Then check the sources listed under that wiki article.
If you couldn’t be bothered to look up something as simple and undisputed as this, then it’s really silly to make a stand with “Wikipedia isn’t a source”, it just makes you look like a bad troll.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yahweh
You should have just looked this up yourself. It’s going to be the first result in most search engines.
I’m on Android and android has something called app pinning, but that still allows full functionality of the open app and is thus open to abuse. I looked up the guided access system and it’s a lot better than the android method, but it seems much more convoluted to set up. I just want a simple option: you can look at what is currently playing, but touching does nothing.
I want this, but not just for toddlers, just for handing over my phone to anyone really. Put on some media (photo, slideshow, video), lock your phone inputs, hand it over to someone else to look at, without having to worry that they will invade your privacy as a prank.
Putin is so popular in Russia, that even the dead vote for him.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deportation_of_Kilmar_Abrego_Garcia
Tldr:
Fled from gang violence in San Salvador as a teenager, married to an American, has american kids, was living and working legally in the USA, was still illegally deported to a prison in San Salvador, had to be brought back under court order, is then falsely accused of crimes in Tennessee and now they want to deport him to a country that he has no connection to whatsoever.
Ironically, to get the Tennessee accusations, the usa government struck cooperation deals with convicted criminals, one of which was going to be deported after his sentence, but now not anymore.
The cost for the USA government to persecute this 1 single person has to be already in the millions by now.
I was wondering if what you were saying about Corbyn was true, so I looked up most of your claims (all true for those I checked), and I thought I’d share what I found for others.
Corbyn used Russian talking points as justification for not wanting to do anything about Russia’s conquest of Crimea: http://www.hscentre.org/russia-and-eurasia/corbyn-wrong-says-ukrainian-human-rights-legend/
Corbyn has indeed worked with RT. This article called him a frequent guest: https://www.thearticle.com/rt-is-putins-propaganda-channel-so-why-do-british-politicians-agree-to-appear-on-it
Corbyn is indeed against NATO: https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-corbyn-did-call-for-nato-to-disband-but-its-labour-policy-to-stay-in
And Corbyn does indeed oppose weapon deliveries to Ukraine because “it would prolong the war”: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/feb/26/labour-left-breaks-with-jeremy-corbyn-over-sending-weapons-to-ukraine
A non exhaustive list of what makes them awful: https://expertbeacon.com/why-is-paypal-so-bad/
Afaik, the issue that was making the most victims, was that they were facilitating scammers that targeted sellers:
5. Good Luck Recouping Losses as a Seller in Disputes.
89% of sellers experienced dispute resolution problems with PayPal in 2021 surveys. Despite providing evidence the item shipped or service rendered, they lost cases and sums averaging $622.
This is driven by PayPal‘s buyer-favored review round taking 1-2 weeks. This favors scamming buyers at the expense of legitimate businesses.
Iirc, there was a time when Paypal always sided with the buyer, irregardless of evidence or past track record, the review process was useless. Once scammers picked up on this and began scamming sellers en masse, Paypal still kept their policy unchanged for years and sellers started to raise their prices on platforms that forced them to accept Paypal (ebay used to do this). Ebay has since tossed Paypal off their platform. I don’t know if Paypal ever improved.
When calling that number, the caller will need somekind of proof that they are in control of the car that they are trying to opt out of ads. Afaik, the easiest way to accomplish that when requiring a phonecall, would be pairing phone and car. But obviously Stellantis is not going for easy with this setup, so this is purely speculation on my part.
Apart from how insane it is to put obtrusive ads on a car dashboard, having to link your phone to your car and then call a phone number to opt out of touchscreen display ads is 🤯
There is going to be a reason that they’ve set it up like that.
You could still send an email or fill in their contact form. It’s quickly done and the worst that could happen, is nothing.
The cookie without chocolate is a classic, the variant with chocolate is only a 3 or 4 years old and likely always has been like this. So not shrinkflation or enshittification, just the way this product has always been.
