2,656 karma · joined August 8, 2018
While that is true, they were redeeming them 1:1. So you could buy them at a 6% discount on the exchange, but redeem them, for free 6%.
Few people did because enough of them thought that USDT is going to the ground, causing the discount.
It’s possible (with much effort) to get a legit licence for Windows 10 Enterprise LTSC.
But just get an evaluation copy, promote it to volume and KMS activate it and save yourself the hassle.
Well, Google has to diversify away from being a glorified ad agency. And they are becoming so detached from the reality that more and more people are starting to see them as complete scumbags.
Getting it now costs $1.1m/y.
A complete non-brainer for $13k. If you could get it for $13k, you'd already be far too late. I don't see how it's not at least a high 6 figure flip.
Unless the 116 countries voting to uphold it are actually willing to do something about it, it's near completely meaningless.
Can we stop pretending that the UN has power over anything?
Yes.
> What part of 'sticks and stones' did you not understand?
I don't believe in the 'sticks and stones' part. Even if I did, it's not something I have to concern myself with—if I do, everything becomes futile anyway.
WW3 doesn't have to mean the end for all civilization.
That would largely depend on the sides getting hit with the nukes.
Deep OTM calls on VIX (ETF ticker $UVXY) would be something similar to that. If WW3 happens, VIX will skyrocket.
Furthest expiry available as of today for $UVXY options is Jan 16, 2026.
The harsh reality is that it genuinely doesn't matter what the UN declares. General Assembly resolutions are non-binding and are almost universally ignored.
The UN also is not the ultimate authority on international law. The countries subscribing to said international law are.
It's very easily defensible. BIOT is internationally recognized as a sovereign territory of the UK.
> And none of that money goes to the people who historically lived there and were displaced.
I fail to see how this is relevant. It's a thing that has happened a million times in the past and has been rarely rectified. We don't (and never will) live in a perfect world.
The status quo offers the most certainty, therefore is the best option for holders of .io domain names.
Depends on how you spin it. I suspect it would be quite easy to spin the narrative on this one. "So you knowingly funded a terrorist group that's likely going to use the money to commit further crimes against US citizens?" or something of the sort. Have some experts testify on that too, preferably ones in officers uniform.
It is a meaningless website. Everybody and their dog knows that in the present political climate it’s practically impossible to change the immigration law. It’s only a remote theoretical possibility that the US could fix their immigration system.
There's case law on this matter actually, coming from the trial of King Charles I.
> The court challenged the doctrine of sovereign immunity and proposed that "the King of England was not a person, but an office whose every occupant was entrusted with a limited power to govern 'by and according to the laws of the land and not otherwise'."
So no, granting the Royal Assent doesn't happen in the name of King Charles III.
Technically the military in Canada swear allegiance to the monarchy in Canada.
The monarchy of Canada is legally completely distinct from the one in the UK. Or Australia. Or New Zealand. Or any other of HRHs realms and dominions.
It’s just that they all share the same monarch and the rules of succession.
It’s actually theoretically possible for Charles to abdicate the throne in the UK but still remain the King of Canada. Which would be utterly ridiculous and it’s not going to happen, but theoretically it could.
No. The only reason why the British monarchy still exists is because they are completely apolitical.
If that changed, it would very quickly become a bipartisan issue to end the monarchy, irrespective of which side he’d support.
He would probably be either asked to abdicate, or it would be the end of the British monarchy altogether.
It would cause a massive constitutional crisis in the UK where not only the monarchy would be called in question, but also the nobility (i.e. House of Lords)
International audience might interpret it exactly like that.
“King Charles III signs off” is a perfectly ordinary part of the legislative process. Royal Assent has been granted 100% of the time in probably the last 1000 years. I’m not going to search when was the last time royal assent was not granted, but I’m somewhat certain it was before 1600s.
Edit: looked it up after all. Royal Assent was last withheld in 1708.
It would not go unnoticed, but say if the CEO is >50% shareholder, he could just say “if you don’t like the way I run the company, sell the stock”.
> The case claimed that a Brisbane-based company, Flow Chemical, and its sole director, Vincent Zhen, were “instrumental” to its publication and for keeping it accessible, even though they were not the authors of the defamatory Kiwi Farms thread.
> Because the matter was undefended, an interlocutory judgment was made against Flow Chemical and Zhen in July and Fong-Jones was awarded damages of $445,000 plus costs this week.
The defendant didn’t show up to the court so a default judgement happened. No case law was set here. Nothing has changed, at all.
I'm fairly confident that nobody is ever going to scan a single /64 of IPv6 addresses within our lifetimes.
In comparison, scanning the ENTIRE IPv4 internet on a single port can be done by anybody at all and it's going to take about 40 minutes.
We absolutely can do NAT with IPv6, but there's no reason why anyone should (aside from stateless NAT66 in case you get a dynamic prefix that changes every now and then, but that's about the only use case)
$15-$25? when was that? Currently it's $40-$55 on ipv4.global.
Covid killed the flight.