Quasari

If it's a maximum limit to what's safe, you can say anything at or below it is safe. They don't set the maximum at a value that is unsafe for some vehicles.

If it's repeated offenses like the example in the article, it's a little harder to prove it wasn't intentional.

I think the big issue is that joking about school shootings is satirical to bring up how common it is in hopes to change it, while joking about fat people is just to be mean. No one is going to change because you made fun of them, in fact it might make the problem worse as state of mind is a factor in being unhealthy.

You could probably make the same argument about abortion jokes being satirical, but I don't think abortion jokes are made in order to enact social change. It's usually just to be offensive. Satire is usually used to point out how ridiculous something is, the hope is that we as a society will see it and do something about it.

The 1m was confiscated because it was ‘illegal income’, not because he used VPN.

Yes, it’s still shitty that using VPN to access GitHub makes his income illegal

using VPN ... makes his income illegal

Yes, they fine wasn't a flat 1m or whatever, but because he earned it while using a VPN on and off(cuz the great firewall periodically blocks github). None of that would of happened if he didn't use a VPN, so saying that the direct reason he's in trouble isn't why he got punished is less honest.

If your complaint is about how the number was determined, perhaps it would be better as "Chinese programmer ordered to pay entire income(1m yuan) for using Virtual Private Network." Honestly, either headline is fine as long as the details of how that number was chosen is in the article.

While the concept as capitalism didn't exist, there are certainly many facets of the ancient economy that are facets of capitalism.

Most of the economy was privately held, just certain facets of modern capitalism like corporations didn't exist.

So, while you are technically true, you know exactly what they are talking about. We can't 100% relate, but issues like laborers getting a fair wage and the rich exploiting the poor were just as relevant then as now.

They are laying off people not on strike in response to the strike and blaming those on strike for it.

You are probably correct. I don't know if it's true, it's probably more likely it was a way for it not to fail.

I said HTTP mainly because HTML is plaintext because of it. 1.0s main purpose was to manipulate the page. Of course Array objects weren't added til 1.1, when netscape navigator 3.0 released, but it was still mostly 1.0 code. I felt like having everything be coercable to string made it easy for you to just assign it to the document. If you assigned the wrong thing it wouldn't crash.

I originally thought there was a precursor to microsofts XMLHTTP in an earlier version due to the 1997 ECMAScript documentation specifically talking about using it both client and serverside to distribute computations, but it was far more static. So, I'm probably just wrong.

Mainly because JavaScript was designed to work along side HTTP in a browser. Most of its input will be text, so defaulting common behavior to strings makes some sense.

Numbers 5:11-31. Here's a Wikipedia Article about it.