" Hopefully that's not a sign of things to come."
Of course it's a sign of things to come. In fact things already here, obviously.
1434 publicly visible posts • joined 15 Jul 2008
I am sure a lot of customers* of this kind of thing don't have a clue about how it works, what it does or doesn't connect to, they are just buying a baby monitor.
*Not me, my kids haven't been babies for many years. And I avoid such connected/subscription/spying devices anyway.
Because they want to call it Twitter, which is a much better and well-known name than X, especially as it's pretty much impossible to be taken out of context (whereas "X" could be various things in different contexts), but they feel obliged to mention its real name.
Normally I see it written as "X, formerly Twitter"
The problem with those who seem convinced that they are aliens is that only the poor-quality images remain unexplained. Could it be that they are unexplained due to their poor quality, rather than because they are unexplainable by Earthly standards? Seems likely to me.
Similar to photos of Bigfoot, Nessie, etc.
Since almost everyone does have a decent-quality camera on them most of the time now, it's strange how there are NO clear and unambiguous images of such things.
"in certain circumstances demand the entire amount owing to me immediately."
I believe in the UK this is almost any circumstances. Provided the credit balance is in excess of what's needed (or estimated) to cover the expected usage, they have to give it back to you.
"In the US, on the other hand, employee monitoring is totally legal – even in the federal law the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, one of the charges you'll often see brought against criminals who break into systems."
What is the second part of this sentence trying to say? That Criminals are charged with monitoring employees?
Are you suggesting that because a country spies, they should not prosecute foreign spies they find working against them?
We all know every country spies. They are not prosecuting them because "spying is bad", they are prosecuting them because they are spying against the USA, which, if you are the USA, is bad.
How is it that spy satellite technology that allegedly can read car licence plates and recognise the faces of someone looking up hasn't translated to US Navy aircraft cameras that seem to generate footage of UFO's that's worse than that from WW2 fighter gun camera footage?
Same as the pictures of Bigfoot. All the decent pictures show what the picture is really of. It's only the fuzzy unclear ones that remain so those are the ones the nuts jump on as so-called evidence.
A fuzzy picture of a bear is still a bear, not Bigfoot, even if it's hard to tell. Same with poor pictures of weather baloons etc
The news is "fake"?
Was a paper published?
Did they do what they said in the paper?
Did they achieve something which looks like superconductivity?
Was the temperature not what they said?
Was the pressure not what they said?
If mistakes have been made with the science, this is not "fake" news. It's real news of something, whether or not that turns out to be what it was initially thought to be.
By the way, if indeed "the laws of atomic physics do not support any form of superconductor at room temperature" then why are various teams attempting to do this?
I am not a physicist, don't downvote me for asking questions please.
That's pretty standard though, if you have anything outside of "plug in our equipment here" you have to prove it's not your fault if something is broken.
Like my "home emergency" insurance that refused to pay out after my oil water-boiler failed. Their engineer was going to take a week to arrive (some "emergency" cover), therefore I spoke to the manufacturer, obtained a part and easily fitted it. But since I had touched it, all bets were off.