It is a war crime according to the "Protocol on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Mines, Booby-Traps and Other Devices".

Article 7 section 2 states: "It is prohibited to use booby-traps or other devices in the form of apparently harmless portable objects which are specifically designed and constructed to contain explosive material."

Israel is a signatory to that agreement.

For a Debian system with firefox-esr, you can download the XPI for the hotfix directly to update the cert, then restart firefox and reinstall your addons. The URL of the hotfix XPI is in this bugzilla report: https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fbugzilla.mozilla.org%2Fs...

Original source of the fix: https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2FNixOS%2Fnixpk...

The number of CVEs assigned to Wordpress + plugins vs Plone + addons is a very misleading metric for making this type of claim.

https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwordpress.org%2Fplugins%2F shows 45,129 Wordpress plugins.

https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpypi.python.org%2Fpypi%3F:... shows 3242 Plone addons.

If you assume rough parity in terms of line of code between a Plone addon and a Wordpress plugin (a dangerous assumption), 10x more Wordpress related CVEs would indicate that Wordpress has a lower density of CVEs per LOC than Plone does.

But, of course, even that comparison is a misleading one to make. There are too many other factors that skew these numbers to draw any meaningful conclusions from them. CVEs simply weren't intended to be used for this kind of comparison.

Most states have a reasonable limit, like 3.6g/day purchase (up to 7.5g/month). At 60mg per pill, that's 60 pills in a single purchase. It sounds like your Costco guy doesn't know what he's doing. With the log book, it doesn't even make a difference that you split them into two transactions, the limit is per day not per transaction.

Claritin D is just Claritin with sudafed in it. (That's the "D" for decongestant.)

I wonder the same thing about the scroll wheel. If you just slide you finger along the extreme right side of the screen, it's the same motion without the need for a separate wheel. Zoom would also be less ambiguous if it was done by sliding your index finger along the right side and your thumb along the left side at the same time.

It's probably safe to assume that every obvious way of translating a touch on a watchface into some standard UI concept is already patented though. Maybe the goal was to avoiding some existing patents.

I didn't notice the "days" links at the bottom until reading your description. At a quick glance, it just appeared that they removed the links to older articles on the home page. Those links could use more of a visual hint that they're for navigating the site and not just the standard background noise you see at the bottom of most websites.

When the alternative is we all go back to living by the salt of the earth, building our homes by hand so the only pollution we create is the waste our bodies generate... yeah, I'm all about fucking around trying to fix it by doing something.

Yes, at this point in time we, the public, have little to go on and are playing the armchair quarter back position and the waiting game while we see if verifiable information, such as from a police investigation, comes out.

That said, this is the evidence in front of us, and we have no basis on which to confirm or deny it at this time.

I should point out that it is also what the victim's side would look like if they were signed into email but not twitter, saw the notifications coming into their email, and clicked on them to view the content in twitter.

Also interesting. Of course, that's also what it would look like if an intelligent person wanted to make a specific threat: Create a burner account, make the threat, be specific, don't make errors, delete the account. They probably also conducted their activity through a random open proxy server so it is untraceable. It is also what it would look like if the victim was on an alternate twitter account that they use for safety and didn't want to reveal that account for privacy reasons, so when they saw this tweet they logged out and took the screen cap.

There are plenty of opportunities for a figure such as her to screencap perfectly legitimate threats without needing to make one up. It would be somewhat more surprising if this were false than true, but at this time I'm holding judgement on either possibility until we find out more information.

Evidence that indicates a true claim of aggravated harassment does not preclude the simultaneous existence of false claims of the same.

That proves (presuming we believe the screencap, which I do) that aggravated harassment has occurred. It does not prove that she has never falsely claimed harrassment, but it isn't necessarily possible to prove such a (ludicrous, I think) claim.

How is someone supposed to present evidence of no evidence? The OP cannot find any existing evidence that Sarkeesian has lied or is willing to lie about threats. I suppose they could present their search result pages, but that doesn't actually prove anything.

As for evidence of the threats, here's a post she made on twitter highlighting an example of a specific threat

Verizon received $23 Billion over 6 years to finance the build-out of FiOS. Their construction budget didn't change from what it would have been without the grant, they built FiOS out in highly profitable areas and then stopped, not completing the project and shifting their focus to wireless. Then they managed to get a roughly $2 rate hike in some places to offset their claimed capital expenditure cost. (which was supposed to come from that grant that didn't appear to change the construction budget)

And all of this was rubber stamped.

So tell me again how they have a build out requirement?

Doesn't Google already offer an online website building/hosting tool?