HN user
Software Engineer
Well, it is a git commit hash of the action repo that contains the transpiled/bundled javascript.
Like: https://github.com/actions/checkout/tree/11bd71901bbe5b1630c...
So I'm pretty sure that for the same commit hash, I'll be executing the same content.
Illegal would by a hyperbole. But the noose is tightening a bit.
There are upcoming limits for cash transactions (10K, countries can opt to go lower), and strong requirements for identity verification at 3K or more euros in cash.
See: https://www.deloittelegal.de/dl/en/services/legal/perspectiv...
EDIT: The other side of the coin is that banks are _required_ to give legal residents of a country a basic account that can be used for payments.
Yep, only semi-consistent exception is that Amsterdam Central & Schiphol are usually also announced in english. Including delays related to these stations.
But, for example, Rotterdam or Utrecht are already a lot less likely to be announced in english.
Very close, and I can confirm that as someone who knows "standard Dutch" it is fairly easy to read.
It wouldn't surprise me if it is even easier for someone from the german-dutch border region who is fluent in a local dialect.
The fact that it does not scale into a far far future where more than 0.00000000125% of the humans is in orbit/space does not mean that it is not a good system for today & the upcoming decades.
At least in NL there is no such thing as a 5 day hold on a transfer. Typically these are instant, at worst next business day, and if you use something like "payment request" or "tikkie" all it involves is sending the buyer a link or posting a QR code somewhere to allow them to send money directly, instantly, to your account.
No chance of making errors in the bank nr, you can pre-specify the required amount in the request. No chance of making an error counting out 3K or more in cash notes.
Within the NL banking/payment landscape I'd argue that large cash transactions are more bothersome for everyone involved. (well, unless involving a bank is bothersome to either of the parties, but if that is the case we're probably entering "dubious transaction" or "dubiously sourced money" territory..)
Actually I think the 2x16A should have a different phase per fuse. Otherwise you hit the max of your phase fuse when you put all 4 (assuming a somewhat standard one) heating plates to the max.
In NL, assuming a somewhat modern setup, you have two sets of fuses: one per phase capped at the phase capacity ( commonly 25A), and then another fuse per group (usually: 16A).
(Source: lives in a recently renovated apartment in NL :) ).
Reuse the literal? (postfix with 'n')
The smallest pulley on the bottom betrays how it is done.
The rope is a line along the side closest to the pulley, the other side of it // the wire pattern are made by attaching triangle(-ish?) shapes to it. Only the bend at the smallest pulley is so tight it shows.
Seems to have been some sort of europe wide hiccup then.
Appears to be working again now.
I wonder where in the EU you live then.
My experience in the Netherlands is that voicemail is often on by default with a at least a 'this is the voicemail of <telnr> leave a message after the beeb' greeting in it.
100% agreed.
I try to treat email as any other letter I recieve(1). Meaning that the sender can only expect an instant reply if I know beforehand the mail is coming and urgent. The same way one would rapidly reply to an urgent letter one is expecting, but easily take a day or more to reply to, or even open, a non urgent letter.
If you need to get a hold of someone directly you should use your phone (to call them). If they don't pick up their phone, leave a voicemail or send an sms.
(1) Registration confirmations / new password emails are an obvious exception here.
Makes me think about http://xkcd.com/705/ .
It should be noted that the belief should fall within reason.
So if something about the transaction is completely and obviously fishy, i.e. 'you should have known something was wrong'. Then its impossible to invoke the 'vertrouwensbeginsel'.
Correct.
For instance in the Netherlands if you believe the person selling you the item has the right to sell it to you // perform that transaction, its yours. (The so called 'Vertrouwensbeginsel')
The only way for Alice to get her money back would be by going after the scammer, because he did not do his part of his deal with her(paying).
the blocking of TPB is not an inconistency. The net neutrality law has explicit exceptions for allowing blocking IPs / hostnames / sites via court order.
In this case the judge has decided that TPB mostly facilitates illegal downloading and that therefore a block is allowed.
This is a, technically, correct decision because the net neutrality law gives judges enough room to block websites.