I don't disagree. But I'm pretty sure this was intended to be done on the election year. Don't get me wrong, I will not vote for the orange fuzz ball with a gun to my head. But this could've been done earlier in his term
I don't disagree. But I'm pretty sure this was intended to be done on the election year. Don't get me wrong, I will not vote for the orange fuzz ball with a gun to my head. But this could've been done earlier in his term
That should've healed by then though
Oh I didn't own my steam account it was created for my future children. it's a trust.
Now put in a law saying you can't do that
Took me a minute to figure out why these 2 updates would be bundled together. Must be cause if you downloaded something you'd be able to bypass their ads
Why does it matter? The standard is now open and can be used by everyone. It's just like CCS now from a usability pov but with many more chargers
I understand for the life of the company. But it's not even my steam account. It's my child's who's currently -5 years old (give or take). I did create it on their behalf a decade ago to redeem the free games on their behalf and gift them games I think they'll enjoy.
The Palestinian homeland isn't even a liberal idea though.
For uploading game clips I'd assume
Oregone*
Power in the US is held within an oligarchy and when they are threatened people get disappeared. There's examples of that but one that's being made an example of in broad daylight is Julian Assange
I assume that's the best outcome generally. Just forgetting they existed
You're forgetting a decent subset. Ones who are informed but would rather vote 3rd party, which due to not having Teddy Roosevelt won't do shit, rather than vote for either of these guys
If someone buys a home that was rented. Would the cap apply to them? Because this might result in a loophole
GLBTA? I honestly thought you were spelling something out with that
There's examples that swing both ways of a government being benevolent and self serving. The more likely outcome is the government being self serving. I personally anticipate every government to eventually go that route. For instance Agustus and a few following Roman emperor's had set a good example. But once corruption had set its teeth within the government it became incredibly difficult to be a "good" emperor. Not impossible but discouraged.
So yeah. Just because there's good examples doesn't mean you shouldn't be cautious even in their cases. Enjoy the prosperity and encourage it but do have a Killswitch of sorts just in case
The ad design could link to the products and out of Netflix. So they wouldn't get clicks
Idk I didn't have expertise in this space
I didn't really follow. Because the way it happened was, Tesla can make money from it's charging stations and other OEMs get a robust charging network.
I understand that. But building chargers using their ports is an option and will be something that happens. It just answers the customers of other OEMs of whether to charge their cars now. And even if Tesla controls a significant portion of the charging infrastructure now there'll be others that build chargers with that standard with time. And I'm sure there was some closed door agreement they came up with on pricing
I don't think giving ownership to accounts like shares would work. But probably employees owned
I completely agree that's what I meant by the 3rd party. Those who will refuse to vote for either and I tend to find that more common from those who would've voted Democrat compared to the ones that would've voted Republican
For us to do so yes. For the government, it constantly breaks the law
I'm giving it to my brother. Or just sell it for $100 to yourself
Idk man I consider wraps as sandwiches
Funny-ly enough you can block their signal. Issue is it's also going to block everyone within range
How many ccs chargers are there compared to nas? That's the question that matters to GM Ford and other automakers
It's a headstart for a robust charging network while other charging station companies build more to catch up
Quick question
Why didn't he do that 3 years ago when he got into office
It's not within his powers to do so. But he could have the secret service assassinate them. Pardon the perpetrators and then assign whomever he wants the position with threats against the lives of the senate and congress as a whole for all who would vote against assigning this person. Elimate them and have the vote.