The newspaper used to cost $1 (each! every day!) and it was full of ads. Probably about as much percentage of area as a typical news site today.
There must be a balance between "no payment" and "no ads" - the optimum profit doesn't necessarily happen at one of the extremes. Do you think you'd choose a higher priced subscription if it offered no ads?
What's wrong with clicking on an unknown link? It can only hurt you by taking advantage of an unpatched security bug in your software. But if you have that, you might be vulnerable doing all sorts of other things on the internet. And you probably do have that and are vulnerable doing all sorts of other things. It's just not very likely to hurt you in either case.
This is a paradox of runners and cyclists too. They use high-tech gear to make running easier - easier than a naked human can do it - but they refuse powered assistance. I don't understand why they make such a clear distinction between using gadgets to save power and using gadgets to provide more power. If it's about natural un-assisted ability, they shouldn't wear shoes either.
By bad luck he happened to be the same person who also did something legal that they really didn't like and also something illegal. So his legal actions have caused an excessive sentence for the relatively minor crimes he was actually convicted of.
If embarrassing people was a crime, the ex-partners who gave him the photos would be charged too. Those people are even more at fault than him.
Sounds like if you pay Cryptolocker to recover your files then you can have you money frozen too. Perhaps this is a good incentive to stop people paying extortionists.
If true, this also shows the TRUSTe privacy seal is worthless. The name implies it's undergone some kind of assessment that showed it's good for privacy when just looking at an encrypted file would immediately show the problem. TRUSTe itself is a bit vague on what they really do.
I can't find NQ in their search tool for certified companies. Perhaps it's been retracted or was never really issued? Maybe I'm looking in the wrong place
There certainly are. Iphones smuggled into mainland form Hong Kong are sold at a premium. Whatever the reasons for that are among the conditions that Apple must have conceded to to sell legally in the mainland.
Actually, yes. Any water shortage in a developed area with cheap water isn't actually a water shortage, it's a mismanagement or incorrect pricing. California can simply produce more water if they really need it, which they would if everyone was leaving their taps on.
We're fooled into believing water shortages are environmental problems we need to make sacrafices to prevent. But just paying more for more expensive, higher volume production or recylcing would work too. Eg Isreal.
Not stupid, but they either didn't understand or relied on the placebo effect and didn't perform experiments that were actually useful at distinguishing helpful from harmful or useless medicines - AND communicate that information to others. When an ancient remedy turns out to be useful, it's not useful until we rediscover that it actually works. The idea of science and sorting out mysticism from reality is fairly new in most of the world. In China, doctors in public hospitals still prescribe untested herbal remedies and diagnose diseases without any idea of the effectiveness of what they're doing. Patients just trust authority, tradition and popular belief. You could argue that the same is true to some extent in the west today too - see general "have some antibiotics" prescriptions, and cough and cold medicine.
What sexualities do you think he's talking about? Surely not all of them. But he doesn't explicitly say which groups, if any, he supports discrimination against.
He seems to mainly be talking about discrimination against gays, though doesn't say it directly. I wonder if he really means it that Apple won't discriminate against pedophiles, incestuous couples or the grey areas on the boundaries of age of consent? Or is it like the old "universal suffrage" that turned out only to be universal to men, and not women?
Did you just say that immigration is harmful because workers get most of the benefit and property owners relatively little? This economic perspective seems to be only looking at the economy of one group of people.
People at the lower end of the labor market are also adversely affected by each other. Why are they not proposing deportation of low-skilled Americans? No justification seems to escape from the fact that anti-immigration is fundamentally just discriminatory tribalism no different from racism and homophobia like the OP's father had.
"Logically, if immigrants were “stealing” jobs, so would every young person leaving school and entering the job market"
It's bizarre that people don't see this. Anyone concerned about immigrants is surely, logically, also concerned about people having babies. But somehow people think that limiting birthrates as a bad thing and limiting immigration is a good thing. Just a complete inconsistency.
These articles appear from time to time but they never give any sensible reason. Just take it as given that languages must be saved. This one has a long diversion into indigenous medicine - not something that needs a language, but rather needs knowledge, using any language. Here's the closest thing I found to a reason though I only read half way:
"But the loss of languages passed down for millennia, along with their unique arts and cosmologies, may have consequences that won’t be understood until it is too late to reverse them."
This just means the last speakers are hoping to pass their insecurity problem on to another group of new "last speakers" to suffer it for them. Nothing against an individual having that desire, but for a 3rd party to help them, it's really doing any overall good. It's just moving the problem to somebody else.
Sounds like your problem is drug users/dealers, not people with mobile homes. I hope you wouldn't also want to push out the good ones who aren't causing problems. You can just consider that you now live in a bad neighborhood. Some people have this from their permanent house neighbors too.
They nest inside each other as the picture shows. This is clearly a low-labour product. Though I think if you have a lot of people needing a house, there's already a pool of excess labor available.
A surprising fact about wood is that large-section wooden beams can perform better in a fire when there's a lot of flammable material around. They burn slowly from the outside so they take a long time to fail, making it safer for firemen to walk around inside. In comparison, steel fails by softening and that can happen much faster just by conducting heat through the whole section.
Bricks are a problem in earthquake prone regions. Even brick cladding on wooden frames tends to fall off and hit people on the head.
There must be a balance between "no payment" and "no ads" - the optimum profit doesn't necessarily happen at one of the extremes. Do you think you'd choose a higher priced subscription if it offered no ads?