Just want to point out that the allergic person seemed to have taken every precautions possible to avoid this. She asked the waiter and the chef multiple times to verify that the allergen wouldn’t be there and they repeatedly said it was the case.
I think there were 4 times where they confirmed that the meal was safe. It wasn’t at all.
So it looked like a really really bad mistake from the restaurant staff.
Not OP but everytime I used the verbose output of ssh it didn’t help me one bit. Even adding outrageous verbosity I was still quite confused on what step failed and which didn’t.
I’m probably just bad at understanding SSH but i don’t know it seems like ssh workflow includes many trial and error until it finds a way to connect.
Imo the verbose output of SSH is often not very helpful if you don’t know very well ssh in the first place. Obviously it is still worth a shot and a good advice but don’t expect ssh to clearly state what is going on :)
I have the same version with the white spot on the chest :)
Are we bros ?
They are the best cables!
A soft layer outside then some crunchy shielding and then another soft layer and crunchy core. This is clearly a snack.
I’m not a cat (nor a lawyer).
But discrediting someone’s opinion by just posting this meme is NOT toxic ?
So it’s toxic to assume someone might be a Russian bot but it is not toxic to disregard the opinion of everybody that said that ? You know there are bots online. Maybe not much here but there was definitely many on Reddit. So bots are real but someone that points out a bot must be wrong.
This is weird.
So yeah, it appears we shouldn’t trust what Putin says publicly.
Obviously, he could say he prefers Biden and then pull every trolling ressources available to make Trump wins.
This statement from Putin doesn’t have any value whatsoever.
He would say openly the opposite it would still be extremely unreliable information.
So basically:
Russian bots do exist but they are “not that bad”. Also if someone from Russia they are not necessarily a bot because they have a different opinion…
That’s all fine to have that position but who are you to tell other people if they encountered a bot or a real human being ?
Do you have any idea how prevalent Russian bots are ? What are their latest strategy?
I cannot answer these questions and you shouldn’t either.
The people you are bashing for pointing at “Russian bots” could be completely right. Their perception of internet is not the same as yours.
If anything it’s good that people are suspicious of any Russian information on the internet. It’s much better in my opinion than your alternative which seems to be built on contempt for people falling for bots and a very prominent ego yourself for thinking nobody ever got you.
I follow closely what is happening in the US from France because even though we have a very different culture I still think US politics is a preview of what’s to come here.
Right now I consider we are at the step where our media are crumbling and becoming unable to properly inform us. A step that has been reached a couple of years ago in the US in my opinion.
The next step will probably be our own coup attempt in a few years and a steady increase in the division of the country and far right movements.
I want the same thing I just don’t think taking what is inherited is the way to do it.
I would much rather see the ultra-rich pay properly their taxes when they are alive.
It’s not like taking inheritance money is the only way to finance things. I don’t see the reasoning.
I can totally understand why someone with huge revenue would pay more taxes but I don’t see why someone who inherits has to pay taxes at that exact moment.
In any case, I think you are missing the point and answering the question “for what purpose?”. Instead of “why?”.
I want to know why it’s more logical to pay taxes when you die rather than paying them in the first place when you got the revenue.
Obviously, the money collected is useful I just don’t see why it has to be collected when it is a time of sorrow for a family.
Also where I live it’s like 50% of the inheritance that is taxed. It is not just significant, it is 50% of the work of a life that goes in one shot to the state when someone dies.
Edit: I was mistaken, I did some calculations and a practical example: If I inherited 200 000€ I would have to pay around 18 194€ (20%)for one taxation and some additional applies but it’s nowhere near what I was told. This rate goes from 5% to 45% for the largest inheritance. In reality, to get a 45% taxation in France I would have to inherit more than 1.5 million euros.
I still think this taxation is too high and I regret that my comment is not clear. I don’t want less taxation overall I just think it makes more sense to take the money over time on the revenues. Anyway, taxation for inheritance is still something people here are very much concerned about. Parents want their children to inherit as much as possible of their wealth obviously so seeing a good chunk going to taxation is not great. Again I’m ok to pay taxes. But we have 192 different taxes here (that’s the exact number calculated in 2014) so I would prefer a system where most of the taxation comes from revenues and what you own and that’s it.
Since when does wealth be shared when someone dies ?
No, the money will go to their descendants who will try to get even richer than their parents. A large part of that money will also be taken by the state because ?? and ??.
Nothing would change.
Maybe people didn’t frequently have weird hobbies before.
The way I see it internet widened enormously the diversity of knowledge we get to check. And that’s these weird rabbit holes online that create the similarly weird new hobbyist.
I chuckled when I read this :
privacy safeguards from Google
And now our partner, the NSA will demonstrate the privacy safeguards they implemented in our latest software…
My instance tried to disable downvotes and it was a fiasco.
So yeah a lot of people are keen to remove user feedback in any way possible in the hope to lessen toxicity until they notice that it’s a double edged sword. People can’t dislike stuff just to troll or for bad reasons. But people couldn’t even downvote a spam bot and you essentially are at the mercy of anybody if a mod is not close by ready to act. Likes and dislikes are a way to outsource moderation to the users. So either X has a secret army of moderators or that will just result in a lot more trash being on the foreground.
No likes on X means that the spammers, racists, stalker will essentially be at the same level of visibility than any other user.
I’m sure that will go just fine…
Yes.
Nothing really graphic here but it is accurate.
I actually couldn’t believe such picture existed. And then I remembered that this is Trump so it is to be expected.
Also as DDG is based in the US it is most likely legally bound to give your informations to any agency with a nice gag order on top of it.
I can’t imagine any serious privacy oriented business to be headquartered in the US.
The whole better privacy is true with DDG but certainly not to the extent people would like to think.
That being said DDG has decent search results and is slightly better than Google for privacy. Google is an ecosystem so every little bit you don’t give them is a success.
It’s really too bad we don’t have good private search engines…
Who would ever contest this claim ?!
I call it the depression portal.
That was indeed the joke.
Not enough Guinness I guess :)
IMHO everyone is entirely missing the point pointing their finger at Boeing.
The main issue is the FAA and how it failed to control Boeing. It’s obvious a business will try to sacrifice safety for money. But there should be check and balances. Someone making sure a business doesn’t do that.
The FAA let Boeing supervise itself.
Just to be clear some of the higher up at Boeing are criminals but so is the cop that told him he could police himself.