alainv
Joined 12 years ago
Joined 12 years ago
If the US wants their regulators' decisions to carry weight in another country, they can pay for the privilege via trade agreements, same as it ever was.
[1]: https://plantnet.org/ [2]: http://data.plantnet-project.org/datamanager/_design/dataman...
Neat factoid but this article is not exactly information-dense.
2) Any pronoun in that case would be superfluous. "Holy crap! Congratulations!" would be far more intuitive to native english speakers. Choosing to add a gendered pronoun without knowing the correct gender is just... odd. That's exactly the type of situation most would avoid where possible: you omit gendered pronouns unless you know.
I can verify it still works for Pro/Plus accounts with existing Public folders.
One does not need to call for that in order to find the current representation of women in engineering/CS lower than desirable.
Continuing on the theme of using the sources presented in this thread: do you find it more likely that Google's worldwide tech workforce is 83% male because A) there is "no causal influence, insidious or otherwise" and there is perfect freedom of choice or because B) there are systemic factors at play?
That is the only question.
> available in the United States, Australia, Mexico, New Zealand and South Korea.
Can you explain how exactly the U.S. has yet to "come close to" your list? Your post created the very "us vs them" separation you now claim to disagree with. The child post was fairly clearly just answering that statement
And while we're talking deflection, you are the one who took a thread about the US border and its impact on travellers and made it about civil rights abuses by the rest of the world. Yes, they are all important; no, it is usually not possible to solve them all at once.
Reproducible builds are an absolutely achievable way of adding trust to that particular step and reducing the overall attack surface.
We don't need to live in a world of two extremes, 'curl http:// | sudo bash' or hand-built silicon.
Do you seriously believe Apple would have gone this malicious compliance route rather than pursuing WTO grievances through their army of lobbyists if they thought that had half a chance of succeeding?