Because harassing the Jurors won’t change the outcome of the case since the Jurors have already done everything they are going to do, so harassing them can no longer harm the case, which is probably his primary concern. He obviously would prefer that Trump not attack them, but he’s giving Trump rope and a warning, so we’ll see if Trump ignores the rope, or if he can’t help himself but to open his mouth and stick his head in it.
From your own usa today article:
according to the poll of 1,261 adults surveyed May 21 through May 23. It found third-party candidates Cornel West and Jill Stein — not Robert F. Kennedy Jr. — are making the difference, pulling support away from Biden.
Emphasis added by me. And I agree, with the article, other 3rd party candidates are likely to pull more from Biden than Trump, but also in agreement with your article, not RFK Jr. And it goes back to people pushing RFK Jr as a threat to Biden, when in reality he’s not at all a threat to Biden. Its FUD being pushed by bad actors and people are falling for it and is distracting people from the real threats to Biden, which is Cornel West and Jill Stein.
I can’t see a world where RFK costs Biden a higher percentage than Trump in any state, that seems like FUD being spread by bad actors. I am not saying anyone here is a bad actor, I am just thinking that people are fearing the worst possible outcome and bad actors are praying on that to push an agenda and because of Wizard’s First Rule (“People are Stupid. People will believe anything because they want to believe it or because they are afraid it might be true.” [Amusingly that quote comes from an Author that if he were still alive would probably vote for Trump]) it spreads, just like most other misinformation.
You can’t just say he’ll cost Biden 0.1% in Michigan without also considering how much he would affect trump, if he costs Biden 0.1% and Trump 0.9% he still only gets 1% of the vote, but it hurt Trump 90% more than it hurts Biden, which in the end will actually improve Biden’s position. And the newly (within the last 4 years) never-Trumper republicans who would never-Biden as well who votes for RFK Jr can’t be counted as a “biden” vote since they would never vote for him to begin with, if anything its a vast majority of 2020 Trump votes that are shifted to RFK Jr.
He’s not running on a platform of pre-brain-worm or environmental work, he’s running on an extremist platform, and anyone who votes thinking he’d be an alternative to Biden, probably also has a brain-worm, and will be a very small minority compared to the people voting for him because he’s an alternative to Trump.
I don’t get how it would help trump, RFK Jr is such a right-wing nutjob, I don’t think anyone who would vote for Biden would vote for him instead. Its much more likely to pull votes from Trump instead since he’s just the right kind of nutjob to appeal to the extreme Q-Anon supporting far right who would otherwise vote for Trump.
your share price is wrong, its $31.06 right now down from $34.72 at opening today (about 11.5% down). Hopefully it’ll be down to less than a penny before Trump is allowed to sell them, that would be amazing. It was down to $30 earlier (about 13.6% down), but its rebounding slightly on people buying the dip so they can lose it tomorrow as it continues to drop. Less than a month ago (May 30) it was up to $55/share, so in 2.5 weeks its dropped 43.5%. From its High of $66.22 on April 25, its lost 53.1% of its value. So less than 2 months it lost over half its value, lets hope it loses the other half in the next 2 months.
Edit: 2 days later and its currently down 58.82% from April 25 to $27.27 a share, so it lost 4 bucks in 2 days already. Lets-a-go, if it keeps this pace it’ll be worthless by next weekend. Though its highly unlikely that will happen that quickly, likely going to see some pumps and dumps and rebounds while steadily keeping the trending direction.
yup, those too.
It should continue in perpetuity, otherwise he’ll dox everyone involved as soon as its lifted, since he has the mental capacity of a toddler.
My initial question was did this “researcher” just discover SMTP Open Relay? Cause if so I can do the exact same thing by configuring my SMTP server to open relay then using telnet to connect to it and issue the SMTP commands directly and it will send the email as though sent from whatever email address I want. This has been a known issue with SMTP for decades at this point and can’t be reliably resolved with SMTP, but since the whole world uses it for email, its probably not going away any time soon. However to mitigate it as much as possible is what DMARC DNS entries are supposed to help with, by providing assurance that the email was sent by an SMTP server allowed to send email on behalf of the domain.
I used to send people emails from themselves to demonstrate why they can’t trust the “from” address when they get an e-mail.
