Pretty sure the idea of due process extends to ensuring the government respects "certain unalienable rights" that America recognizes all people are born with--that includes non-citizens
Soleos
joined 2 years ago
They don't want no women, they want subservient women. Think Handmaid's Tale in space.
Most of the traditional automakers will do keys or key fob without an app AFAIK.
For usability/get in and go, you can't go wrong with a Toyota or Honda. Perhaps consider a used Prius prime (PHEV) if you're on a budget
checks history notes
For them, crying is a mark of their weakness and hypocrisy. It's laughable to them and adds to their sadistic joy.
Given the world's track record with the 2nd and 3rd greatest world powers, I imagine the same if not tamer with the 1st greatest world power. Heavy sanctions only when they actually invade a "western" country.
"You misunderstood my bigotry as hurtful." Not "I understand my views were bigoted and therefore hurtful."
Severance
The hyper-positivity and enthusiasm is because his content is aimed at kids as much as it is adults. A lot of kid-oriented science content I remember, from tv shows/documentaries to guest speakers, to science-centre guides had that affect.
The bar set for self-driving cars: Can it recognize and respond correctly to a deliberate optical illusion?
The bar set for humans: https://youtu.be/ks11nuGGupI
For the record, I do want the bar for self-driving safety to be high. I also want human drivers to be better... Because even not-entirely-safe self-driving cars may still be safer than humans at a certain point.
Also, fuck Tesla.
Ahh that makes sense, your English is is very correct, just harder to tell with more reserved English speakers. Your situation is certainly very normal and not at all unique to younger folks!
I guess another pragmatic thing people do sometimes is, if they know they're going to see someone they get weird about, they'll leverage their refractory period so it's less intense when they meet.
view more: next ›
The proposal doesn't ban the party, it suggests banning extremist individuals convicted of things like inciting hatred from running for office. In effect, it puts a damper on extreme individual members of a party that doesn't itself reach the threshold for prohibition as a party. So I can see the logic behind it. But I agree it's a dicey proposal and ripe for political abuse. Still, it would be contingent on court decisions so it could work with a strong (just/uncorrupt) court system.