It's me, I do it. But only when I need something to do to stay awake in hour five of today's meetings to address the "quick turnaround" patch that I finished coding three weeks ago, but now they want a label to change and no one on the six teams that have somehow become involved seems to know who owns the package that the field the label represents belongs to, but they're absolutely certain we need to programmatically retrieve the text in case the package owner changes it at some point, and someone remembers that the original developer wrote code to get the label text 16 years ago, but it was removed from the program two years before the project started using source control, and they have an old installer around here somewhere that we can decompile or trace with Wireshark to get the right RPC name (sharing their screen while they have a rummage for it, natch), and someone else volunteers that they might know how to get a version of the server application from around that time since the client and server versions have to match, but it's technically the intellectual property of a different subcontractor who was just a guy in Alaska who passed away five years ago, but they're sure they can convince his estate to burn it to a disk and mail it to me if they can just find the contact information...
Squiddlioni
I nixed the Zojirushi because of the PTFE coating, but I love having a non-stick rice cooker. Ended up getting a GreenPan induction rice cooker with an insert that has a ceramic coating to make it nonstick, and I love it.
It's hex numbers that map to ASCII characters: 72 r 75 u 6c l 65 e
Or, in the modern nomenclature, "systemd and friends"
I did this exact thing when contemplating getting a mini pc. I got an external drive and turned my Deck into a Kodi box. It's been great, though it had trouble pushing 4K60, so I have it set up to output 1080. If you're setting up something like Kodi it's worth mentioning that the Deck uses KDE, so you can set window rules to always open the application fullscreen.
Looks like Patricia Tallman, maybe? Lyta from Babylon 5.
Alright, you've convinced me that you're either a disingenuous troll or a genuine fool. Either way, I think this conversation isn't going to be productive. Have a good one.
Since you duplicated your link I'll duplicate my response.
You're linking to a statute of the ICC, The Rome Statute, which provides that inciting or committing genocide is against the ICC's definition of International Law and the ICC will attempt to prosecute accordingly. That statute was not ratified by the United States, so the United States is not bound to uphold that statute. Israel also did not ratify, so is also not bound. That doesn't mean that the ICC can't prosecute Israel or the US under the statute, but it does mean that they are explicitly not responsible for upholding it. Your argument is that the United States is bound by whether the ICC determines genocide has occurred, and that is explicitly not the case according to the statute you linked.
Edit to add: The Rome Statute is the document which established the ICC. As a nation that did not ratify the document, not only is the United States not limited by the ICC determining if genocide occurred or not, the US explicitly rejects the ICC's authority to do so. It means the exact opposite of what you're saying.
You're linking to a statute of the ICC, The Rome Statute, which provides that inciting or committing genocide is against the ICC's definition of International Law and the ICC will attempt to prosecute accordingly. That statute was not ratified by the United States, so the United States is not bound to uphold that statute. Israel also did not ratify, so is also not bound. That doesn't mean that the ICC can't prosecute Israel or the US under the statute, but it does mean that they are explicitly not responsible for upholding it. Your argument is that the United States is bound by whether the ICC determines genocide has occurred, and that is explicitly not the case according to the statute you linked.
Edit to add: The Rome Statute is the document which established the ICC. As a nation that did not ratify the document, not only is the United States not limited by the ICC determining if genocide occurred or not, the US explicitly rejects the ICC's authority to do so. It means the exact opposite of what you're saying.
Which law? Laws have names and titles. They are published publicly and they can be linked to. Please provide a link to the law you are referring to.
You're sort of right. It's a condition associated with the rapid-growth breeds raised in commercial farms, and has become more prevalent over time. It's called woody breast.