How in the world are you getting that the bar is 2lbs? No one makes a 2lb candy bar; the size would be huge. The bar in the picture certainly isn't big enough to be 2lbs. Googling shows a Reese's Fast Break Super King to be 5.25oz total, or $1.236/oz.
Every country subsidizes their industries. The US automakers have gotten tens of billions in bailouts whenever they trip on their face, plus decades of tariffs against cars made outside the US so they play safe in their home market.
Do you even have a clue what the article is about? The 'original' design is in use. It is in the game which was released and is being played by people.
You're an angry little pissant. She said no such thing, she said if she couldn't avoid ending up in a situation where stabbing is a serious concern she had made some poor choices. That's extremely different from 'getting stabbed is the victim's fault', which you chose to read it as. It's the difference between being hit by a drunk driver vs being hit by another car after running a red light. She very clearly listed places she avoids to intentionally reduce the danger of being a victim. Sane non-rage filled people understand the idea of avoiding danger just as they understand that not all people can avoid those situations nor can all danger be predicted.
No he's being a blowhard as usual, saying he's doing things that he's not. He can sign an executive order but that's not going to do anything to get drug companies to give to their profits, because he has no direct legal power over them.
No they can't just force drug companies to lower prices with a an executive order. Executive orders aren't laws, they are orders to the parts of government that the President has power over. The president can order that agencies to look into ways of lowering costs, but Congress has to actually pass laws to legally limit prices.
They would be nowhere if they didn't have his money. Otherwise Musk actively hinders his companies with his idiocy. This is well known from SpaceX employees.
The companies' success is from being in fields that the employees are passionate about so they'll grit their teeth and put up with it to be able to work there.
And fighting for free speech, are you kidding? He's fighting for his own speech period. Anything he doesn't like tends to get journalists temp banned or shadowbanned from Twitter for example.
Flip 5, love the form factor and haven't had any screen or hinge problems. The crease doesn't bother me, but I do wish the battery life were better (though it's not much different than my phone before it).
Yeah if that's all that needed replacing. The entire system is ancient, not just the disks, like:
Much more critical than the dated use of floppy disks is the system's loop cable, which transmits data between the central servers and the trains and, according to Roccaforte, "has less bandwidth than an old AOL dial-up modem."
The SFMTA's website adds:
The loop cable is fragile and easily disturbed. This makes subway maintenance more difficult. This also means the system cannot be extended outside the subway, along surface rail, where currently we don’t have automatic train control.
Well then reply to them, not the other person replying to them. You're causing the confusion here. You don't always need to reply to the latest post in a thread.
Got it, giving an opinion that someone should not be invited to speak at a specific location is apparently not an expression of free speech, it's suppression of free speech. Just like how if someone comes up to you on the street and starts yelling in your face, it'd be suppression of speech for you to ask them to do that somewhere else.
You're literally claiming things that are not true. Voicing your opinion against a prospective (as in it hasn't even happened) action by the Speaker of the House is a right afforded to everyone, including representatives. Speaking against something is not perversely somehow suppressing speech. Saying someone is not allowed to speak against something is suppressing of speech.
You have not explained your reasoning at all on how saying they're against Netanyahu speaking in front of the House is subversion of free speech and not just those representatives exercising their own freedom of speech. That is exactly what freedom of speech is, the right for everyone in the US to voice their opinions.
In contrast, there is no right to speak in front of the House, especially not for a foreign politician. The Speaker can invite someone to speak, and if anyone physically interferes with the invitee's speaking or shouts over them, that would be a violation of House procedures, not any infringement on their freedom of speech. They would not have been silenced or punished. They would not have been gagged (physically or otherwise). They would still be able voice their opinions.
Actual examples of speech suppression would be searching and questioning pro-Palestinian journalists at the border, and arrests of peaceful non trespassing protestors.
Did you sit down and watch the whole movie and not just the dramatic moments as YouTube clips? Outside of a few good Denzel moments, the movie was just awful in terms of dialogue, pacing, and blunt 'foreshadowing'
How in the world are you getting that the bar is 2lbs? No one makes a 2lb candy bar; the size would be huge. The bar in the picture certainly isn't big enough to be 2lbs. Googling shows a Reese's Fast Break Super King to be 5.25oz total, or $1.236/oz.
