Haven't had a problem getting printed boarding passes or getting stuff done via United's website myself, but I might be unusual -- I use them a lot.
378 karma · joined June 17, 2011
In general, the vast majority of registries are fine with marking particular domains as "allocated but not delegated" as long as they get paid. ISTR ICANN waiving their fees, so the costs of marking a domain as undelegatable essentially turn in lost opportunity cost, which most registries are willing to eat.
The way you "destroy" a name is either to not delegate it or give it to the Registrar of Last Resort (https://www.rolr.eu).
However, the root server operators merely publish what ICANN (via the IANA functions) produces.
If the US (either federal or perhaps even the states of California or Virginia) were to decide to "censor" a TLD in the root zone, they would simply go to ICANN, PTI (the folks who provide the IANA functions under contract to ICANN) or, more likely, Verisign (who generate and publish the root zone under contract to ICANN) and demand the root zone be modified.
That is not what I call "truth". Consensus may (or may not) reflect truth, but it is not truth.
As for the UI, meh -- I suppose it's personal taste. I could take it or leave it, but I wish they'd focus on substance over form, i.e., addressing bugs and fixing functionality (e.g., Mail's search remains useless, particularly compared to something like infoclick) instead of gratuitous appearance changes that no one asks for.
But form over substance seems the norm in our industry (see e.g., Windows 11)
"Statutory references to the Department of Defense, Secretary of Defense, and subordinate officers and components shall remain controlling until changed subsequently by the law."
That is, until a law is passed by Congress, DoD is the primary, controlling title (DoW is an "additional secondary title" according to the EO).
Hint 2: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turbo_cancer
I can point to blogs too, here are a couple:
- https://ezra.com/en-gb/blog/turbo-cancer
- https://globalvaccinedatanetwork.org/news/turbo_cancer_and_m...
As for your appeal to authority, Andrew Wakefield was once considered a scientist as well. The fact that a scientist talks about something for years or gets papers published means little. What matters is actual, independently reproducible data.
But something like that would fly in the face of the "Unitary Executive" insanity and would (I suspect) require a constitutional amendment, which is no longer remotely feasible.
• Vietnam War and Bombing of Cambodia: Kissinger played a key role in the secret bombing of Cambodia and the escalation of U.S. involvement in Southeast Asia, which expanded the conflict, resulted in significant civilian casualties, and destabilized the region, enabling the rise of the Khmer Rouge and contributing to mass deaths.
• Bangladesh Genocide (1971): Kissinger and President Nixon strongly supported Pakistan’s military dictatorship during its violent suppression of Bangladesh’s independence movement, despite well-documented human rights abuses and U.S. officials’ warnings about atrocities.
• Support for Dictatorships and Coups in Latin America: He was instrumental in U.S. support for right-wing military coups, notably the 1973 ouster of Chile’s democratically elected president Salvador Allende, and the subsequent support for General Pinochet’s regime, which was responsible for widespread human rights violations. Kissinger also backed Operation Condor, a campaign of repression and assassination by South American dictatorships.
• Indonesia and East Timor: Kissinger has been implicated in supporting Indonesia’s 1975 invasion of East Timor, which led to widespread killings and humanitarian abuses.
• Undermining U.S. Principles and Rule of Law: Kissinger’s tenure saw numerous secret operations and violations of U.S. and international law, including illegal arms transfers and covert interference in foreign elections and governments.
• Sabotaging Vietnam Peace Talks: He was accused of interfering with peace negotiations in 1968, potentially prolonging the Vietnam War for political gain.
The (simplified) sequence (in the US) was:
ARPANet (1969 - 1990)
"Commercial Internet" (1989 -)
NSFNet (1990 - 1996)
Internet2 (1996 -)
NSFNet, overseen and partially funded by (unsurprisingly) the National Science Foundation, had quite a number of restrictions and an acceptable use policy that prohibited commercial use. To get around those restrictions, the "Commercial Internet Exchange" was formed allowing commercial networks to easily interconnect.
As for "apps", the World Wide Web was invented in 1989 and publicly released in 1993. Prior to that, there was "Usenet News" and a service called "gopher". There were many centralized services that interconnected with "the Internet" (mostly NSFNet), e.g., Compuserve, AOL, MSN, etc.