hmmdiggy

I think what OP was getting at was is if you're processing each example on the fly, why aren't the unedited default examples cached so if a user just hits "Run" they can see it working, regardless of whether it's their own content or not.

This is also my opinion, but for those downvoting/greying this comment could you elaborate why you disagree?

> Then you make it an election subject

It was one of the main election subjects back in May 2015 to whether to hold the referendum or not. Making whether to follow through another election subject would be wasteful considering leave has the majority.

I'm talking strictly about the voting weight of an individual.

> It's a sad day for the UK's younger generation who voted overwhelmingly to stay, the older generation

Implying not all votes are equal.

> who will depend for their bread and butter on the younger ones has just made their life a lot harder.

Or rely on their pension they've worked their entire lives for, which having remained in the EU would be more at risk.

> likely for their entire lifetime

This will affect everyone for their entire lifetime, regardless of their current age.

Reminds me of a Ricky Gervais stand-up where a woman is scarred for life at the age of 93, which is technically true regardless of how many years she lives to.

> that older people seemingly looked to their own interests

That's an assumption. You could even look at it another way and say it's the other way around where they've lived in the UK prior to being in the EU and know what the UK is capable of on it's own.

> Especially I am sad for the young generation in the UK. A very large part (about 75%) voted to stay in Europe, and this future is taken from them

The undertones in this point imply that votes from the young generation is worth more than others.

    A link to a website which publishes photos without authorisation of the author does not in itself constitute a copyright infringement

Sorry for my naivety here but the way this is worded is creating confusion for me. Does the article mean:

1) Linking to photos that you don't have authorisation to use on your website isn't copyright infringement.

2) Linking to a website that doesn't seek authorisation to use photos on their website.

To me it reads like the latter, in which case how is one meant to know if a website has sought and gotten authorisation for each photo they use?

I used to be a delivery driver in rural England, and one day it was a Harry Potter book release date and we were told explicitly not to leave on the door step if they weren't in. I'm not sure who sent these instructions whether it was the company sending the items, or our company delivering, but it's funny to see perceived value imposed on this occasion.

Complained several times but still occurs. I'm stuck in that guy's catchment area so always a high chance it's the same bloke.

We've had packages delivered by an individual similar to survelx, and the guy clearly smokes in his car as the package stinks of smoke and it even penetrates the items inside on occasion (clothing). Issue here is that he's not bound by company policy of smoking in a company vehicle, so he's free to smoke away.

Because most people wouldn't class a WordPress theme as a tool