For me, the alarming fact is that this "privacywise" option was not the firs one chosen. Instead, they went with a "privacyunwise" option as a default, and only backed out because of user uproar. Bad Mozilla!
That is what multicast was meant to address. Sadly, it did not catch on.
Well, #00ff00 could be difficult to dictate over the phone... :-)
What about just not saying or doing stupid things at all?
Hopefully he doesn't also think that a totem pole is a guy from Poland who looks after a totem. :-)
Perhaps the append() also returns void. I've seen this kind of bug uncaught by gcc exactly because of that.
Suddenly, the phrase "like a bug on the windshield" gains new level of meaning
So, a question: why? Just so that there is an alternative (not that there is anything wrong with that), or is there an issue with ImageMagick that discourages some people from using it?
Ok, we are still safe. As parent demonstrates, machines still can't even compose coherent text. Nice try, robot slave!
Everything old is new again. It is as if things went around in cycles or something.
Maybe it has to call home to microsoft to find out if the font is whitelisted? That would of course imply that in Windows 10, "disabled firewall" doesn't mean "all traffic allowed", which I find bizarre...
You should be upvoting comments because you think they add value to the topic/discussion, not because you happen to agree with the poster. That is how echo chambers are created.
But how would that serve ads to the eyeballs? You forget that most of modern webcontent is just packaging fluff for eyeballs to more easily digest the real content payload - the advertisments.
What's important is that they all hate the customer together... Or at least have a healthy disdain thereof.
Try re-reading the post you replied to. The author does not want you to respect the cause for which he has taken the risk, but the fact that he felt strongly enough about it to put his life on the line for it. And yes,…
Yep, that one worked just fine.
Well, I can't read it at all on my android phone, because whatever javascript they use, prevents me from scrolling down. While the page was loading, scrolling worked, but as soon as everything loaded up, it jumped back…
For me, the alarming fact is that this "privacywise" option was not the firs one chosen. Instead, they went with a "privacyunwise" option as a default, and only backed out because of user uproar. Bad Mozilla!
That is what multicast was meant to address. Sadly, it did not catch on.
Well, #00ff00 could be difficult to dictate over the phone... :-)
What about just not saying or doing stupid things at all?
Hopefully he doesn't also think that a totem pole is a guy from Poland who looks after a totem. :-)
Perhaps the append() also returns void. I've seen this kind of bug uncaught by gcc exactly because of that.
Suddenly, the phrase "like a bug on the windshield" gains new level of meaning
So, a question: why? Just so that there is an alternative (not that there is anything wrong with that), or is there an issue with ImageMagick that discourages some people from using it?
Ok, we are still safe. As parent demonstrates, machines still can't even compose coherent text. Nice try, robot slave!
Everything old is new again. It is as if things went around in cycles or something.
Maybe it has to call home to microsoft to find out if the font is whitelisted? That would of course imply that in Windows 10, "disabled firewall" doesn't mean "all traffic allowed", which I find bizarre...
You should be upvoting comments because you think they add value to the topic/discussion, not because you happen to agree with the poster. That is how echo chambers are created.
But how would that serve ads to the eyeballs? You forget that most of modern webcontent is just packaging fluff for eyeballs to more easily digest the real content payload - the advertisments.
What's important is that they all hate the customer together... Or at least have a healthy disdain thereof.
Try re-reading the post you replied to. The author does not want you to respect the cause for which he has taken the risk, but the fact that he felt strongly enough about it to put his life on the line for it. And yes,…
Yep, that one worked just fine.
Well, I can't read it at all on my android phone, because whatever javascript they use, prevents me from scrolling down. While the page was loading, scrolling worked, but as soon as everything loaded up, it jumped back…