don't worry, I don't have the power to change definitions, you can rest at ease.
698 karma · joined June 21, 2023
don't worry, I don't have the power to change definitions, you can rest at ease.
you're deliberately focusing on the phrasing instead of the substance of my post so you don't have to talk about my point.
There's no electricity in large parts, and often we'll be out there for the full day.
An extra can of gas is cheaper and easier than getting the electric company out to run a line so I can install plugs.
I guess I could haul a generator but... uhm, kind defeats the purpose right?
my point was I don't consider it a truck as it doesn't meet my needs for a truck.
I don't see how that wasn't obvious, you're being pedantic.
obviously it can meet a wikipedia definition, that doesn't really matter too much to me though.
use whatever definition you want for it though.
and my truck can haul a lot more at a longer range.
love ev's for casual roadtrips and jetting around town, but not for 4x4 adventures.
I'm planning on having a cybertruck as our car for town and trips, and keep my 1500 for actual work and recreation.
I generally want an extra can of gas to fill up the truck when on the trail and on the ranch.
> At Busch Gardens, the first of three ponds removes biological material, the second pond removes nutrients and the third pond stores water as it is cycled through an ultraviolet disinfectant filter.
> The third pond in that process is the one with the sinkhole.
Done properly, reusable will always be cheaper, inheritly.
Well anyway, let's all continue speculating...
It doesn't represent an actual experience though, it's deliberate and misleading since that curation was left out of the report.
What a ridiculous statement...
This just in, blowing up your car is cheaper than refilling the tank, wow!
There's proof right now btw, in SpaceX's Falcon prices vs others.
Plus the common sense that remaking something is more expensive than not.
To be in $10k debt, it means you have more debt than assets.
Either way, wealth distribution is wrong. Stealing is stealing.
many of those "rich" people could be supporting many other "poor" people via jobs that you just wiped out for a small personal gain.
I don't see how having "plenty of money" changes whether or not you can have something stolen from you...
In reality, you're stealing from both Google and the creators.
Whether you view it as justified is up to your own morals and perceptions.
What tests are you talking about that should be done BEFORE conception!?
Supporting a test that says you have X gene and that might result in a problem so you can't reproduce is a ridiculous stance to have.
You seem to have no knowledge about current medical screenings and no regard for human liberty.
You trust the government to decide who can and can't reproduce? You see no problem with this?
You see no room for abuse here?
There's already tests to show parents many diseases detected early on. It's just not mandatory to terminate.
[1] https://www.cbsnews.com/news/biden-classified-documents-hous...
[2] https://www.politico.com/news/2023/01/12/additional-document...
But it seems a bit too off-topic for this thread, dunnit?
Sometimes you just don't want someone to be able to easily iterate on your script (grab a script, modify and resell)
Mirrors will crack and can reflect sunlight in unwanted ways (directly into your neighbor's line of sight, into planes, etc.)
Main sales pitch here:
“We saw this happen in two incidents of Cuba ransomware. One company (Company A) had continuous monitoring in place with MDR, so we were able to spot the malicious activity and halt the attack within hours to prevent any data from being stolen.
“Another company (Company B) didn’t have this friction; they didn’t spot the attack until a few weeks after initial access and after Cuba had already successfully exfiltrated 75 gigabytes of sensitive data. They then called in our IR team, and a month later, they were still trying to get back to business as usual.”
That's not really a step up from the current system that lifted millions out of poverty and hunger.
The US has enough grain to pass it out to everyone, no magic technological leap needed, we already ship our massive amounts of excess grain across the world to developing countries.
Noone in a developed country wants to eat just grain though!
Also who gets to hand out the grain? That never really goes well when authoritarians control who gets to eat and how much and what. (some animals are more equal than others)
And who gets / has to do the automating / maintaining? Are they compensated extra or is it forced?
> It would be reasonable to assume for ubi to work, we would need a reasonable amount of land to be farmed.
We have plenty of farmland. The thing you need most for "free food" is more ranchland in the US.
Otherwise you will have to develop the natural grassland as farmland, killing every creature under the topsoil and using A LOT of water.
As you can tell I have a few issues with this communistic approach, but I would like honest answers to these proses as they come up in history as "problems of implementation" to be generous. (killing millions via famine and force)
Edit: downvote all you want, but questioning a proposed new system to govern humans should be scrutinized given the past failed experiments with millions of people's lives.
To the point where suggesting officers should respond incase someone is bleeding out get downvoted.
I guess the compassionate thing is to wait for the body on Monday because "what's the point"
I don't think pointing to other ideologies really absolves the issue of unneeded political ideologies pushed on kids.
I think the point would be to strive for less ideology, not justify more using the existence of others.