Yeah. Only for one year though. I had previously thought his CIA involvement was more extensive.
squiblet
joined 1 year ago
It’s named after the elder George Bush, GHWB.
I skip to the last chapter, and if I don't understand it, keep skipping back until I do. Or just put it down for a couple of weeks.
It makes my browser window flicker and I thought my entire system froze for a moment…. right click menu was stuck on the screen. I haven’t seen an image that did that before and images this size are fairly common these days. Perhaps I should report a desktop Firefox bug. It’s fine on my phone.
Something about this image file totally fucks up my browser.
I’d reverse it. “Security researcher who has been thanked by Apple for helping fix bugs in MacOS found to be a serial fraudster”
Absolutely no reason to suggest that Apple “forgave” him, or that it was a mistake. I hate whoever wrote this article.
My mother cooks a wide range of stuff that is generally good. I don’t agree with some of the ingredients but the methods and results are solid.
My father used to cook a limited range of decent dishes but seems to have forgotten about that, and has become incredibly lazy about food… if it’s not something frozen he can microwave in 3 minutes, he considers that way too long and too much effort. Their microwave stopped working and had to be replaced, and in the meantime, he was simply flabbergasted and thought he was going to starve to death. He apparently didn’t realize you could heat canned soup on the stovetop.
Well, that was a pretty cluelessly written article. The two things are entirely unrelated. The headline seems to imply that Apple changed its mind about the fraudulent activity and was wrong, but that is not what the details support.
That's fine, since he'll lose the appeal and have to pay her. I doubt the Supreme Court, as lame as they are now, cares to hear this.
I see, so you summed it up poorly. This is also, you're right, one of those bullshit right-wing hit job 'journalism' things where they edit the shit out of footage to make it fit the pre-existing agenda they're trying to prove. Correct that people here wouldn't take that seriously, since we're not the target market for that kind of manipulative tripe.
It's also misleading to say that most porn sites are owned by one company. You could say that one company has majority market share of one type of site - streaming video.
Can you specify what company you mean and provide a citation for the 'what 12 year olds want to see' part?
One flaw in this theory is that guacamole is a condiment vs a side dish.