cloudsloth
It's only a cop-out if they say it to avoid looking into reasons for the explanation. The religious people I know, myself included, have well established and agreed upon reasons.
Just because you disagree with their conclusions and reasons for them, it's ridiculous to call it a cop-out.
Religion tries to answer the questions on existence, meaning and morality (this is not meant to be defimitively comprehensive). An atheist who calls the religious person a fool for asking a question and finding an answer that still leaves some questions is himself the fool.
I wasn't saying it was in someone's control. I was discussing analysis of the system as it is.
At best it was like 400m/ hour but didn't exactly scale easily. I had 7 windows open. Scanner dramiel remote sensor boosted by someone two jumps from target, three battleships with artillery cannons, one destroyer with artillery cannons and a scrambler, someone sensor boosting these ships, and a hauler ready to warp to can. Sometimes I would scan the other direction and be ready to switch gank gates but it depends on system. Goal was to be able to catch almost anything with 1bil+ in cargo. Cruisers, t2 haulers, t3 cruisers, etc. It felt really distopian. Some hits were upwards of 5bil.
I'm not sure discussions of a free and equal internet approach something that will be a net good.
I think there's ample evidence that the internet is really most similar to TV.
The statement 'All Lives Matter' not as response to BLM would have been fine, but come on. No one here is blind to the current discussion to that extent.
A group of people is experiencing horrible and unjust treatment. The implication of the situation is they don't matter, and the correct reformist statement is that they do matter.
Black lives matter also is not the correct statement. It is the correct understanding of the while situation but you need to keep in mind the nuance of language.
The controversy isn't because it's a bad slogan. The controversy is evidence of it being the correct slogan.
In the article it looks like Apple is replacing key markings with an e-ink display. Sounds expensive.
They presumably have engineering and marketing staff so they should do great.
What's pretty interesting is that it could be both.
Sellers get's a return. Upon receiving returned item they check that packaging is still sealed and when it is, they send it back to amazon's fulfillment center to be sold again.
Amazon receives the item. Amazon's system (obviously) doesn't open boxes. They at the very most check the barcode, visually inspect for sealed box, and check weight.
Now the items are co-mingled with other new items
Now a buyer can receive a box of clay when they buy from an entirely different seller.
Co-mingled items allow for a ton of fraud. They also save Amazon a lot of money on logistics. They make prime shipping possible. For Amazon, the acceptable rate of fraud is very high because everyone wants to be on their marketplace (huge sales volume) and the system they use allows them to offer such value at such a low cost.
Is that actually feasible?
Oh my goodness.