That's what his advisors told him, go argue with them about it. I'm not sure who this "we" is, but that whole event was a huge international embarrassment to the government of Pakistan.

Iraq is a case of hindsight being 20/20. There are clear missteps for many things for sure, like enhanced interrogation. Just as a comparison, before the 2012 Osama Bin Laden raid, Obama was advised that they had a stronger case for WMDs in Iraq than they had evidence of where Osama was. Right or wrong, calls have to be made. Beyond that, Iraq was a bipartisan act of Congress.

You're always bashing America and Americans here, what did you expect? Respect is a two way street. And apparently we can take it, whereas you wildlings have very delicate skin. All somebody has to do is look at you the wrong way and you bleed.

Either way, you can relax in your igloo and take solace with the knowledge that nobody is going to send you to space, nor is anybody going to take away your seal club. The wildling went there voluntarily, not by force. He wasn't allowed to take his seal club, which I understand that to you is traumatizing, a bit like somebody cutting your balls off, but when you're going to space, every gram matters, and he'll get it back when he lands. And don't worry, when he returns home, he can have all the maple syrup that your government allocates to him from your strategic maple reserve.

Having said all of that, and more to the point, precisely how has this harmed you that made you feel the need to come here and complain about it?

Itâ(TM)s not a âoefreeâ country though. There are limits on everything. One person owns a thing and you canâ(TM)t touch it without permission.

We might have a lot of choices, within a confined area like what shampoo to buy from three different holding companies that might mean itâ(TM)s actually two. But we canâ(TM)t just take that shampoo without buying it.

We also have a duty to society; or we can watch it fall apart, which is what we are doing.

The prediction market is gambling, and thereâ(TM)s no protection at all against rigging. For instance; someone bet a good deal of money that Trump would bless Allah on Easter Sunday. What are the chances they had access to the script going to the teleprompter? Weâ(TM)ve actually had military strikes and peace deals predicted.

Somehow, they made something worse than gambling in a casino and gladiators spectacles and we can bet on life and death now.

And itâ(TM)s like decriminalizing dangerous drugs. It can make things better but only if itâ(TM)s not commercialized and easily accessible. If there are support systems to help with addiction. If there is opportunity for people to live happy lives.

When there is no hope, addiction gets worse. And thereâ(TM)s nothing better to improve profits and numbers of butts in pews than a crumbling hopeless society.

We can incrementally improve but easy access online gambling that favors inside information is the wrong direction. Iâ(TM)d rather trade this freedom for free college education.

According to the writeup; there are two methods: it is possible for an extension to mark some parts of itself as 'web accessible'; and linkedin has assembled at least one characteristic file for 6,1000-odd extension IDs and attempts to fetch it to confirm/deny the extension's presence.

The other is based on the fact that the whole point of many extensions is to modify the site in some way; but the site normally has largely unfettered access to inspect itself, so they have theirs set up to walk the entire DOM looking for any references to "chrome-extension://" and snagging the IDs if found.

Not exactly a 'declare installed extensions'; but it looks like, out of some combination of supporting the use cases where an extension and page actively interact by design and either not wanting the possibility or not wanting the complexity of trying to enable 'invisible' edits(presumably some sort of 'shadow' DOM mechanism where as far as the site and everything delivered with it knows only its unedited DOM and resources exist; but the one the user sees is an extension-modified copy of that one, which sounds like it could get messy), inferential attacks are fairly easy and powerful.

So you're complaining about something that doesn't affect you in any way, shape, or form. Either that or you think wildlings are entitled to that money for some reason, even though they're not. The only connection you have to this whatsoever is America just sent the first wildling, ever, outside of the Earth's atmosphere, which entitles you to nothing.

It's a system of checks and balances. For example, how do you think we got rid of school prayer when the overwhelming majority of the country was in favor of it at the time? Because the constitution explicitly gave SCOTUS the power to do so. Not the voters, not the legislature.

Your king holds all of the checks. You're just relying on him to exercise restraint. You can't impeach him, and you can't veto him in any way.