Imo buy it without chocolate and eat it together with coffee or tea for the best result.
It appears that in the future, Itch will allow creators to opt out of payment providers, meaning that it’s probably on a per game basis, not per platform. That Itch and Steam are not making a per game solution now, is most likely because their current software doesn’t allow it and they need time to rework it. Itch has promised various changes already, Steam has been mum afaik.
Source for Itch: “For NSFW pages, this will include a new step where creators must confirm that their content is allowable under the policies of the respective payment processors linked to their account.”. https://itch.io/updates/update-on-nsfw-content
I only use Steam myself, so I hadn’t checked Itch Io’s communication yet. I don’t know the platform myself so it’s quite possible that I’m misinterpreting this, but to me it appears that Itch Io will allow creators to delist payment options that they are not compliant with: “For NSFW pages, this will include a new step where creators must confirm that their content is allowable under the policies of the respective payment processors linked to their account.”.
Do you have a source of where they are saying that?
I have seen an article about the Australian political action group that was claiming credit for getting the games banned. The story behind the start of the controversy.
And I have seen an article about the communication from Steam that they were banning games which were in conflict with the rules of their payment providers. The result basically.
But I’ve only seen conjecture and speculation about what went on to get from the start to the result. I haven’t seen any article that spelled out exactly what the different payment providers demanded from the gaming platforms, nor anything about what they discussed in between them.
Edit: after 12 hours there’s 4 downvoters and 0 sources. Another victory for vibes over facts.
I don’t get why the gaming platforms are removing games instead of removing the objecting payment providers as a payment option for purchasing those particular games.
If visa doesn’t want people to purchase game X with Visa, then remove Visa as payment option for buying game X.
Your omissions and alterations are interesting.
The article doesn’t just mention “a wreck”, it says “In September 2022, Tyler flipped his father’s SUV while driving, leaving his passenger with multiple concussions and sever lacerations, according to reports.” If Tyler was driving recklessly (and he was), then the passenger was the victim and the driver the perpetrator. If you’re interested in hearing the story of the passenger: https://www.rawstory.com/lauren-boebert-car-crash/ The tldr: “If I did what he did, I’d still be in jail.”
The “theft ring involving drug use” doesn’t mention drugs in the article. And it being theft, means that there were victims of theft. Including apparently a broke woman with a brain tumor.
And also in the case of child abuse there was a victim (the child in case it isn’t obvious).
I don’t get how you can’t recognize the victims in these stories.
In your example the daughter has committed no crimes and made no victims, and she could even be considered a victim herself. Tyler Boubert has already made many victims and will continue to make new victims because his mother’s political clout is protecting him.
The morally right thing to do, would be to protect the victim(s) and bring the perpetrator(s) to justice. In the example of the daughter, the daughter is a victim and she and her family should get the time and space needed to heal. In Tyler Boebert’s cases, Tyler was never the victim, but always a/the perpetrator, with his mother enabling him. With the Boebert family, the morally right thing to do, is to decrease the odds of Tyler making new victims, which gives journalists a moral imperative to consider every new crime of Tyler, to be news worthy.
If an adult family member of a significant political figure commits a crime, then there’s 2 big reasons why that case deserves extra scrutiny: 1) to check whether or not the family member is treated in a fair manner by the persecution and justice system (which could go both ways, they could escape justice because of their family connections, but they could also be extra persecuted for political reasons). 2) To keep track of whether or not the political figure their integrity remains intact.
If Tyler Boebert’s mother wasn’t a prominent republican politician, would he have escaped a prison sentence for his litany of crimes? Personally, I doubt it. And because he keeps escaping consequences, he keeps doing stupid things.
Yep, undisputed. Except by religious zealots who resort to bad faith arguments when some of their cultist beliefs are not accepted as fact by non believers, but on those subjects, those people aren’t taken seriously by anyone except others from their cult, so yes, pretty much undisputed.