Yeah, im talking about the 207 BILLION US dollars they need to raise. That’s an absolutely insane amount of currency if it had to be backed by real things and not “Hey buddy, its the U.S.! nothing could go catastrophically wrong and make this all valueless overnight”

deleted by creator

But it’s what the article is comparing to when they say “market prices”. This particular store is based out of California.

At restaurants here you would ask the host/waiter the market price before deciding to order.

So with things like fish that can change day to day are they required to just update it every day? that sounds nice.

so i switched myself and my parents to arch linux over the past 3-4 months and I can say definitively that those specs are fine for CachyOS (an Arch Linux distro). My mom is using my hand-me-down 970 with its lovely “we charged you for 4gb of vram but actually only 3.5 of it is fast haha sucker” and it runs great paired to an old i7 6700k.

I think what we’re seeing is the result of their stock depleting actually. AI has been buying up supply for a while, and I don’t think the consumer markets are able to compete.

I’m always afraid to test ESC during a cutscene because I’ve been burned by games that auto skip cutscenes when you hit ESC. Who does that.

It seems to also include Japan and Russia. Birds flying across oceans still blows my mind.

Well tell canada to come burn the white house down again, maybe that will get the message across

“I would call you a cunt, but you have neither the warmth nor the depth.”

I would imagine the migratory bird treaty act protects them, as they are migratory birds.

They have to infiltrate as many orgs as they can to get around the separation of powers system. But yeah ICE seems particularly bad.

100%

What was ambiguous to you? Also I said that. You must swear or affirm. I personally chose to affirm when I took my oath of enlistment.

Thank you for sharing! Added it to my watch list.

The problem is that the UCMJ puts the onus on the “accuser” to prove that the order was unlawful. It’s an awful lot to ask of a public servant. The whole situation sucks.

Ahh, I was enlisted so I didn’t know that the officer’s oath excludes the “following orders” bit.

It does, however, require you to swear or affirm that you will follow the orders of the President, and the UCMJ puts the onus on the accusing service member to prove that an order is unlawful. It’s a lot to ask of service members that likely only joined because they needed college money.

I, (state name of enlistee), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. (So help me God)."

Edit: Ya’ll are right, I didn’t realize the officer oath excluded the “following orders” bit.

I ___, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God. (Title 5 U.S. Code 3331, an individual, except the President, elected or appointed to an office of honor or profit in the civil service or uniformed services)

It’s pretty fucked up that we’re at the point of relying on service members to decide that an order is unlawful. The Uniform Code of Military Justice doesn’t exactly side with the military members in this instance, but it also doesn’t explicitly prohibit it. Here are some crib notes from the US Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces.

United States v. Sterling, 75 M.J. 407 (a lawful order must relate to military duty, which includes all activities reasonably necessary to accomplish a military mission, or safeguard or promote the morale, discipline, and usefulness of members of a command and directly connected with the maintenance of good order in the service).

(the dictates of a person’s conscience, religion, or personal philosophy cannot justify or excuse the disobedience of an otherwise lawful order).

(an order is presumed to be lawful, and the accused bears the burden of rebutting the presumption).

(to be lawful, an order must (1) have a valid military purpose, and (2) be clear, specific, and narrowly drawn; in addition, the order must not conflict with the statutory or constitutional rights of the person receiving the order).