What the law says and what the state does can be two different things. That's true for the West and China.
We know what the CCP does to China's ethnic minority communities. Reciting the word of the law doesn't change the evidence of how the state implements it.
Some people in tier 1 cities don't live like that, but the vast majority do. As an average person, you would not enjoy China more than your western country.
Web 2.0 is the umbrella term for a bunch of things that enabled the social media we see today. Infinite scroll, notification toasts and asynchronous loading of new content to name a few.
If we had to reload a page every time we wanted new content we would see way less and move on more quickly.
Great question. Intention matters, so many countries focus on speech that can only be malicious, like incitement to violence in the UK or Nazi salutes in Germany.
That's an interesting point. The government tends to get ripped off because of negotiation issues. Private orgs can hire and retain the best negotiators, whereas govt can't afford that and if they can, they'd still be vulnerable to accusations of cronyism to have the best of the private sector's negotiators negotiating with the companies they've probably dealt with privately before and who they will likely be back with in the future.
This is one reason why competitive procurement is such a big deal and so complicated and time consuming.
We know from bitter historical experience that privatising public operations, especially natural monopolies like utilities, results in worse service and higher prices, coupled with sub-par investment. A private company can be bailed out if it goes bankrupt sending all its profits out to shareholders. A public org has an incentive not to waste taxpayer money.
OK thanks.
This is entirely new to me. What do you mean non-binary is trans? I know plenty of enbies who are not trans.
According to the article, the 2.34% figure includes all non-binary people.
I thought it seemed high for trans, but now it seems low for all non-gender-conforming.
I think that's a stretch.
Someone could tip him off ahead of time so he can donate to charitable causes down to 900 million.
I honestly both agree and disagree. The tunes were absolute bangers but 30 seconds is quite long enough for opening titles.
What the law says and what the state does can be two different things. That's true for the West and China.
We know what the CCP does to China's ethnic minority communities. Reciting the word of the law doesn't change the evidence of how the state implements it.
Some people will loudly proclaim so, which makes it seem like a universal unimpeachable truth
Some people in tier 1 cities don't live like that, but the vast majority do. As an average person, you would not enjoy China more than your western country.
Web 2.0 is the umbrella term for a bunch of things that enabled the social media we see today. Infinite scroll, notification toasts and asynchronous loading of new content to name a few.
If we had to reload a page every time we wanted new content we would see way less and move on more quickly.
Can you explain your last paragraph a bit?
Thanks for the link!
Because if they use it in aggression e.g. against western allies in the SC sea, we need the technology to repel or counteract it.
Then treestart.
Only in North America... for now. 🌎
Great question. Intention matters, so many countries focus on speech that can only be malicious, like incitement to violence in the UK or Nazi salutes in Germany.
That's an interesting point. The government tends to get ripped off because of negotiation issues. Private orgs can hire and retain the best negotiators, whereas govt can't afford that and if they can, they'd still be vulnerable to accusations of cronyism to have the best of the private sector's negotiators negotiating with the companies they've probably dealt with privately before and who they will likely be back with in the future.
This is one reason why competitive procurement is such a big deal and so complicated and time consuming.
We know from bitter historical experience that privatising public operations, especially natural monopolies like utilities, results in worse service and higher prices, coupled with sub-par investment. A private company can be bailed out if it goes bankrupt sending all its profits out to shareholders. A public org has an incentive not to waste taxpayer money.
That's so beautifully illustrative of what the LLM is actually doing behind the curtain! What a mess.
What do you mean? Anti-establishment? Nationalist?
Well known by... his policies? The jury's still out because he only just got into power. He could go back to more Corbynite policies by stealth.