What the law says and what the state does can be two different things. That’s true for the West and China.
We know what the CCP does to China’s ethnic minority communities. Reciting the word of the law doesn’t change the evidence of how the state implements it.
Some people will loudly proclaim so, which makes it seem like a universal unimpeachable truth
Some people in tier 1 cities don’t live like that, but the vast majority do. As an average person, you would not enjoy China more than your western country.
Web 2.0 is the umbrella term for a bunch of things that enabled the social media we see today. Infinite scroll, notification toasts and asynchronous loading of new content to name a few.
If we had to reload a page every time we wanted new content we would see way less and move on more quickly.
Can you explain your last paragraph a bit?
Thanks for the link!
Because if they use it in aggression e.g. against western allies in the SC sea, we need the technology to repel or counteract it.
Great question. Intention matters, so many countries focus on speech that can only be malicious, like incitement to violence in the UK or Nazi salutes in Germany.
That’s an interesting point. The government tends to get ripped off because of negotiation issues. Private orgs can hire and retain the best negotiators, whereas govt can’t afford that and if they can, they’d still be vulnerable to accusations of cronyism to have the best of the private sector’s negotiators negotiating with the companies they’ve probably dealt with privately before and who they will likely be back with in the future.
This is one reason why competitive procurement is such a big deal and so complicated and time consuming.
We know from bitter historical experience that privatising public operations, especially natural monopolies like utilities, results in worse service and higher prices, coupled with sub-par investment. A private company can be bailed out if it goes bankrupt sending all its profits out to shareholders. A public org has an incentive not to waste taxpayer money.
That’s so beautifully illustrative of what the LLM is actually doing behind the curtain! What a mess.
What do you mean? Anti-establishment? Nationalist?
Well known by… his policies? The jury’s still out because he only just got into power. He could go back to more Corbynite policies by stealth.
He’s a national treasure
People will hold their noses just the same for the Tories in 5 years’ time, after them having done way worse things than just not quite holding their coalition partner back a couple of times.
What Clegg conceded was bad, but 14 years might be enough exile and personnel churn for one to give them a new chance.
Not sure what you mean. He’s well known for having one stance under Corbyn and another when leader. The first being quite radical and socially progressive, the second being essentially Tory but a bit better. Which bit did they make up: the before or after?
Opposite scenario in my dept. The boss wants to improve our time tracking so he can justify asking for more staff.
“Yes the rest of the org needs 500 new starters a week but you guys can manage, right?”
One could argue “understand” is more clearly two words stuck together than others mentioned.
Not that the two words combine meaningfully to create the new word!
The answer to that question involves talking about the French and what happened in 1066!
Tbf though, Webster tried simplifying some words for American English. He just didn’t manage to get them all.
I honestly both agree and disagree. The tunes were absolute bangers but 30 seconds is quite long enough for opening titles.