Volpe

27 ms·

301.
by Volpe 14y ago
So non-native speakers should be dismissed?
302.
by Volpe 14y ago
Also, It would depend on what kind of evidence China has on US hacking China.
303.
by Volpe 14y ago
I wasn't suggesting that... Only that Vietnam and South Korean War were anything but "stabilising" and their approach could have been different. But I like your attempt at hyperbole.
304.
by Volpe 14y ago
> That's just totally ridiculous. You believe that this view of North Korean belligerence is due to propaganda. That isn't what I said. I said that they are no MORE belligerent than the US, I wasn't saying they are not belligerent. P
305.
by Volpe 14y ago
Okay, I'll qualify that with: and its borders are disputed.
306.
by Volpe 14y ago
The US are the only country to have used nukes (in war) They use to have nukes in sk, now they don't, but can still strike nk anyway. So that leaves the hyperbole that NK and SK could negotiate a peace if the US withdrew. Why don't you thi
307.
by Volpe 14y ago
Really, you don't think the US is a destabilising element in Asia? They were involved in 2 wars that had no relevance to US security, purely for ideological reasons... They are still involved in one of those wars... They lost the other one.
308.
by Volpe 14y ago
You'll note my use of the word "likely". Happy to be refuted.
309.
by Volpe 14y ago
That's misrepresenting US to suit US propaganda. The US leveled two countries in order to assassinate someone in a third country. It wasn't held accountable at all. You are right, morally they are not on the same level, but not the way you
310.
by Volpe 14y ago
Maybe you should just go google about the nazis, they invaded half the world and killed 10s of millions of people. Talk about Godwin-ing a discussion.
311.
by Volpe 14y ago
I was talking politically... They are not too different. Ideologically opposed nations that were once a single nation (to over simplify a bit)
312.
by Volpe 14y ago
But we're safe right? Those defence satellites worked?
313.
by Volpe 14y ago
The government is stable... Please show me evidence to refute that. How many citizens are in prison in the US does that make it unstable? What a strange connection to make... Yes the country is a mess, but the government is stable... They a
314.
by Volpe 14y ago
NK v SK conflict is not that different to India v Pakistan. The difference is... there are US troops sitting on the border of NK/SK, so agression between those to parties involves the US. So who is the destabilising force in the region?
315.
by Volpe 14y ago
> Your comment conveys another implication that UN is supposed to be impartial to issues between member countries. It is isn't it? Otherwise it isn't a union... > That cannot explain veto power of five permanent members of UN secur
316.
by Volpe 14y ago
> You seem to think having nuclear weapons is some sort of national right or something. No, I don't think that. > Nobody wants an unstable, belligerent, nasty dictatorship to have the ability to nuke other countries. The US opened t
317.
by Volpe 14y ago
Right, so it makes sense that the US would be worried... not why the UN should sanction them. I'm referring to the inconsistency. The implication of what you are saying is: "The UN only intervenes when it suits the US". To me that makes m
318.
by Volpe 14y ago
Yes, they are severe. my 'some' wasn't refering to the severity of the issues. Regardless this has nothing to do with whether sanctions should be applied for testing weapons.
319.
by Volpe 14y ago
Erm... you mean like Pakistan did?
320.
by Volpe 14y ago
Your comment is an example of why this kind of propaganda works. People start hating another country they've (likely) never been to, and likely have no understanding of their motives.
321.
by Volpe 14y ago
Why is it wrong that NK do Nuclear testing? I agree NK has some human rights issues, that should be addressed, but testing nuclear weapons is no different to Pakistan or India, and there are no sanctions against them.
322.
by Volpe 14y ago
Read the article. It states you have to explicitly sign to have your data logged, and they have it on by default for media reviews due to some incident with Top Gear.
323.
by Volpe 14y ago
As I understand it, being branded a felon in the U.S is a big deal... you essentially lose a bunch of 'rights' that you have as a citizen. This dominos on to making it harder to find jobs, places to live, loans... etc. You could argue some
324.
by Volpe 14y ago
well, no... you'd drip sweat.
325.
by Volpe 14y ago
Erm... I think you are just not a designer yourself and don't understand the difference custom fonts can make to the 'readability' and overall feel of a website. Using custom fonts for headlines and then a 'helvetica' variant to mix in on c
326.
by Volpe 14y ago
I'm not conflating anything, I'm pointing our privacy was just a vehicle that was being used to deliver a message, and that message is valid: "If you don't want gmail splashing ads all over your messages, switch to outlook." No need to be a
327.
by Volpe 14y ago
custom fonts shouldn't be used for body copy? Shouldn't technology be bending to our will? Not our will to technology?
328.
by Volpe 14y ago
> If you don't want it, don't use Gmail. I'm pretty sure that is exactly the point Microsoft are making with this campaign. They are using the fact you can't opt out of a "feature" as an excuse to opt out of a "product". They are levera
329.
by Volpe 14y ago
irony...
330.
by Volpe 14y ago
That is focusing on your advantage, the message ends with "Why outlook.com is better"

More ›