Got proof? I've not cracked open a phone for a while to see if the component labelling matches the interface, let alone tested capacity of an extracted battery directly.
mjr
joined 4 weeks ago
Arrive on time?
Cartoon about the BBC currently sucking up to the far right: https://tech.lgbt/@Natasha_Jay/115524226654011092
But he did say 'we fight like hell'. The bad edit just made it seem clearer than Trump's speeches ever are. If there had been an edit flash (where the screen briefly goes grey between clips) and ideally a couple of snatches of speech from in between, there would have been no credible complaint. This seems more like wanting history to be neater than it usually is, not an attempt to change Trump's fundamental message, no matter how much he's backpedalled it since.
How can you tell? It looks like a bad edit. This is not like the 2007 incident of editing things out of order to fake someone leaving an appointment angrily, then making an indiscreet comment on the faked event.
But also, the faster you ride, the more tiring it is, the more stressful it is, and the more severe the consequences when anybody - especially nearby drivers - makes a serious error.
Cycling doesn't have to be that way. No matter what Forester and other ableists say. If you remove most of the motorists, it can be fun! And proper fun, not the 'I jousted with drivers and survived' type.
'We fight like hell' isn't much of a code!
Diana's Drove is named after her. Look at the nearby street names. It's in the next town north from the royal estate at Sandringham.
Edit: this is the first one I found. I'm pretty sure there are more.
"alarming analysis by consultancy Barnett Waddingham" is saying this, not Labour. It's basically think-tank fantasy.
Naughty CNN! Trump did indeed say to 'we fight like hell' as you can see in the full transcript on news sites that haven't surrendered yet, such as AP: Transcript of Trump's speech at rally before US Capitol riot | AP News
Any one hour documentary pretty much has to edit that rambling dumpster fire of a speech. The BBC's main mistake was not to make the edit clearer.
This was probably worth an apology. Was it worth the leader resigning? Probably not. The right-wing media succeeds in hunting another witch. I hope it backfires and Labour appoint someone further left.
Article rests on one expert. That assistant professor's publication list doesn't seem to contain evidence about it, plus the quotes in the article don't directly say it happens.
Maybe it does, but that article only seems to be guessing based on (admittedly reasonable) theory.