Fair. When I read “no one actually wants to use nukes” I think “no nuclear power’s public geopolitical doctrine involves a nuclear first strike.” But individuals will not necessarily toe that line.
Fair. When I read “no one actually wants to use nukes” I think “no nuclear power’s public geopolitical doctrine involves a nuclear first strike.” But individuals will not necessarily toe that line.
“Tech” is a conflated term. The way I read OP is that they don’t want their cars main user interface to be a smartphone app. Doesn’t mean the car can’t be technologically advanced.
Sure, in the same way volcanologists could mutate to survive being submerged in lava.
I’ve heard the exact same analogy applied to alcohol killing bacteria and it doesn’t convince me
This kid will start pushing this boundary in like 3 weeks (like every kid pushes every damn boundary all the time) and then OP will have a problem on their hands, when the kid decides that OP is toothless.
576 rankine
Personally, my brain manages to filter out anything with a leading underscore (I don’t know the origin offhand, I think some system I worked with at some point used those on files that I knew I didn’t care about). So when coworkers use leading underscores it slows me down a bit.
It does work though
Tangential, but Blind Guardian has one
deleted by creator
It’s not obvious to me how these things are related, could you elaborate?
deleted by creator
I’m lacking context or something because I don’t understand why that is so significant.
Can you please elaborate?
So are you saying that in these cases, where voter fraud was detected and people were charged for it, they took “no risk”? Maybe what you’re really trying to say is that regardless of what the risk of there needs to be zero chance of ineligible voters accidentally voting?
I mean, I think i get your viewpoint. There are people who “slip through the cracks” and do vote when they aren’t eligible, and they shouldn’t. I don’t deny that and I think it would be foolish to deny that any ineligible voter has ever voted.
But at the same time you seem to have a fatalistic view of the systems that are supposed to enforce those rules. Like most laws, deterrence is in the consequences of being caught and convicted. But it seems that’s not enough? And government systems don’t work, so we can’t use those to try to enforce voter eligibility. But how do we vote? Are you really just advocating for voter ID? (which, fwiw, I agree with as I indicated previously) but you also have cast doubt on how well that works. So what would work, in your view?
Is the risk of detection, prosecution, and jail or deportation not enough? I don’t see how you consider that “no risk.”
As a MN resident I was curious so I looked at MN practices
Step 1: Department of Public Safety (or other agency) Application. During the regular course of certain DPS interactions—applying for, replacing, renewing, or changing the address on a driver’s license or state ID card—clients generally supply the information election officials need to register them to vote, including Name, Address (mailing and residential), Date of Birth, Citizenship Status, and Signature Image. The Secretary of State shall determine if other state, tribal, or local government agencies also collect sufficient information to identify eligible citizens for potential automatic voter registration, and may work with them to allow participation in the program. Step 2: Citizenship Filtering. Only clients who provide a document that demonstrates that they are a citizen (which is generally required by the DPS) will be included in AVR. As part of this step, demonstrated non-citizens or people whose citizenship status is unknown are excluded from the AVR workflow. Other agencies may verify citizenship instead through a database check.
See Step 2? I’m not gonna go state by state, but maybe you should before assuming they all register everyone to vote regardless of eligibility.
And yeah, in MN I don’t show my ID at the polls. I think they should change that. But I also won’t be able to vote if they don’t have my name on the list at my polling place, or if someone has already voted under my name. It’s hard for an ineligible voter to vote, and if they do, there’s a high chance of detection.
Do you think there’s a systematic effort to have ineligible voters vote on behalf of registered voters in places that don’t check ID, with a database of registered-but-definitely-not-voting people, and their associated polling place? If so, have you seen any evidence of it?
Is this really a line of reasoning people use? They’ve committed one crime so of course they’ll commit all the crimes?
I see “taxes” a lot but I have never seen someone explain the mechanism by which this is supposed to work.
The only thing I can come up with in my head is that they have capitalized the development costs and are currently depreciating the resulting asset. And that by cancelling/delisting the games it may allow them to immediately depreciate the rest of it, thereby recognizing a large expense for the current tax year, reducing profit, and therefore taxes.
Is that how this is supposed to work?
So you see the issue and have a workaround. Good! But that doesn’t mean that, as you said, “it’s not the cables that are the issue.” Why throw them away if they’re not an issue?
Yeah Tildes is exactly what OP is looking for. It was designed from the start to facilitate discussions and suppress memes
Except…they didn’t keep up that same rate? M2 ij Jan 2020 was about 15.4 trillion, in April 2024 it was 20.9 trillion. So 26% of M2 supply was created since 2020, not 80%, not 95%.