I would have thought it was all hookers and dudes pretending to be girls by now.
Besides, who needs Tinder now that Slashdot has banner ads for FilipinoCupid.com?
Until we develop an AI that can read between the lines honestly good luck with that
I don't think most people can even read between the lines, and especially men when it comes to women.
Under $10 (most under $5). It is just not feasible to ship that for free by it self.
Yeah, but you're ignoring 2 points: 1) I already paid $119 for a Prime membership, which is supposed to give you free 2-day shipping and 2) I'd be willing to pay shipping for a low cost item, but that is not an option with "Add-on Items".
When free shipping went up to $49, I stopped buying as much from them. I might use them more again now, $35 was easy to pad a purchase to reach- $49 isn't.
Amazon's goal is to get you to buy more stuff than you need. What really irritates me is that I paid $119 for a prime account, and then a lot of things you look at are "Add-on Items", meaning that they only qualify for free prime shipping on orders over $25--but you can't buy them alone even if you'd be willing to pay for shipping. I needed to get some over-sized U-Bolts for my camper. Nobody locally carried them--Lowe's, Home Depot, Walmart, or the local hardware stores. Amazon had them for $8, but I had to add an additional $17 worth of stuff I didn't really want or need at them time before they would ship them to me.
Money problems? Consider; Trump Tower, The Moon.
Appeal to his ego, tell him space tourism is going to be YUUUGE!
it may also identify risks that nobody would have flagged at all--including terrorists planning attacks using private channels, people bullying someone too afraid to report it themselves...
And also, coming soon: PRECRIME!
So sad, you're too dumb to recognize the shuffling of papers was so much busy work. Your electronic forms don't need to be filled either.
Actually, a lot of them do, due to state or federal requirements.
It's over, folks. The capitalist/technological system is self-defeating; on the one hand you have the weird notion that you have to work every day to survive, yet technology increases all of our productivity.
We can't have both at the same time.
Sure you can. It's called doing new things. I'm currently involved in business process improvement at my workplace. I'm converting all of our paper forms into electronic forms. Additionally, I write automation & workflows for those forms. Multi-part forms automatically get routed from one person to another to perform different tasks after each part is completed. Once that's all finished, everything goes into our document management system automatically. So no printing, shuffling paperwork from department to department, or scanning. And it's done in a fraction of the time. That allows the people who worked on those tasks to do other things that we've wanted to do here but haven't had the time.
Something is clearly wrong with the translations of the Downfall videos. Sometimes it's about SAP, sometimes it's about the World Cup, but my limited German tells me it's about the fall of the Third Reich.
We're living in the postmodern era. The interpretation is left up to the viewer!
Unlike self driving cars that need to integrate with unpredictable human drivers, a fully automated system takes humans out of the equation.
Now we just have to worry about unpredictable Canadian Geese or Sandhill Cranes, in my area at least...
Granted, I haven't read it all (I just skipped to the DENIED at the end), but I think it's a little more nuanced than, "because I said so."
At no point in his ruling did he mention the law (U.S. Code SS 1182 - Inadmissible aliens) that gives the president the power to do this. He didn't rule on the constitutionality of the law that allows the ban, he ruled based on his perceptions of the intent of the ban, so basically "Because I said so." Trump could have just as easily banned immigrants from Lichtenstein if he had the inclination that they were a hot spot for terrorists.
In the portion of Thursday's ruling that sided with the government, the judge said he could not reconcile the company's attempt to assert the Fourth Amendment protection against invasive searches on behalf of its customers with earlier court decisions. Other courts have found that such rights can only be asserted by individuals, and not vicariously by third parties, he [Robart] said.
I'm not sure why Robart is concerned with precedent in this case, since his reason for blocking Trump's travel ban basically came down to "Because I said so." I guess all data hosts should now have to give disclaimers that there's no guarantee of an expectation of privacy. So much for due process...
Wow, I wish I had Russian genetics. They seem to be able to do all the really big scary computer stuff that us non-russians are not capable of doing. I am not trying to denegrate Russians here, but the media is so incredibly naive. It is as if putting "Russian" in front of it, no matter the evidence, turns the so called hack into something mysterious, huge, and scary.
Those wascawy Wussians, hacking Amewican ewections & weportews emaiws!
I think people should freely be allowed to unionize, but people should also be allowed to NOT be part of the unions if they don't want to be: it's their economic choice, really.
Collectivism only works when it's mandatory--and even then, it doesn't work.
In a consumer society there are inevitably two kinds of slaves: the prisoners of addiction and the prisoners of envy.