It doesn’t matter. Even if it were constantly streaming the current volume level, the energy to transmit the value “100” is the same as to transmit “5”, so your phone doesn’t drain any faster to constantly tell the earbuds the volume is high versus low.
You can see this very clearly flying almost anywhere. It’s most obvious in places like the Midwest US, but even between cities in more densely populated regions, there’s so much farmland. Islands of concrete in oceans of ordered crop fields.
Yes. If you don’t already have some, your local pet shop might sell it. I think that’s where my wife got it.
Luckily for us, a generous spray of Rosemary extract mixed with water in a spray bottle worked to keep our cats off our tree. My wife also managed to capture a photo of our more athletic cat loudly complaining after he discovered the change. A very merry Christmas for our tree.
I interpreted that as for soups and stews. Peel the clove and plop it in. Once the cooking is done, take it out, like you would do with a bay leaf.
I personally would never use garlic that way. I absolutely put it crushed into my stews. But that’s how I read the image.
My original comment? I just answered your question as to what that other commenter meant by “amendment 2.” I didn’t say anything else? Did you not want someone else to answer your question and only want that commenter to?
Yep, I definitely think the whole phrasing of that comment is unusual. I understand the basic facts they are stating, but not the point of stating them.
The right to bear arms.
Men’s rights to what, exactly? There are plenty of rights that affect men that vary state to state. Off the top of my head I can think of firearm rights that vary dramatically state to state. Or are we talking about rights exclusive to men because of different biology between men and women? I feel like other than a vasectomy, I’m not sure what other male-biology-related rights I have. Honestly there’s less technology related to reproduction on the male side.
I get the point of the message, that there are rights women should be universally guaranteed that aren’t, and I totally agree with that message. But the phrasing seems ambiguous at best.
I don’t know. People keep talking about what to do when we “make it out of this” like the whole situation was thrust upon us by nature, and we just have to wait and tough it out until it passes, like a storm. People made this happen. The people with wealth and power in our society chose this reality for the rest of us. They aren’t just going to stop one day. And they aren’t acting like this is a storm that will pass. They are acting like this is the next step in a transition they want and intend. We have to figure out how to instigate a change from this path, and I don’t know how to do that.
But do you really want them touching it?
Are we there yet? Is the bubble popping? Do we need the Ron Paul gif (or am I showing my age)?
My hypothesis on that is people responding to others’ body language to get the same snap-out-of-dissociation effect. The people closest to Batman would see him and then look around at others more to gauge their responses. Others further away wouldn’t see Batman, but would notice the more-attentive-than-usual other passengers and be similarly more attentive to try to find out what’s going on. They then would notice seemingly unrelated things, like the pregnant woman, and respond more than usual. The paper also says Batman entered from a different door, so a ripple effect of attentiveness could explain this effect without needing responders to directly see Batman.
Well the snake oil salesmen have taken over the health department. It was only a matter of time.
Republicans drew the state’s new map to give the GOP five additional seats, and Missouri and North Carolina followed with new maps adding an additional Republican seat each. To counter those moves, California voters approved a ballot initiative to give Democrats an additional five seats there.
The redrawn maps are facing court challenges in California, Missouri and North Carolina.
How much you want to bet SCOTUS blocks California’s redistricting but greenlights Missouri and North Carolina maps, each through tortured logic?
One catch is that they are only forced to release “unclassified” files. Guess who decides what files are classified?
And they’re being redeployed to Charlotte, NC, and New Orleans, LA. They’re continuing the tactic of blitzing whatever they want to do somewhere, and when the courts start to catch up, they pull out and start to do something else somewhere else. They can do whatever they want, legality be damned, if they accomplish their goals before the courts wake up. This is guerrilla warfare applied to the legal checks and balances between the branches of government.
If this Supreme Court were considering the issue for the very first time today, it would almost certainly hold that the Constitution does not protect same-sex marriage by a 6–3 vote. But now that Obergefell is entrenched as precedent, and widely supported by Americans, they’ve shown no appetite for spending down their political capital to issue an unpopular ruling that could only hurt the Republican Party.
This seems like a really naive thing to say about this court. They have shown no qualms about striking down much older cases with a stronger history of precedent than Obergefell on the most specious of reasoning. They struck down Chevron Deference last year, which was in place since 1984 and had come to form the backbone of judicial handling about highly technical aspects of government regulation of virtually every industry.
And they have no hesitation about making unpopular rulings. Several justices have a habit of lecturing the public in a way that’s essentially talking down to the people they are supposed to serve and say they simply know what’s better for the people than… the people. Their egos couldn’t care less about their public image; Chief Justice John Roberts has spoken out multiple times that people need to basically shut up and respect the court’s decisions no matter if they like them or not.
It’s a higher level of infuriating that the court is so obviously corrupt, and then the most corrupt among them present themselves as fundamentally more deserving of respect and deference than the common rabble.
The problem is that some small but non-zero fraction of these bugs may be exploitable security flaws with the software, and these bug reports are on the open internet. So if they just ignore them all, they risk overlooking a genuine vulnerability that a bad actor can then more easily find and use. Then the FOSS project gets the blame, because the bug report was there, they should have fixed it!
“It must be legal, I do it all the time.” This is not the compelling argument they think it is. Or at least, it wouldn’t be if we actually had the rule of law.
Edit: Also the fourth amendment is protection against unreasonable searches and seizure, not unusual searches and seizure. Just because they do it all the time doesn’t make it actually reasonable.