Publishers set the price on Steam. Steam doesn't control pricing.
Every country subsidizes their industries. The US automakers have gotten tens of billions in bailouts whenever they trip on their face, plus decades of tariffs against cars made outside the US so they play safe in their home market.
Do you even have a clue what the article is about? The 'original' design is in use. It is in the game which was released and is being played by people.
You're an angry little pissant. She said no such thing, she said if she couldn't avoid ending up in a situation where stabbing is a serious concern she had made some poor choices. That's extremely different from 'getting stabbed is the victim's fault', which you chose to read it as. It's the difference between being hit by a drunk driver vs being hit by another car after running a red light. She very clearly listed places she avoids to intentionally reduce the danger of being a victim. Sane non-rage filled people understand the idea of avoiding danger just as they understand that not all people can avoid those situations nor can all danger be predicted.
No he's being a blowhard as usual, saying he's doing things that he's not. He can sign an executive order but that's not going to do anything to get drug companies to give to their profits, because he has no direct legal power over them.
No they can't just force drug companies to lower prices with a an executive order. Executive orders aren't laws, they are orders to the parts of government that the President has power over. The president can order that agencies to look into ways of lowering costs, but Congress has to actually pass laws to legally limit prices.
The W name feels intentional to me- they didn't want to call it World 2 but it works for people abbreviating it MHW2.
They would be nowhere if they didn't have his money. Otherwise Musk actively hinders his companies with his idiocy. This is well known from SpaceX employees.
https://x.com/yoloption/status/1595213678147764224?mx=2
The companies' success is from being in fields that the employees are passionate about so they'll grit their teeth and put up with it to be able to work there.
And fighting for free speech, are you kidding? He's fighting for his own speech period. Anything he doesn't like tends to get journalists temp banned or shadowbanned from Twitter for example.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/December_2022_Twitter_suspensions#%3A%7E%3Atext%3DOn_December_15%2C_2022%2C_Twitter%2C%2C_CNN%2C_and_The_Intercept.
Because in most places adults are allowed to make unhealthy choices. It's the same principle as not being allowed to market alcohol to kids.
The enemy of my enemy is a useful temporary ally.
The context is the SK President suddenly declared martial law.
https://www.bbc.com/news/live/cn38321180et
Flip 5, love the form factor and haven't had any screen or hinge problems. The crease doesn't bother me, but I do wish the battery life were better (though it's not much different than my phone before it).
Yeah if that's all that needed replacing. The entire system is ancient, not just the disks, like:
Well then reply to them, not the other person replying to them. You're causing the confusion here. You don't always need to reply to the latest post in a thread.
Official gov ID photo.
Got it, giving an opinion that someone should not be invited to speak at a specific location is apparently not an expression of free speech, it's suppression of free speech. Just like how if someone comes up to you on the street and starts yelling in your face, it'd be suppression of speech for you to ask them to do that somewhere else.
You're literally claiming things that are not true. Voicing your opinion against a prospective (as in it hasn't even happened) action by the Speaker of the House is a right afforded to everyone, including representatives. Speaking against something is not perversely somehow suppressing speech. Saying someone is not allowed to speak against something is suppressing of speech.
You have not explained your reasoning at all on how saying they're against Netanyahu speaking in front of the House is subversion of free speech and not just those representatives exercising their own freedom of speech. That is exactly what freedom of speech is, the right for everyone in the US to voice their opinions.
In contrast, there is no right to speak in front of the House, especially not for a foreign politician. The Speaker can invite someone to speak, and if anyone physically interferes with the invitee's speaking or shouts over them, that would be a violation of House procedures, not any infringement on their freedom of speech. They would not have been silenced or punished. They would not have been gagged (physically or otherwise). They would still be able voice their opinions.
Actual examples of speech suppression would be searching and questioning pro-Palestinian journalists at the border, and arrests of peaceful non trespassing protestors.
Did you sit down and watch the whole movie and not just the dramatic moments as YouTube clips? Outside of a few good Denzel moments, the movie was just awful in terms of dialogue, pacing, and blunt 'foreshadowing'