robotdongs

First off, a 30 day vacation from Facebook sounds wonderful, it'd be a great excuse to leave it all together.

Second, not that this was your intent, but that's such a poor example to use in pointing out the fallacy that I can see why someone might see it as "hateful", which is against the TOS, whether or not it should be is a separate discussion.

As a side-note, pointing out a logical fallacy doesn't invalidate someone's argument, ironically this is itself a fallacy.

This already occurs with SOX, it's definitely a workable model for processes and decisions not just impacting the finical statements.

It didn’t seem to reflect well the way cloth moves when sliding across another piece of cloth. When she was climbing, I’d expect the scarf to sort of wrinkle/bunch up, then fall to her side, not just cleanly slide off.

However I could see them adjusting the physics for the demo to ensure the cloth actually fell by her side so we could see it swaying as she climbed.

I was going to correct you, the 8th gen intel chips support DDR4, but you're right, they don't support LPDDR4.

For LSD and Psilocybin I'm not sure if Toxin is the right word. From my layman understanding, LSD and Psilocybin mimic naturally occurring proteins that bind to certain receptors in your brain triggering release of chemicals like serotonin, dopamine and etc. Your brains natural processes will "clean-up" the LSD and psilocybin just like it would for your body's natural analogs.

Sellers are neither contractors nor employees for eBay, they're customers, just like those who sell something at Christie's aren't an employee or contractor of Christie's but another type of customer.

I disagree, the apps facilitate their business but Uber and Airbnb aren't in the software development business, as they don't develop software for sale as their primary means of income.

Even if that were the case, many enterprises would still want to perform testing before deployment or require updates to be part change management.

The New urbanism article was pretty bad.. The author made some OK points, but the only example he provides is the San Francisco which you can really only compare with a city like New York, London, Hong Kong.

I thought it was funny the idea that New Urbanists are this big powerful entity pushing all these regulations and codes in place, as if building developers and their investors don't have any sort of input.

Also he fails to provide any sort of evidence these new codes and regulations pushed by new urbanists are responsible for sprawl. Especially when most of the suburbs mentioned in the article are much older than new urbanist policies.

I believe that's a sprint issue, not a google one.