+1 for LLWN! Fantastic Chrome extension, especially for language learning. They also have one for YouTube.
However, the language options offered beyond those already provided by Netflix are machine translated. This is good enough to follow along or fill in gaps in your knowledge of the officially subtitled language, but is a subpar representation of the program.
This happens fairly often on German Netflix. When the program's language is neither German nor English, often there are no English subtitles available.
International licensing is obviously complicated, so it's hard to say whose "fault" it is, but my suspicion is that some rights owners will only license the service to use the local language to prevent end users doing digital geo-arbitrage.
For example, the Swedish series "The Bridge" is available on German Netflix, and the trailer has English subtitles, but the actual episodes only offer German subs. AFAICT in the US market this show is only available for streaming as a purchase from Amazon.
I don't agree that "freedom of speech" in the US is only and always equated with the First Amendment. Even if it were, the article is unambiguously concerned with the broader principle, so we should consider the article in that context.
I pushed back on your mention of the distinction mainly due to a growing tendency in which people dismiss concerns about constraints on freedom of speech/expression/opinion by arguing such concerns are only valid insofar as the First Amendment applies. (Not to say you were doing that yourself.) At best it's a tiresome debate tactic; to the extent it's believed, it's a dangerously narrow misapprehension of one of our fundamental social tenets and civil rights.
The definition of free speech is not at all limited to the absence of legal constrictions. Russell addresses this quite directly in "Free Thought…":
»When we speak of anything as “free,” our meaning is not definite unless we can say what it is free from. Whatever or whoever is “free” is not subject to some external compulsion, and to be precise we ought to say what this kind of compulsion is.
…
Legal penalties are, however, in the modern world, the least of the obstacles to freedom of thoughts. The two great obstacles are economic penalties and distortion of evidence. It is clear that thought is not free if the profession of certain opinions makes it impossible to earn a living. It is clear also that thought is not free if all the arguments on one side of a controversy are perpetually presented as attractively as possible, while the arguments on the other side can only be discovered by diligent search.«
It is worthwhile to consider Barlow's legacy--particularly this utopian rhetoric about cyberspace--as examined by Adam Curtis in his 2016 film Hypernormalisation (starting at 40m 35s):-
This seems more limited in scope than the article implies, as it will only use existing fiber. From the announcement: "San Francisco—where we’ll bring service to some apartments, condos, and affordable housing properties, using existing fiber."
Ketosis does not require or imply a severe caloric deficit. It requires a very low carbohydrate intake, but you can eat a maintenance level of calories and be in ketosis.
None of the standard guidance (e.g. [1]) for a weight loss program using a ketogenic diet advocates such a severe deficit. Presuming you're a male of average height, 700 kcal is about a 75% deficit. By all appearances, that was the source of your troubles, not keto per se.
It most certainly is a generalized circumstance that Dutch cyclists don't wear helmets. A 1998 study (1) found that 0.1% of them wore a helmet. Furthermore, search for "Amsterdam cyclist" images (2) and you'll find virtually no helmets and rather few of the head coverings you posit are the cause of reduced helmet usage.
Good question. It probably is not relevant. I presume it's predicated on the notion that olds are generally less tech savvy (and therefore less capable of fairly & reasonably adjudicating technology cases.)
How, exactly, are you harmed by having to share the road safely with non-motor vehicles? Your stated concern over protection applies equally to motorcyclists, yet you seem to have no problem with them.
Your real concern seems to a presumption that you would get to work faster if it weren't for bicyclists. This is very unlikely in reality, and certainly no more than a couple minutes in the worst case. A belief that your right to get to work 2 minutes faster trumps other citizens' entitlement to use and enjoy public rights of way safely is somewhat sociopathic.
I can relate, though. This is what car commuting does to a lot of people. It's dog-eat-dog and me-first out there, with few norms of or need for civility. I've been there. It eats away at you progressively and makes life objectively worse. Explore your options for transit or ride-sharing or find a job you can walk, bike or take transit to. It really makes a huge difference in quality of life.
Never underestimate the left's propensity to defeat themselves from the inside out, to choose a personal sense of moral and/or ideological superiority over coalition building and meaningful progress. Especially in the SF Bay area.
Marriage equality is law in California. So yes, we should be tolerant of those that opposed it and lost. That battle is over here. And there's absolutely no indication that Eich evidenced anti-gay bias at Mozilla, in policy or attitude. (I am not one to stand on it, but there is a difference between being opposed to same-sex marriage as a single issue and being anti-gay.) By all accounts, he has gracefully accepted the result and moved forward. What benefit is there to be had by asking more of him?
"We have been laying the groundwork to remedy this for quite some time...but it is impossible to predict when any particular mile post will be reached."
Impossible to give a date with both high precision & accuracy, maybe, but certainly not impossible to predict. Statements like that would give me pause were I were trusting AgileBits to protect my secrets.
However, the language options offered beyond those already provided by Netflix are machine translated. This is good enough to follow along or fill in gaps in your knowledge of the officially subtitled language, but is a subpar representation of the program.