So the only way to qualify as middle is to be able to afford two of the most expensive neighborhoods in the country? I tend to think "middle" or even "upper middle" would include a lot more than that.

Where exactly does supporting 3 people on $133k/year count as 'upper middle class'? You could be doing a lot worse, and many are; but that's not just tons of money in a HCOL area; and that's also lower than twice the median salary for full time employees with bachelor's degrees; so you are calling either a single income household doing a bit better than median or a dual income one doing worse 'upper middle class'; which seems pretty ambitious.

It's hard to train a cow to keep its cellphone charged; so you can see why you need something to keep their tracking collars topped up.

Realistically, the status quo has arguably outrun the dystopia there. Your phone already does far more than anything you could get into the power envelope of a bracelet or embedded chip implant, and if for some reason you've raised enough eyebrows that you'd be hauled in for an RFID read DNA is a pretty indelible identifier.

It's not 100% ironclad; but penetration is broad enough that you've basically got the majority carrying highly fingerprintable RF beacons and the minority standing out for their relative radio silence and attempts to deal in cash. Expensive and uncomfortable ankle trackers are good business and feel nice and punitive, just to remind the wrong sort of people we aren't happy with them; but you don't really need to impose a surveillance society when it will build itself for you.

My (admittedly anecdotal from the totally unscientific sample of random stuff I've had reason to work on) impression is that some 'shared' BMC ports had oddities related to network controller sideband interface speeds, since NC-SI is what the BMC is depending on if the NIC is on someone else's PCIe root. It's not like the BMC actually needs a faster link for much(normal management traffic probably doesn't fill 10mb and mounting virtual media may be literally once-in-a-lifetime) so the actual speed of the NC-SI interface was not a burning priority; but it left things up to the NIC whether it would support remaining at gigabit speeds and just quietly slipping the trickle of shared traffic in(presumably slightly more complex; but seems to be what the newer ones do) or if it would knock the link rate down visibly to simplify the case.

You see little echoes of similar behavior elsewhere. The intel desktop and laptop NICs that support 'vPRO' will be GB or 2.5GB when the system is on; but quietly drop back to 10 or 10/100 when it is off and it's just the management engine listening. Some enterprise vendor USB docks do similar things; looks like a normal USB NIC when the OS is up; but drops to a lower speed and operates quietly over, I think, some sort of oddball vendor-defined messages if one of their systems is plugged in but off.

I assume that, as an exercise, getting 5 simultaneous introductions working makes for a better paper; but is there a reason why you would want that in practice? Especially if there is any wobble in the ratios either randomly, across generations, or in the presence of certain environmental conditions that tweak the plant's metabolism one way or another that sounds like it would be a real pain in the ass to have to re-balance (and, if different patients are deemed to need different combinations even a perfectly stable plant is going to need re-balancing of the outputs) vs. very specifically going for a specific target output per-plant(or e. coli or yeast or whatever is easiest to bioreactor) and then just mixing to taste after purification. Is there some advantage I'm not seeing?

I realize that there are cases where some plant-sourced pharmacological effect looks like it is actually driven not by the identified 'active ingredient'; but by dozens or hundreds of assorted things, and in that case you just have to live with the complexity if you get better results with that than with purified isolates; but if you are deliberately engineering for very specific outputs why a mix of 5?

And yours is a monarchy, with the closest thing to a constitution only being a charter that only guarantees any rights at all to barons and nobles, whose descendants to this day still hold their titles and rights from ages past. The only thing it promises, but does not guarantee to you, is a jury trial. You guys sentenced Markus Meecham to jail and a fine en banc, putting a felony conviction over his head making him unemployable, over a youtube comedy that didn't involve any kind of violence or threats. The only way he makes a living at all is because he's paid by an American company to entertain his viewers.

And for voting...well...you don't even get to vote for your German head of state, who is not just for life, but by birthright to each successive generation he begets. Your prime minister legally only acts in an advisory role, who your king has the power to veto.

Anyway, how is ol' Boris doing?

I know a lot more about this subject than you do, Pootin.