That would require people taking personal responsibility, and Americans are deathly allergic to that.
The fact that an utter moron like you gets upvoted as Insightful says everything I need to know about the broken moderation system here on
Fuck. You.
The EU does not mess around when it comes to financial penalties for privacy and tech monopoly type things.
Which is exactly the reason why they passed these laws. They have no meaningful AI innovation: all substantial innovation is happening in the U.S.
In other words: once again, the EUSSR is trying to leach money out of US companies using their "these laws are to protect the children" adagium.
This is getting really old really quick.
Any prosecution that relied on banned facial recognition should be thrown out and sentences vacated. Fruit of the poison tree.
And any prosecutor worth their salt will explain to you that a city council enacting a policy banning a specific investigative method does not mean that it is unlawful for the police to actually use it as evidence during a criminal trial.
Also, I guess you are not familiar with the many exceptions to the poisonous tree doctrine.
Your statement ascribes to them "wants", which is an intention, which you cannot observe as fact except if they have said so (which they have not done).
People way smarter than you or me have solved that problem a long time ago. Courts determine intent (even past intent) based on observable actions. This is especially true in murder cases: someone pointing a gun at another's head and firing the trigger is a pretty good indication that the murderer intended to kill, even though they say it's just an accident.
Here, we observe that the EUSSR, like they did in the past, open an investigation into a wealthy foreign entity, and we know from the past that their true intention is to enrich their own coffers.
You clearly don't understand how science is done. Real scientists always look at possible weaknesses in their studies and disclose them. You've clearly only have experience on the Internet where everyone is always 100% right and certain.
Sure, I only have two grad degrees and am working on my third one. Yeah, I know nothing about scientific research. At all. Especially data. Totally clueless.
Nope nope nope, I recognize a flawed study written only to make headlines and get citations when I see one.
Competing interests
LF, MZ, and GF are civil parties in the trial currently underway at the Vicenza Court, focusing on PFAS contamination in the provinces of Vicenza, Padua and Verona.
Riiiiiight.
Some methodological issues of this study need to be considered. First, the study was based on aggregate data at the municipality level and the interpretation of the results depends on the assumption of homogeneity of exposure within municipalities
Second, we could not adjust the association of PFAS exposure with the risk of cardiovascular disease
Third, our period of observation began approximately 15years after the onset of exposure because of limita- tions in availability of mortality data. As a consequence, we excluded from the exposed population those munici- palities with groundwater contamination since 1966
And fourth, comparisons with other studies from the same area should be made with some caution because of the possibility that the municipalities considered to rep- resent the âcontaminated areaâ(TM) and the uncontaminated (or reference) area have been selected using data from different reports of regional authorities or have been defined according to criteria partly different from ours. The selection of the uncontaminated area is particularly prone to arbitrary assumptions and between-studies variation, with a risk of misclassification of exposure.
As for the last one: "we're unsure if our data is what we think it is".
How the fuck did this even get peer-reviewed?
Well I know when I watch train webcams there are a shocking number of Prime containers on railcars. I think they have just scaled up massively.
Ten years ago, I did a weekly road trip from San Jose to San Diego, traveling the 182 mile through the central valley every Friday and Sunday, for about 18 months for a contracting gig. It was one truck after another. Usually agricultural or just random trucking company.
Last weekend I did the same trip to see a friend. I swear that every third truck appeared to be an Amazon Prime truck. Absolutely nuts.
Why not just mandate a $15 and $20 plan available to everyone?
Ask California and Florida what happened when they started to regulate home insurance pricing for everyone.
That's right, companies deciding that it's not worth it anymore.
she was open and up-front about her pregnancy.
What I don't get is:
A. Who the fuck cares? You know that getting pregnant is a part of life. It's part of the work-life balance. Her manager should have been "wow, congrats! How can I make it easy for you?"
Most most importantly:
B. Why on earth are they allowing such an incredibly talented woman to go work for the competition over something as simple as a little bit or maternity leave? This is just plain stupid.
I have every right to tell other parents how to raise their children.
Found the annoying boomer that thinks he can tell me how to raise my child.
At least our children can go to school safe in the knowledge they'll not be shot
Dunblane would like to have a word with you.
Also, American school kids never had to worry about being blown up by the IRA.
that is exactly where they are going with it. its being compared to alc and gambling.
Exactly. It's a great example of the slippery slope.
1: Ban "sales" to kids, because, you know, for the children
2: Limit the use of the bad smartphones, because, you know, for the children
3: Criminalize adults buying for their kids, because, you know, for the children
4: Tell parents how to raise their kids, because, you know, for the children
Seriously, Fuck the UK.
Doubt isn't the opposite of faith; it is an element of faith. - Paul Tillich, German theologian and historian
