocation cell data matched with surveillance video showing people stuffing so many ballots at once into "drop boxes" that some fall to the ground, only to go riding off on their bicycle and then return later with more.
At this point, its not even really a question. There is not an election where the leading candidate of the incumbent party receives 15 million fewer votes than in the previous election. There was no enthusiasm for Biden, and it was clear even before the election that the man was having severe cognitive issues.
But here's the thing: I'm not trying to convince you. I'm just pointing out the lack of intellectual honesty in suggesting that evidence was ever heard. It was not. YOu could see someone opening a panel on a voting machine and changing votes while you watched, and even in a ridiculously blatant scenario like that, which would never happen in real life, you would claim it was the most secure election ever. Which brings us to the pro-tip. When media troglodytes all drone on simultaneously about an election being the most secure ever, you can take it to the bank that the election was not, in fact, secure.
That's not really intellectually honest. Having cases thrown out on procedural grounds, sometimes quite outlandish, is not "thrown out for being unsubstantiated". Normal legal actions entitle parties to discovery, and the ability to be assigned a date on the docket, and to have claims and evidence heard. They couldn't get that far. This includes for States that violated their own Constitutions, like Pennsylvania. That was not only substantiated, it was really undisputed.
The real reason is that Joe Schmoe Judge doesn't want to be the one seen as changing the outcome of an election by allowing arguments to be heard, especially if those arguments have merit.
Luckily, it will likely soon be impossible for you to prevent people from sharing their thoughts on platforms which asked users to participate by sharing their thoughts. That way, we won't have to concern ourselves with your ridiculous policies based on regurgitated stories you read from whichever political party's media outlet published. "Anti-parasitic medication for horses" is all we need to hear from you to realize that you are a profoundly stupid person.
That, mixed with your authoritarian goals, is a deadly cocktail.
Well, cisgender isn't really a word. It's a construct promoted by people who want to create a special label for people who are normal, so that they don't seem normal relative to someone who thinks they were born with the wrong body parts. In medicine, you learn that you should not participate or go along with a patient's delusion. It doesn't help, and it can actually put people at risk. In short, "transgender" persons are just that, and everyone else is just a person, male or female.
I can imagine it is difficult to not have a meltdown if your child has been affirmed (maybe even by you, to your horror) in a delusion which would potentially lead to their sterilization, mutilation, and more mental damage. He obviously erred in allowing things to progress as far as they did, and the child will suffer for the lack of appropriate parental guidance.
Uh, fuck off yourself. We used to be able to go to concerts for bands that weren't mega attractions and pay reasonable prices.. Now, the tickets are instantly bought by bots and immediately posted on StubHub for anywhere between $750 and $1,500 per seat, when the original ticket was $75. You keep refreshing, and no tickets available through TicketMaster (including for "restricted presales).
Maybe consider not buying tickets for events if you aren't sure you will be able to go. Alternately, you can get your refund and you lose nothing. StubHub/SeatGeek etc are why people with average incomes can no longer affordably purchase tickets. One also has to wonder if your opposition to this is not misrepresented, and that you are involved in the bot/scalping industry.
Unfortunately, the Justice system somehow acquired an heir of respectability that it doesn't deserve. Partisan politics play a strong role in rulings. Therefore, people will complain when the system produces what seems to be a biased result. The only way to really judge the judges in these cases is to compare their rulings with the Constitution and applicable laws.
In this case, it is very clear that Google is selectively targeting political emails from Republicans. I interact semi-regularly with politicians from both parties. Invariably, after some initial communication, I see communications from them. Some are "updates", most are brief panic blurts meant to trigger donations, with very explicit requests to donate now because the world will come to an end if I don't.
There is literally not a speck of difference between these items, except for one: the Republican missives are almost always marked as spam. More than 90% of them. The Democrat ones? Haven't seen them in the spam folder yet. Note that if I get these communications via a third party commercial mail host other than Google, used for business, with excellent spam filtration and basically zero spam entering my inbox, I receive the communications from both groups to my inbox.
Here is the brief version of "show original version" from a recent "flagged as spam" email from a Republican interest:
Message ID
Created at: Wed, Jul 31, 2024 at 2:04 PM (Delivered after 6 seconds)
From: "Donald J. Trump"
Subject: I asked my team to flag your response
SPF: PASS with IP 156.70.47.94 Learn more
DKIM: 'PASS' with domain republican-updates.com Learn more
DMARC: 'PASS' Learn more
Note that all of the recommended spam prevention features are set up on the sending server. There are two working unsubscribe links in the email. This particular one asks you to take a survey. Assuredly, after the survey will come a plea for money. This is just one sort of tactic. Both parties are all over the map with different methods meant to hook different personality types.
Face it, a Biden appointed judge doesn't want Republican emails delivered to constituents/donors. There is no reasonable person, looking at the plain and clear evidence, who could come to the conclusion that this was not willful interference with political communication, which was opted in. Oh, and another little detail? I always click the "not spam" button. Yet they keep going into my spam folder. For years. And years. I have clicked the "not spam" button for these thousands of times. I never had to click it for the DNC ones.
Very reminiscent of Real Genius. Comedy becomes reality.
There is nothing hideous about Phyllis Schlafly. She was a remarkably intelligent, thoughtful, and hard working woman, who fought for the rights of women. So-called feminists of the era had no interest in promoting the rights of women, instead wishing to destroy gender roles to satisfy their weak egos. Schlafly was comfortable in her own skin, and knew that most women were actually happiest when holding a traditional role, nurturing their families, and engaging in artistic expression and craftwork.
The sad fact is that many women are barraged with someone else's ideas of a "good goal" from a very early age. Instead of teaching children in a truly educational way, the purpose is to inculcate certain agendas that amplify power structures for the elite class, while suppressing wages and running people ragged.
Itâ(TM)s really impressive that you think that anyone sees you as anything other than disingenuous. Of course, itâ(TM)s the same way we see the people in these âoesocietiesâ that like to erase the accomplishments of actual scientists.
Itâ(TM)s always the same motivation: you (and they) have accomplished nothing of import or interest in your entire life. But instead of dedicating yourselves to uncover more of the natural world, you begrudge others who did so.
How pathetic. But, I guess the look suits you.
It may have had a reputation, but it wasn't well deserved. The only really decent tractor they made was the 4020. Oh, sure, they had some interesting designs, but they weren't reliable when compared with Allis-Chalmers, Oliver, Minneapolis-Moline, or Farmall/International Harvester. However, they spent a lot more money on marketing, like the ubiquitous green hats. Even today, at the antique pulls (usually pre-1960), they usually rank in the bottom of pullers. Mechanically they are prone to failures, and repairs are not as easy (the 4020 - and related series, up to the high powered one which didn't have an equally strong drivetrain - being the exception).
In the late 1970s, lots of poor government policies led to very hard times for farmers (high interest rates, high inflation), and the smaller, but better manufacturers did a lot of consolidating, and we now have just a few major players. Tenneco Case bought International Harvester in 1984, forming CaseIH, Deutz purchased Allis in 1985, forming Deutz-Allis (later bought by management and renamed AGCO (Allis-Gleaner) and then AGCO bought White (which had earlier bought Oliver and MM). Any of those tractor lines were superior to John Deere on a technical and mechanical level.
John Deere (and the other manufacturers, to a lesser extent) have taken advantage of the smaller field of players, to the detriment of farmers and independent repair shops.
Science is to computer science as hydrodynamics is to plumbing.
