The extra charge for playing "triple-A" games is quite reasonable, only about 1/10 the cost of the actual game per hour. Of course if you want to save....
"but it will download any nude photos you have of yourself on the machine for TSA employees to enjoy. " Time to get photoshopping if I want moans and not laughs coming from the TSA office. I have my pride.
" it does seem more likely than not that the FPD is well aware of the legal ramifications associated with journalists engaging in the act of news gathering/reporting." Yes specifically there will be no legal ramifications at all for "public servants" who break the law. So they broke the law. It's amazing how when someone is obviously guilty or obviously innocent of something the people who deny this say "there must have been something more going on". No, there wasn't or they'd have said.
But it's not pulling needles out of haystacks, that's the point. It's one thing to try to justify a potentially intrusive system by it's positive effects, it quite another to adopt it regardless of the lack of them. Any attack on our privacy should be met with counterattacks on all fronts, including questioning the effectiveness of the attack at it's alleged aim.
"This is most evident in areas consisting of upper class citizens." Because the poor just eat it. But hey statists, tell me again how concerned you are for the "disadvantaged".
"The stuff we already disclosed is too dangerous to disclose. " No, the fact that we disclosed it, when and why is too dangerous to national security. If people found out what we were exposing and why they would not be confident telling our intelligence agencies anything. They would know it would be on the front page of the NYT if someone found it convenient.
How are they dumb? Do they make decisions that have a negative impact on them? Well no, they have a very positive impact on them, they get votes and contributions. It's not stupidity it's willing suspension of disbelief.
Jay you can lead a horse to water but you can't make it think. These are people who do well at running the old business model. If their companies decided to go with a new, better one they'd probably find they need different people to run it well. So where is the incentive for the old management to bring in a new, better business model?
I would think that Jews everywhere would be googling ' "Ruppert Murdoch" jewish ' in the hope of finding evidence that he's not. Certainly as an Australian I always hoped to find evidence that he was actually born in New Zealand.
Why do you think they have the power to freeze your assets? So they can destroy your business (and your ability to hire a good lawyer) before you see the inside of a courtroom. Why do you think the Arthur Anderson accounting firm plead guilty? Because while they were under indictment they couldn't take any auditiing or accounting work so they'd be bankrupt in a few months. Get it straight, if you're a corporation and the US government decides to screw you, you're pretty much screwed.
The weird thing is if they really believed we could do the stuff our characters could do why would they want to fuck witnh us? I mean seriously considering what my characters can do why would a suburban housewife not just go, "Ok do what you want just don't summon a basilisk in my living room."? Of course that wouldn't be necessary, they would just realise we're not the hobbyists they're looking for.
Unfortunately it's not always clear who is a lord since those fools got rid of the sumptuary laws. Some poor cop might actually lose his job because he innocently tried to suppress a serf and bothered a lord instead. The injustice of it all.
Sorry still doesn't get around the massive looting that the government is effectively doing. If the non-profit was the only one providing child-only insurance (and it looks like it would be) they'd take all the losses from people not insuring their kids until they get sick. So the non-profit effectively goes bankrupt subsidising bad decisions (made good by legislation) by parents.
It's like they fired the competent people for mentioning problems.
What other explanation is there? I mean even if they were evil, you'd think that this is just asking for trouble.
Re: Re: WiFi
The extra charge for playing "triple-A" games is quite reasonable, only about 1/10 the cost of the actual game per hour. Of course if you want to save....
Looking good for our oppressors.
"but it will download any nude photos you have of yourself on the machine for TSA employees to enjoy. "
Time to get photoshopping if I want moans and not laughs coming from the TSA office. I have my pride.
Re:
" it does seem more likely than not that the FPD is well aware of the legal ramifications associated with journalists engaging in the act of news gathering/reporting."
Yes specifically there will be no legal ramifications at all for "public servants" who break the law. So they broke the law. It's amazing how when someone is obviously guilty or obviously innocent of something the people who deny this say "there must have been something more going on". No, there wasn't or they'd have said.
Re: Re: Re:
They counted fucks, how do you think they did it? You... person who doesn't think things through.
Re: Licenses
But it's for the children!
Re:
But it's not pulling needles out of haystacks, that's the point. It's one thing to try to justify a potentially intrusive system by it's positive effects, it quite another to adopt it regardless of the lack of them. Any attack on our privacy should be met with counterattacks on all fronts, including questioning the effectiveness of the attack at it's alleged aim.
Re: Fighting bogus tickets
"This is most evident in areas consisting of upper class citizens."
Because the poor just eat it. But hey statists, tell me again how concerned you are for the "disadvantaged".
Not what we disclosed, but that we disclosed it.
"The stuff we already disclosed is too dangerous to disclose. "
No, the fact that we disclosed it, when and why is too dangerous to national security. If people found out what we were exposing and why they would not be confident telling our intelligence agencies anything. They would know it would be on the front page of the NYT if someone found it convenient.
Re: Re:
No, only when they make a statement and some bothers to check out if it's true.
Re:
And exactly how many of them do you think don't already know they work for assclowns?
Pointless?
"Uber just keeps running up against those random or pointless rules and regulations"
"Honestly, these rules seem much more designed -- as so many rules are -- to protect legacy players against upstarts like Uber."
Only one of these can be true, either the restictions are pointless and/or random or they are designed to protect legacy players.
Guess which one I vote for?
Re:
How are they dumb? Do they make decisions that have a negative impact on them? Well no, they have a very positive impact on them, they get votes and contributions. It's not stupidity it's willing suspension of disbelief.
Re:
Jay you can lead a horse to water but you can't make it think. These are people who do well at running the old business model. If their companies decided to go with a new, better one they'd probably find they need different people to run it well. So where is the incentive for the old management to bring in a new, better business model?
I would think that Jews everywhere would be googling ' "Ruppert Murdoch" jewish ' in the hope of finding evidence that he's not. Certainly as an Australian I always hoped to find evidence that he was actually born in New Zealand.
What you thought that wasn't SOP?
Why do you think they have the power to freeze your assets? So they can destroy your business (and your ability to hire a good lawyer) before you see the inside of a courtroom. Why do you think the Arthur Anderson accounting firm plead guilty? Because while they were under indictment they couldn't take any auditiing or accounting work so they'd be bankrupt in a few months. Get it straight, if you're a corporation and the US government decides to screw you, you're pretty much screwed.
Re: Re: Nothing new... again
The weird thing is if they really believed we could do the stuff our characters could do why would they want to fuck witnh us? I mean seriously considering what my characters can do why would a suburban housewife not just go, "Ok do what you want just don't summon a basilisk in my living room."? Of course that wouldn't be necessary, they would just realise we're not the hobbyists they're looking for.
Re: The question that comes up in my head
Unfortunately it's not always clear who is a lord since those fools got rid of the sumptuary laws. Some poor cop might actually lose his job because he innocently tried to suppress a serf and bothered a lord instead. The injustice of it all.
They always were
"and the women are now appealing. "
I would have thought they were appealing at the time, otherwise they wouldn't be in the video.
Re: Sleazy???
Sorry still doesn't get around the massive looting that the government is effectively doing. If the non-profit was the only one providing child-only insurance (and it looks like it would be) they'd take all the losses from people not insuring their kids until they get sick. So the non-profit effectively goes bankrupt subsidising bad decisions (made good by legislation) by parents.