Impossible for what reason. Sounds like the airline would be happy to adjust if things like minimum connection times changed, but the flights still ran (or maybe a minor timing change)
If the country entry requirements changed, that’s not the airline that’s liable - just like if the country cancelled your visa. Talk to your insurance company.
It is not so important that the fire marshal has facial recognition, because the police department chose to ask the fire department because access was then free of charge and a mere handshake to them. If not the fire marshal, the police department would have chosen some independent 3rd party. This is a known trivial loophole to facial recognition bans. (Former lead dev of globally leading facial recognition system.)
> What would it even mean for lifestyle choices to directly cause some condition?
Eating a diet largely of white rice directly causes beriberi. At least 9/10 people will get beriberi if they eat a diet that's mostly white rice. The median human body needs a certain amount of thiamine to operate properly, and without that certain body functions will cease to occur properly.
Eating too much spinach will cause kidney stones, but by exacerbating a different underlying cause (not directly). 9/10 people will not get kidney stones by eating too much spinach. Making the lifestyle choice to eat smaller amounts of spinach than the general population will protect against kidney stones, but it doesn't mean that spinach is bad to eat.
Without knowing the difference in bodily makeup that allows spinach to influence the occurrence of kidney stones, doctors will vilify spinach. But once the bodily factor that causes this will known, they'll either be able to treat that or recommend lifestyle (diet) changes specifically to the people who have that mutation, rather than vilifying spinach in general.
People use transformative filters on their faces on dating apps all the time. If you show up and find someone with a completely different face, is there any chance of romance? I have no idea... the best I can guess is
- No, but people do it anyway due to anxiety
- People can be pressured, the trick is to meet them the first time
- People say they care about faces, but don't actually care about faces
I am not attractive. Thankfully once I am being given the chance to have a conversation with people, after that, they find me attractive regardless of my appearance, in fact, I am more attractive now in their eyes due to the way "I am". Oftentimes all it takes is a deeper conversation.
It happened to me, too. I did not find someone particularly attractive, but their experiences, their views of relationships, the world, and so forth somehow ended up making them look more attractive.
I don't want to wade into the debate here, but by "their tools" GP probably meant their existing tools (i.e. before adding a new tool), and by "a fuzzy problem solver" was referring to an "AI model".
No, Firefox is the conduit through which the funding provided by Google to stave off claims of monopoly are used for pet projects and padding CVs by people wholly uninterested in Firefox.
I'm not using the containers extension, since it only goes about 20% of the way and then they lost focus and stopped developing it. I think most people don't use it. It could have been a differentiator.
I use it every single day.
It helps open the same website in "Cognito" instead of opening it in Cognito mode.
Plus, as a developer, it makes it easy to run tests using multiple accounts.
> Knee and joint pain may be common complaints among runners
> More common sources of pain or injury in runners’ knees are iliotibial band syndrome (ITBS) and patellofemoral pain syndrome (PFPS), says Dr. Mayer.
So it doesn't sound like a myth, unless you restrict your definition of knee health to "osteoarthritis".
Each of these cited a number of studies. I know there's a lot of "these are professional researchers, of course they controlled for bias" and the studies said "we controlled for bias" but it wasn't clear how they controlled for bias or how it was effective.
For example, the one about marathon runners didn't analyze long term affects of marathon running, just whether the people who ran marathons at the time had arthritis (no: if you had arthritis you would probably quit running marathons). Another general meta study seemed similar (recreational runners have lower arthritis, but would you be a recreational runner if you had arthritis?) in addition to noting higher arthritis in long term (15 year) runners vs general population.
So when you said `ask for IPv6` you meant `ask for a static IPv6 prefix` or something else similar to a static IPv4 address? Or is this an apples to oranges comparison?
And then you say `Nobody asks for IPv4` - so nobody asks for IPv4 and 0.5% ask for IPv6?
2 of my customers explicitly asked for IPv6 prefixes. Another ISP had a couple of users actively using IPv6 15 years ago, but it bitrotted and nobody cared enough to ask for it to be fixed. Another user recently asked to be provided with IPv6 (actually, forcefully demanded it rater) and then didn't even bother to enable IPv6 on their router.
So, yeah, I don't see IPv6 being relevant as a small ISP today.
I have had a grand total of one customer ask in almost 10 years. I have the block and announce it but there are so many dangers with implementing it that I am scared to even try yet until we slow down a little.
Why is idemnification an appropriate answer to post-service restrictions? What do you mean by ethics regulations? What sorts of fields are public employees forbidden from working at post-employment? How is gp's statement a slippery slope?
reply