I nixed the Zojirushi because of the PTFE coating, but I love having a non-stick rice cooker. Ended up getting a GreenPan induction rice cooker with an insert that has a ceramic coating to make it nonstick, and I love it.
Squiddlioni
Almost 20 years ago I convinced my high school library to let me install Debian on one of the computer groups. I found the "eject" command, and wrote a script that just invoked it with an argument to close the tray. I named that script "inject". Being high schoolers, my friends and I made scripts to "eject" and "inject", along with various beeps, and named the scripts suggestive and tawdry things. We all had a good giggle setting the systems off on their little routines and walking away.
It's hex numbers that map to ASCII characters: 72 r 75 u 6c l 65 e
Or, in the modern nomenclature, "systemd and friends"
I did this exact thing when contemplating getting a mini pc. I got an external drive and turned my Deck into a Kodi box. It's been great, though it had trouble pushing 4K60, so I have it set up to output 1080. If you're setting up something like Kodi it's worth mentioning that the Deck uses KDE, so you can set window rules to always open the application fullscreen.
Looks like Patricia Tallman, maybe? Lyta from Babylon 5.
Alright, you've convinced me that you're either a disingenuous troll or a genuine fool. Either way, I think this conversation isn't going to be productive. Have a good one.
Since you duplicated your link I'll duplicate my response.
You're linking to a statute of the ICC, The Rome Statute, which provides that inciting or committing genocide is against the ICC's definition of International Law and the ICC will attempt to prosecute accordingly. That statute was not ratified by the United States, so the United States is not bound to uphold that statute. Israel also did not ratify, so is also not bound. That doesn't mean that the ICC can't prosecute Israel or the US under the statute, but it does mean that they are explicitly not responsible for upholding it. Your argument is that the United States is bound by whether the ICC determines genocide has occurred, and that is explicitly not the case according to the statute you linked.
Edit to add: The Rome Statute is the document which established the ICC. As a nation that did not ratify the document, not only is the United States not limited by the ICC determining if genocide occurred or not, the US explicitly rejects the ICC's authority to do so. It means the exact opposite of what you're saying.
You're linking to a statute of the ICC, The Rome Statute, which provides that inciting or committing genocide is against the ICC's definition of International Law and the ICC will attempt to prosecute accordingly. That statute was not ratified by the United States, so the United States is not bound to uphold that statute. Israel also did not ratify, so is also not bound. That doesn't mean that the ICC can't prosecute Israel or the US under the statute, but it does mean that they are explicitly not responsible for upholding it. Your argument is that the United States is bound by whether the ICC determines genocide has occurred, and that is explicitly not the case according to the statute you linked.
Edit to add: The Rome Statute is the document which established the ICC. As a nation that did not ratify the document, not only is the United States not limited by the ICC determining if genocide occurred or not, the US explicitly rejects the ICC's authority to do so. It means the exact opposite of what you're saying.
Which law? Laws have names and titles. They are published publicly and they can be linked to. Please provide a link to the law you are referring to.
It shows an 18+ tag for me too, and the image is blurred. I assume it's because of our host software. I'm on kbin.melroy.org (Mbin), and the original commenter is on moist.catsweat.com (also Mbin).