Re: Presumably the fuckwits in charge ...
The Trumpists are nothing more than distilled Reagonistas.
It's the same mind-set, except they care even less don't even pretend to care about other people.
2412 publicly visible posts • joined 24 Jun 2009
If FOOF is the answer, you are asking the wrong question.
Also, rather than the hydrazine/H2O2 mixer/sprayer, just get yourself a ClF3 sprayer, no mixing necessary. Opposed to the Hydrazine/H2O2, it is not hypergolic with itself, but only hypergolic with the fox (or whatever else it lands on).
I think it is less about the vocabulary and more about the density of meaning.
An expanded vocabulary empowers you to leverage synergies and blue-sky to obfuscate your dialog, putting lipstick on the porcine and metaforming the narrative. Or you can speak clearly and get your message across.
It also helps keep .Net trainers in business. If you haven't worked in .Net et al for more than a year or two, you need to go back to school, or at least spend about as long as you've been out, re-learning all the crap they've changed.
On a positive not, I did get a very pushy recruiter to leave me alone after I informed them that I was five years out of date on .Net. ("We'll have to get you trained up again then, let me sort out the details..." and never called back. I call that a result!)
What is the objection to "Social Credit"? Every one I've talked to about China mentions it, but no-one can (or bothers to try to) explain why it's bad. "It's Communist!" is about as clear a response as I get.
Considering that a lot of the issues in the US is people with power/money breaking social contracts and then buying favorable coverage to get no blow-back. Something like Social Credit may be an equalizing force.
Oh, that is communism.
You still have most of Europe you can bugger off to, and all of the Commonwealth countries. Us poor USAians are pretty well stuck with our shower, who are doing the same things; and our "government" has shat on the rest of the world from such a great height that us citizens are all tarred (well, it is a dark, tar-like substance) with the same brush, and no-one wants us.
Or is that just another lie perpetuated by our so-called leaders, to keep the sheep in line?
If they can't be identified for billing, then their calls don't get connected. No corporate entity does free work (counting tax deductions, "good will" advertising, and "brand-name recognition" as having monetary value - a corporate accountant can give you dollar figures for each). Hell, they try not to do work unless they can get paid 2+ times for it; even if it's not work, they still won't do it for free.
Lets say, for a worst-case example, Scams 'R' Us, based out of Russia, uses a dodgy VOIP provider to connect to Tata Docomo in India, which routes the call through Bouygues in France, who directs the call to Verizon in the US. Verizon bills Bouygues, who bills Tata, who bills the VOIP provider, who bills SRU (possibly as part of their subscription). Bouygues may not tell Verizon where the call originated, but they sure as hell know who to charge. If most of the calls coming into Verizon from Bouygues are scam/nuisance/robocalls, then Verizon could tell them to clean up who they accept calls from, or their rates will increase they will stop connecting those calls. Bouygues tells Tata the same, Tata may well drop the dodgy VOIP provider, or bill them extra, which would raise the price of Scams 'R' Us's subscription, possibly making them uneconomical as a scammer.
To restate: If they can be identified for billing, they can be identified for blocking.