I’m dubious of faster than life travel being for reasons beyond our understanding of physics. If there were a reasonable way to do so 1 race anywhere in the galaxy could have colonized the entire galaxy or at least a substantial portion thereof in only a few million years. If it is possible it seems to suggest that life is so rare that there are very few forms of higher intelligent life in the galaxy at any given time and probably relatively few ever.

Flatpak isn’t going to have every library, cli tool, or even every GUI tool. I think in the end out of date just isn’t worth it.

I’d like to see non-synthetic benchmarks showing real world performance increase in otherwise as close as possible to identical systems

Why would you think soldering would increase performance vs socketed at all much less provide “much higher performance”

If soldered was the only option ans 6 skud was enough for everyone everyone would have to buy very expensive hardware to increase one spec instead of smart people getting to mix match and upgrade.

The sad thing is in the US its extremely likely the fellow would have already been dead after years living on the streets with a cardboard sign.

It’s deeply weird that it rates Staff Punctuality Helpfulness Knowledge and then averages them. Kinda funny that if Dr Ned had a nice nurse he would probably rate higher than House.

Men desire friendship for its own sake but they never stop considering sex in the equation.

This isn’t a good reason

Removed by mod

This is literal fake news. Climate change is certainly a thing. Flowers blooming in Antarctica currently is not. Careful about spreading lies if we clothe the truth(climate change) in lies dumb people will think its all lies.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2023/10/07/false-claim-photo-shows-flowers-blooming-in-antarctica-fact-check/71067338007/

Straight to hell all the way to the bottom of hell with you with nothing to eat until the end of time except mac n raisins.

I don’t know what kind of relationships you’ve had with men

I’m a straight man. If you think I’m being unfair to men I’m not. I’m just capable of looking at myself and others critically and fairly and not bullshitting myself by pretending to cold and saintly virtue. To be without passion or drive is neither virtuous or desirable. I don’t need to research men to understand what it is to be a man especially a young man. I’m sorry you are so confused that you can’t even have this conversation maturely.

You’re talking as if women didn’t have sexual desires and…

I didn’t say they didn’t . I’m not sure why you would think that.

What about asexuals?

The overwhelming majority of men are neither gay nor asexual. My statement is generally correct.

What about men that have respect for their SO and don’t see sex as the final goal?

It’s either the final goal or its on the way there. Young men want sex. Sexual tension is a factor even if neither he nor she sees it as a likely thing. Failing to understand that is liable to lead to failing to apprehend human behavior which often makes no sense if we remove such tension. Men don’t just do things for love they do things for imaginary hypothetical love neither party believes will ever happen. Watch people interact sometime.

Yes. Every man ever views a relationship as a ladder with sex or at the top. Men don’t date without expecting to progress towards sex.

I don’t think the person was saying they would really say that they are saying that they are pointlessly calling out the elephant in the room. As a teenage girl if you aren’t a gargoyle literally every teenage boy is thinking about you sexually because that is the level of hormonal reality. It’s like saying stop talking to me you just have 2 eyes and 2 arms.

Present wisdom is to design something that would work well on mobile first so single column and then make it work on larger screens the easiest way being to keep everything the same except for replacing ☰ with the actual nav menu at a certain width and setting a max width that keeps it looking like stretched out crap.

It also requires you to skip from page to page. You need a page to search to tell you what page to to go search for what you want to watch

You hire competent people to hold the election, you pass laws declaring how the election is to be held, and if people deviate you sue them or hold them accountable. If the people conducting your election are themselves corrupt AND are secure against consequences technology doesn’t in any way save you but it can trivially damn you if its impossible for even competent people to conduct fairly as is trivially true.

You have not addressed a single point I have made. There is reason to believe electronic voting is impossible to secure with any presently forseeable level of technology while paper and pen are trivial to secure in ways that someone with a 6th grade education could have understood 100 years ago.

We vote every few years. In WA state you show your ID and register once or check a checkbox when you register for your license or ID and we give you an ID for $5 if you are poor. Thereafter your ballots come in the mail with a book about candidates positions in their own words. You have at that point weeks to fill it out and either walk a few blocks and drop it in a designated drop box or put it in a mailbox and let your mailman carry it.

Once the election is conducted we know the results in a few days. This is already incredibly easy, secure, and convenient. If there is any question ballots can be manually recounted by hand in a few more.

Your suggestion would be incredibly hard to implement, flawed, and give up either secrecy or security right off the bat. Further since it would rely on inscrutable computer code a single bad actor anywhere in the world could corrupt another-wise clean election with no legal means to go back and switch horses after the election had taken place and was adjudicated.

It is purely a nightmare of an idea implemented to cure the fiction of insecure paper ballots, to serve the specter of technology for technologies sake, and tickle the fancy of people who think they know what a smart person looks like.

Voting electronically is an inevitability given technological progress anyway, especially as we move out into space, so arguing about it isn’t going to do any good.

This is a complete fantasy. Changes in how elections are conducted don’t happen magically because the calendar flips over they are implemented by lawmakers who answer to constituents. Such lawmakers are generally old and are generally VERY conservative about technology and proponents of e-voting like yourself have no good answers to ANY of the inherent flaws of such a measure. Just because you think it will eventually be fit isn’t any reason to implement it now or ever.

Come back when you have an answer to ALL the flaws of e-voting. EG when you have mathematically verifiably secure clients that are verifiably secure even handed to morons which is universally available and usable by all and which can be understood to be secure by even said idiots. Then after that magic trick you can explain why spending Trillions was totally worth it compared to simply electronically tabulating paper ballots and hand counting to verify so we can spend 5 minutes in front of a screen instead of 5 minutes with a pen and know the answer a day sooner.

If you continue to have zero answers to any of the challenges please don’t bother to respond. To reiterate the most serious

• No way to verify AND have voting be anonymous

• Clients are impossible to secure see reflections on trusting trust for the ultimate question

• Possible for a single bad actor to corrupt the process from the outside

• Impossible to audit with 100% certainty because the mechanism to conduct election and verify it rely on the same technology

• Even if 100% secure proving this to the average person is basically impossible as it is well beyond their understanding. This makes it easy to drum up support for election denial fantasies like Trump even in the absence of any evidence.

Please address every single point.

If you vote on your computer how exactly do you keep people’s computer from voting for them? How do you keep them from for instance changing the UI so that the graphic for candidate A actually registers a vote for B?

How do you provide a way for user bob to verify he voted for A without also implicitly providing an easy way for him to verify his vote to someone pressuring him to share how he voted either to reward him for voting how that party pleases or to punish him for voting “incorrectly”.

How do you provide a way to audit the vote without being able to see how people voted? If you do as you must have a database of ids to actual voters how do you keep that from leaking allowing everyone to see how everyone voted? Alternatively maybe it just leaks to whatever party is in control and THEY know how people voted so they can better target people for encouragement or suppression.

Not a single one of these issues is an issue with paper ballots but every one of these is a deal breaker for e-voting and some of them are mathematically unsolvable like it being impossible to have an auditable and secret electronic ballot.

Our current method of voting works and works well. We don’t NEED an answer a few days quicker at the expense of totally destroying actual security and secrecy. This is a dumb idea and we are all dumber for having spent time thinking about it.

There is no reason to believe that paper ballots aren’t securable NOW and no reason to believe we will ever be able to secure electronic voting.

If you want to using cryptography print a challenge on the ballot have them type the number into 90s era flip phone sized device and have them write the response on the ballot. Without understanding anything about crypto they and the government both have half of a key and nobody can fool anyone.

Mathematically impossible to commit fraud based on math that has been given massive attention by a small army of very smart people.