I think the law is if you open a URL it was intentional. There just seems to be some confusion about "who" opened the URL.

But it's still a formula to so one action at a time. The entire body reacts and changes posture while flexing and relaxing muscles throughout your body. That is the multitasking part. If you had to consciously do all that while playing the drums anything but the most extreme basics would be impossible.

Good examples.Then you are not actually multitasking at that point. You are learning what the most likely reaction should be then conditioning the body to react. Even further, you can cause another take an action you want through that conditioning through group think. It is still one action to one reaction. Multitasking on that level is in my opinion making the mind believe they body is not where it actually is or is in several possible places simultaneously? Consciously multitasking or rewiring the brain on that level is damaging to the mind and body.

Does the kernel create a foundation to pay people for support? Do distros pay a kernel foundation for support? Do you charge everyone for kernel use? So of course android is a convenient example of success because the only way any of these options can resolve is an eventual closed source pivot and absorption in to a larger bloated closed source environment.

I guess depending on what you mean by threading, you are describing things better written in C++ instead of C? The hardest thing is writing C programs then deciding they don't scale to purpose later.

This was about deciding that millions of computers no longer deserved to run an upgraded windows 11. So fine, in the case of Microsoft being unsympathetic towards all those people, many who likely could not simply purchage a new computer with their new windows version 11..... Screw em, right??

Then being the basic building blocks of the most basic lifeforms while being the actual byproduct of other lifeforms makes it hard to deny it is possible, as well as create a strong argument that life did not/could not begin spontaneously on this planet because the process must have began elsewhere then introduced here.

The question I read between the lines; Does Corporate security matter more than Humans and their living Communities? I do wonder a lot where decision makers are on this issue. I'm watching Ghost in the Shell while contemplating this btw.....good movie.

Corporate privilege allows every type of personal data they are not supposed to be saving and we take them on their word until it gets out. Laws exist that technically allow them to share anything they can monetize, yet laws exist that prohibit the same data from even existing let alone being shared.

If the parents claim US citizenship and file for a social security number then go back to France that the only way that's possible. Even then it's more likely the person is arrested in France after their vacation than being detained in the US.

Then, the very issue of birthright citizenship was such a hot issue that it may have been meant to be an amendment by itself which likely was overshadowed by the issue of slave ownership. So the 14th amendment by that argument was meant to correct the crime of slave ownership itself as well as the deprioritizing of birthright citizenship.

They can't "override" s constitutional amendment without historic precidence. Citizenship by birth is unquestioned in this country and I can't think of any situation where it has been revoked, waived by an individual maybe but never revoked. There are likely situations before the 14th amendment was added were the federal government assumed birthright citizenship was legal. So this argument that it's a flawed amendment as it was enacted because ex slaves needed protection is weak. The wording was absolute knowing that it had precedence and needed to be indisputable. The 2nd amendment on the other hand was PURPOSELY ambiguous by referring to ".....a well organized militia" even though military service was to be voluntary. Both issues of armed service and gun ownership were vigorously debated even slated to be included in other amendments or another document (the bill of rights eventually?) or by states before they decided on the wording of the 2nd amendment as compromise. Yet it's just accepted since then that the goal was ONLY to protect private gun ownership. So, if there were any doubt concerning the absolute meaning of the 14th amendment it would have been worded different...

An El Niño maybe? I applaud the effort of exploration in general.

and I will blame trump for forgetting not to sit down with the taliban to sign a pledge to withdraw completely from afghanistan in 4 months.

Something else the states will have to do by themselves. You would think a warning sign like the sharp rise in electronics due to data centers consuming memory at an alarming rate would be a reason to at least consider regulation. But we are in the act of stopping the steal to make america great again lest we forget someone named benghazi is actually what the epstein files are about......