I use https://www.amazon.com/dp/B09TB83NR2?ref=emc_s_m_5_i_atc and I just don’t use the wifi, everything can be done on device or from a PC you plug the SD card into. I know you said you want it without wifi, but without more details I don’t know if “without wifi” is a necessity or if it just is fully functional without using “wifi” is sufficient for your needs. By default wifi is disabled while the camera has power to it and is recording, and its wifi enabled/disabled state can be changed in the menu to keep it off.
Is there an article associated with this post?
In uh… unrelated news VPN usage in Texas up almost 300%.
Because he wants to come off as a martyr to his base, and putting him in jail is exactly what he’s aiming for to do that.
So, the school board is bullying him into not doing an anti-bully talk. I think maybe the school board should have been the one getting the speech and not the kids at the school…
Gmail wasn’t even the first, Hotmail, Yahoo mail, there were tons of free email offerings, even sites that would host your whole website for free like geocities. Gmail came into the market when 3rd party email being free was already well established. They just followed an Apple style of development, taking something that already exists and made a better version of it. Also back then their motto was still “Don’t Be Evil” and they mostly still kept to it, so they used that goodwill and the better user experience to grow it at a massive rate. And for the most part, its still the best experience for email for many cases.
IANAL, so take this with a grain of salt, but from my understanding, Its legal, though it may be unenforceable. If I want to sue them, they will say I agreed to arbitration in the contract, I will ignore that and continue to file. They will counter-file that I agreed to arbitration by accepting the EULA and that the case should be dropped, I will counter-file that I only agreed to it under duress because it was either agree or throw away my TV and that the arbitration clause is invalid because of X, Y or Z. At this point either the Judge will decide to listen to arguments from both sides then make a decision or will decide based on the undisputed facts presented by both sides and will either invalidate the EULA and allow the lawsuit to continue, or will uphold the EULA and drop the case with prejudice, or will allow me to make another argument and drop the case without prejudice allowing me to re-file with a better case.
The issue is, is it worth it to spend that kind of time and money for it in the first place? If you don’t have an open and shut case and can’t file in a state where you can make Roku pay the legal fees, in general whatever you’re trying to accomplish will cost you more than just getting off their ecosystem, which is what they are counting on. Since you would have to sue them just to see if you can sue them, it just adds extra time, money, and effort into suing them that it is more likely to deter people from actually suing and instead choosing to arbitrate under their terms which, depending on the ethical considerations of the company, could be fair or it could be heavily skewed in their favor. At which point you can decide at that point if you should sue and then will also have any evidence acquired about an unfair arbitration in the filings as well.
Either way, the legality is perfectly legal to be in an EULA, its enforceability though is mostly only backed by how much time, money, and effort it would take to bypass it. Like if there is an open door with a sign saying “Please use next door” and the next door leads to the same place as the open door. Most of us will just use the next door because its not worth the effort to deal with whatever issue might occur if we used the open door. But if the “next” door is locked, we’d just go in the open door because its no longer worth the effort to deal with procedures the company wants.
It can do stuff that running in your browser can not. Since electron runs both the client-side code and the server-side nodeJS you can communicate between the rendering engine and the back-end for tasks that a web browser alone wouldn’t allow you to do, like accessing and navigating your local file system for example. Or if the app has a lot of assets and it needs to work offline, you can have the nodeJS backend download the files and encrypt them and have the front-end query the nodeJS and to get the decrypted assets and use the whole web app offline completely with a local database that you may sync with a webserver at some point later if or when internet connectivity is restored.
For most apps its overkill, but Electron and NodeJS can do pretty much anything a native app can do (just slower and while using a LOT more resources than a native app) but can be done entirely by someone experienced in web frontend development and nodeJS.
I had a package that went from Arizona to Tennessee back to Arizona to refund me on Amazon for the package being undeliverable after a week… I live 30 minutes from the warehouse it was shipped from in Arizona. I was able to re-order it after the refund and got the package in my hands 3 hours later.
at which point 3 people’s views were ignored which is why they dissented to the majority opinion. Joe Biden in 2020 had 51.5% of the vote, under your same logic 155 million people as a group decided to elect Joe Biden. Which, while technically true, you’re pushing semantics at that point that minimizes the differences in views and opinions.