I mean, they have to pay the bills somehow. And this shows maybe how bad financially they're off. Before the internet, you had to buy a copy of the book. I suspect those sales fell off a cliff in the last 25 years. So I may not like this decision but I can understand it.
And as others have suggested, there are other ways to get what you need online. This is a strong atmospheric disturbance in a serving vessel for hot infused beverages.
That's conventional wisdom for lithium ion batteries. Keeping it between 20 and 80 percent will extend its life. But that doesn't mean charging or discharging it fully will be bad immediately; the effects are small but cumulative. And while battery tech improves, this guideline will probably be less important.
There are certain crimes you will never be able to fully eradicate. You can only try to get them down to the bare flawed human minimum. For pretty much as long as there are laws and courts, killing in cold blood has been illegal. But to this day humans kill humans in cold blood. All we can do is make good laws, prosecute perpetrators, and increase awareness. If the latter is what you mean by grassroot change, then sure. If we stay within the hypothetical, I don't think a mass accident (like an accidental gas leak) or mass murder (a gas leak made to look like an accident) of the whole bunch on Epstein island would bring about a cultural change. My personal fear is that this whole exposé of this particular case only served to make the rich fuckers even more careful when they do it, not do it less.
At the root of the Epstein case is money. Billionaires should not exist. The quality of legal representation should not depend on one's bank account. If you want a grassroot cause, tackle that one.
I would prefer buyer or customer. Not Consumer.
If I could just quickly split this hair: there is a semantic difference. The buyer or customer paid money. The consumer needn't have. If I buy my kid a Switch 2 I'm the buyer and my kid is the consumer.
I don't disagree with your take that it gets overused though.
I'm afraid that pedophilia is prevalent everywhere. We only hear about the rich people more because journalists take an interest and rich people think - not unjustifiably - that money is a good protective shield and therefore take more risks.
In this hypothetical scenario, if all these people were pedophiles or turned a blind eye to it, were assembled at the same time, and all punched their ticket to a delightfully shitty afterlife, I don't think the problem would be gone. There will be willing successors standing by to fill all of these positions. And it would be a stroke of luck if the waiting successors were suddenly more moral beings.
I agree. And I think your idea of personal exchanges is something we should try. All I'm saying is that it's too early for anyone to have a well thought through, working solution.
At different points in the past, we thought novels, newspapers, radio, television, and the internet would be the end of truth. Truth is still around. We develop systems to sieve through the bullshit. In terms of slop, I don't think anyone can say for sure how we will deal with it. But if past experience is anything to go by, it will rely on reputation. You trust a certain news source because they have been reliable, so they have a reputation they don't want to lose. And that keeps them honest or you move on. We will find a way to deal with slop as well that will be based on reputation. In addition to laws and regulations that are yet to be written.
Whether it's news rooms or TikTubers or something completely new that will gain this reputation, eff knows. But we will get there.
Not to worry! And thank you for this civilized exchange that managed to stay clear of Godwin's Law:)
Does a nation cease to exist after it is conquered? All the efforts to that effect by the English notwithstanding, it's still there.
[Angry Welsh noise, probably involving a lot of consonants and a few double L's]
Captcha, but for bots, I imagine. Fits in with the general conspiratorial theme.