One of the two involved organisations, "Centre for the Enforcement of Human Rights International (CEHRI)", is an Austrian association based in Vienna.
napoleonsdumbcousin
joined 1 year ago
Coffeehouses have been around since the 15th/16th century in the Ottoman Empire.
Sadly they have not issued them yet. The prosecutor recently requested them and the court has yet to decide.
urning off GPS and LTE ruins 90% of the features in the car.
The main purpose of a car is "driving", which you can do. Unless you cannot start a Tesla without LTE, which would be very stupid.
You can also always strip a car for parts. Teslas are not magically safe from that.
This game never was verified. It was playable despite being unsupported, which it is not anymore.
if they think it benefits them and if they think they can get away with it.
Thats exactly my point. If everybody just "forgives" them right away, then they got away with trying. Then they have no reason not to try a different approach later. What would be needed for this cycle to stop is to actually show them that it does not benefit them and they have a lasting negative effect on their business just for trying.
And in a mid-budget game like this, player goodwill is a part of the numbers. This is not (yet?) a big brand like CoD or something that people will buy and support no matter what. They have to keep their community together or they do not have a business.
(That does not mean that people cannot review however they want of course, I am just putting my thoughts out there.)
I disagree.
If all people would immediately reward them with a positive review after backpedaling, then their learned lesson would be "just try it out, worst case we can backpedal". By leaving up a negative review, they might realize that they should not even try it if they want to keep the goodwill.
I will leave my negative review standing, although I also have other points of criticism.
The story of the Tree That Owns Itself is widely known and is almost always presented as fact. Only one person—the anonymous author of "Deeded to Itself"—has ever claimed to have seen Jackson's deed to the tree. Most writers acknowledge that the deed is lost or no longer exists—if in fact it ever did exist. Such a deed would have no legal effect. Under common law, the recipient of a piece of property must have the legal capacity to receive it, and the property must be delivered to—and accepted by—the recipient.[6] Both are impossible for a tree to do, as it isn't a legal person.
[...]
"However defective this title may be in law, the public recognized it."[11] In that spirit, it is the stated position of the Athens-Clarke County Unified Government that the tree, in spite of the law, does indeed own itself.[12] It is the policy of the city of Athens to maintain it as a public street tree.[13]
[...]
Although the story of the Tree That Owns Itself is more legend than history, the tree has become, along with the University Arch and the Double-Barreled Cannon, one of the most recognized and well-loved symbols of Athens.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tree_That_Owns_Itself
In reality, the tree is not protected by law, but by the will of the people. Kind of symbolic if you ask me.
I think most country's police would be pulling out warrants to search your house when you're advocating for violent terrorism.
I would certainly hope so
First: fuck Israel's Genocide in Gaza.
Second: this article is extremely biased, to the point that it is basically misinformation. The people they are talking about are Yasemin Acar and Salah Said, infamous protesters in Berlin. Here is a translated part of a german newspaper, video evidence is linked in the article:
Speaking at a demonstration in January, she literally threatened: "If violence is the only option, we will use it." She then celebrated the attacks by the Islamist Houthi militia: "Yemen, Yemen we are proud, turn another ship around."
Of course the police is searching the homes of people that threaten violence themselves and encourage terrorist attacks on civilian ships.
view more: next ›
Your comment is only technically correct, so I am gonna add to that:
Alfred Nobel did invent dynamite and was also a believer in mutually assured destruction, BUT: those two facts are not directly connected.
Dynamite in itself was not intended for warfare, but for mining. It was still relatively unstable so not really suited for warfare. (TNT, which came around 1900, solved that problem.)
Nobel did invent smokeless powder for warfare and he transformed Bofors into an arms manufacturing company though.
https://www.nobelprize.org/alfred-nobel/alfred-nobels-thoughts-about-war-and-peace/