I walk with crutches. When navigating an unknown city this would be bliss. Instead of having to stop, put my crutches to the side, pull out phone or check my watch to check directions, I'd just always have them there. Same for notifications too. I guess it would be the same for any other person. Sometimes you just don't have your hands free. There is no way in hell I'd buy them from Meta though.
When I was a PS3 guy I remember the prices in Playstation Store typically being $10 or more higher than what you could get physical copies for, and things never went on sale. Having one storefront for all game sales seems like an absolutely terrible deal for consumers.
It's the other way around now. Walmart has more games than GameStop, and you're lucky to get $10 off, ever. The PlayStation store is never more than MSRP and frequently has sales. They have a Summer Sale going on right now.
Ghost of Yōtei is 25% off, the bundle of the Final Fantasy XIV MMO and all expansions is 50% off, some things are down 75%.
I'm in Norway, and I never consented in that dialog box, so my Facebook account is in limbo. The dialog still appears when I go to Facebook, years later, so I don't think anything has changed?
Perhaps Norway didn't get included? I know GDPR does apply to Norway, but perhaps the legal basis was in another law that didn't transfer to the EEA area?
I don't use Facebook myself anymore so I can't check.
It must have improved considerably since I tried the "3.5-flash-preview" a couple of months ago if all these claims in the presentations are true. Because it couldn't even make changes in a 200 line Python script without doing major mistakes (like messing up argument order when calling functions) when I tried it.
If you taxed the rich and corporations like Europe does you could easily have social security. The rich in the US love making Europe the boogeyman that stole your social security, while they laugh all the way to the bank.
It doesn't take much for somebody to seem like a more reliable party to make a deal with than Trump. Trump has already made direct threats of military action against Europe. Making a deal together with China might be the better option.
Also, Trump asking the EU and other allies to contribute seems much more to be about shifting blame and cost. Participating in the quagmire he created, with such an unreliable partner seems like a terrible idea.
Except ... look at the map. If Iran wins they (and 10 other parties) control Bab-El-Mandeb and Hormuz. Indonesia has already announced they'll close Malacca if Iran wins.
That means that for Europe to trade with Asia, it has to either pay tax to 10 different countries ... or to the US.
In other words, it gives the US the ability to apply import tariffs the way the UK famously did: if France or any EU country wants to trade with China, or any Asian country they'll have to pay tariffs ... to the US. The American revolution coming full circle.
Obviously words cannot describe what a disaster this would be for the EU.
Indonesia did not announce they would close down the strait of Malacca. Someone made an offhand comment that they would consider tolls if Iran could get away with it, and then the government announced as a response they would never do that.
Why don't you ask the EU how well making deals with Iran went so far? Hell, why not ask Israel? (they've been making deals with Iran for 47 years and saved their bacon, espeically in the Iran-Iraq war, multiple times. The sad truth is that half the Iranian regime, both the regime itself and the individuals involved owe Israel their lives. Most owe both the Mossad and the IDF their lives)
Here's how politico describes the EU's relation with the Iranian regime in one article: "Iran continues to hold and execute European Union citizens, using capital punishment for accused spies or dissidents, leading to severe diplomatic tension and EU condemnation of 'hostage diplomacy'"
You think Trump is untrustworthy? When is the last time Trump invited someone for diplomacy ... then had that person executed?
I mean, I get why people make the point that Trump is the worst US president ever to deal with. That's politics, and there's an election coming up... what I don't understand is why people get confused about that still making him 1000x better than a lot of other parties.
>I mean, I get why people make the point that Trump is the worst US president ever to deal with. That's politics, and there's an election coming up... what I don't understand is why people get confused about that still making him 1000x better than a lot of other parties.
You answered your own question - that’s politics. It doesn’t need to make sense to you.
And in the olden times, people got nightmares from reading books, or by hearing a horror story around a campfire. Banning everything that is scary or can cause nightmares or trauma would be a very difficult effort, and deciding a boundary of what is too traumatic and what is not would be very arbitrary.
Can we agree that there's a difference between banning things and making things difficult to access?
I'm an extremely liberal-libertarian free speech and free information advocate. I grew up in a world where as a 12 year old, on IRC, in 1992, I had people sending me fetish porn and child porn, and I developed the belief at that age that that was fine, if you were 12, you had the right to see anything you could, including other 12 year olds naked. But this was not something most 12 year olds were exposed to, and by the time I was 14 I was pretty clear on why they shouldn't be.
We live in a world where there is no such thing as a "ban". Oh, I know, I hated bans and railed against bans, and I don't think the government has any right to ban anything. But a ban is just an obstacle to people who want to violate the norm. A ban is only a way for societies to set up barriers between people and bad shit which is bad for society, and sometimes it's okay for there to be barriers. In 1992, the reason most kids were basically incredibly innocent and had never seen any porn at all at 12 years old, was that the barriers to it were reasonably high. If you were some kind of command line warrior child who could figure out IRC over dialup, then yeah, people would literally mail you brown paper boxes with porn tapes on VHS.
There are, actually, boundaries on what is too traumatic to show someone. Personally, I'd like to obliterate the behavior that fuels those things, rather than need to address the downstream issues of people seeing them. But there are things that are poisonous to society because they poison individuals, and there's a role for society and government to play in prohibiting those things, or at least preventing their spread as much as possible.
There is evil in the world, and it is sometimes necessary to stop it. Free information is not an unalloyed good.
Or will they ban you from using something like https://github.com/filosottile/age to encrypt and armor text encode things you send inside of the non-encrypted chat?
echo "Am I doing something illegal, France?" | age -e -r age1ql3z7hjy54pw3hyww5ayyfg7zqgvc7w3j2elw8zmrj2kg5sfn9aqmcac8p -a -
-----BEGIN AGE ENCRYPTED FILE-----
YWdlLWVuY3J5cHRpb24ub3JnL3YxCi0+IFgyNTUxOSBjTVQ5VTdMaTlnRkEyT1BY
MHZPc0lncHFvbS9FMTlDa2FkK3JQZy9sQnprClRFN3lNQUtnNzJWK0RxQVlYNE1q
NCtlNFJTUWpwZExJSDMvSGlRL2VHc1EKLS0tIC95bEErRU9NNERJRVVuYlMwUFg4
WUx1R0IyTHd1d2dxQTdqU0NJWlF0MXMKL1x9fz+ZVObYrn3bY/IdVBsd4KYxn78P
aWePVjaRUityGTkndNSy6gg1meVky22iv4rxd9MZ4XYnsGJDfRUmkVZhQcCxag==
-----END AGE ENCRYPTED FILE-----
