Is it not weird that jurors can just get out there and start selling their stories after being involved in a trial...? It feels weird.
ChaoticEntropy
joined 2 years ago
Ooo... maybe he's pulling a Steven Seagal.
In swoops the project team to sign a contract with a software vendor without any architectural or Product input, then expects you to implement changes for whatever the software does and however it works. They do not know.
Sure, that's the sort of thing I was alluding to. Not wanting to give a child a more capable system, while still giving them a distraction box.
You can still take issue with a for-profit private company going for an IPO. They are the part that does all of the hardware and software development and the impacts that public trading will have on them will be felt regardless of if the Foundation side remains unchanged.
Can't have a "computer" but can have an entertainment system, I guess.
I don't think I've ever been excited about the IPO of a company I'm a customer of. This trend continues.
The 2nd to last panel gives me serious Frank Reynolds vibes.
If the parent refused medication for a disease that they were willing but unable to vaccinate the child against, that would be baffling. I can't feasibly believe that this isn't a belligerent, poorly informed parent being a reckless arsehole.
They're in it for the thrill.
The fuck are you on/on about...
Because her being forced in to significance remains convenient for the puppeteers with their hand up her arse. They still want everything that they told her to do the first time.