hundt

I took my 7- and 10-year old and they enjoyed it, especially the 10yo. We watched a couple hours of Looney Tunes compilations on YouTube the day before to introduce them to the characters.

As the article explains, debits increase the balance of debit normal accounts, whereas credits increase the balance of credit normal accounts.

I think the argument is that there are multiple judicial philosophies that can be chosen from, and you can generally predict what outcomes will result from following a philosophy consistently over time, so a justice chooses the philosophy that results in the outcomes they want. And therefore they could have chosen their philosophy for partisan outcome-based reasons, so consistently following it is no defense to accusations of partisanship.

I think the heatsink and platform it is on are moving horizontally and the blade only moves vertically.

I would call it a duty more than a debt. I feel that I have a duty to look after my elders, but I do not think my children owe me a debt for conceiving them or for performing my own duty to take care of them.

One possibility is that he "works hard" at that, too, e.g. by consciously thinking about what the best things to do with them are and endeavoring to spend as much as possible doing them. Perhaps if you internalize the idea that spending time with your family is in fact work, of a different but also valuable nature, then you will not find it as difficult.

As I wrote, I didn't find the "drying out" step to be necessary. If you are patient enough you can process the nixtamal into dough with only a tiny bit of water added.

Edit: I don't have a wet grinder so I can't compare to that. It is smooth enough to get the pocket though.

This is an excellent question that I never thought of!

My guess is that

- there is a large range of cal concentrations that work fine without tasting bad, and

- the amount of water absorbed by the corn is very hard to predict, as it varies from batch to batch, and

- unlike brining meat, it is unlikely that two people doing this by hand would vary how much water they are adding by 5x or even 3x, because there is no reason to add a lot more water than is needed, and

- recipes are simpler if you base the cal amount on the corn amount and then add "enough water" (which may change once you start cooking).

So maybe no one doing it for non-industrial audiences has bothered narrowing it down.

I use around half as much as you (3:1 water to corn and 1% cal by weight of corn) and it works well for me.

You can get a smooth product from a food processor if you are willing to do it in small batches, very slowly (I take around 5 minutes to process 1 cup of nixtamal in my 11-cup food processor, with pauses to scrape it down). I can do that without adding too much water (and in fact I have to add more water after I'm done processing).

I also bought from Masienda; they are indeed great!

Having implemented it for a job, this has been my impression of container scanning as well. Either your container has an OS, in which case you don't use 99% of the software on it and so 99% of the vulnerabilities found do not affect you, or else you have a container with "scratch" as the base image, in which case the scanner has no insight.

Maybe, but did you read my post? You need a cause of action. It is not libel to moderate someone's tweets, so even if § 230 does not protect them you can't sue them for libel based on their moderation.

My understanding is that (c)(2)(A) is only about liability for the act of moderation itself, e.g. suing Twitter because they banned you. If they did that in bad faith you could hypothetically maybe sue them for it, but there would need to be a cause of action, which there normally wouldn't be.

'gnopgnip may be referring to the much broader liability shield, for the content that you do not remove, which is provided by (c)(1) and has no good-faith requirement. That is Twitter's main "legal protection from defamation and libel" that you mention above.

Trump's executive order suggests that the (c)(1) liability shield could go away if you don't meet the (c)(2) good-faith requirements, which I gather is not considered a strong legal position.