I bought something like this from Samsung. Honestly, was an oversight that I only started regretting when I learned that the controls to change the input source suck in a major way (not possible to switch source via a provided remote, source-switching buttons are very inconveniently placed at the bottom of the monitor and sometimes enter full settings instead of the source-switch menu). Lesson learned the hard way. And yeah, I keep the wifi disabled on that thing, except when occasionally checking for updates in the hopes that they fixed that shit via a software update.
I forgot to add that the device doesn't seem to support DDC/CI, so input-switching via software is also out the window (TBH, that is what I hope they fix in the future).
Italy has a reputation for its slowly moving bureaucratic machine though, so the issue may be more complex than just looking at the price. This offer would be more attractive for me if it didn't potentially come with hidden strings attached (do you need to work with an institution tasked with preserving old buildings? what are the permitting requirements? will it take ages to get approval to do anything?). People in Italy probably know answers to those questions, but as a foreigner slowly thinking about a place in Europe to settle in, those would be things that'd made me think twice about taking up that offer.
Current system theoretically allows for the presidency to be won even though the candidate got less than 30% of the popular vote. In my opinion the existence of such an edge case makes it undefendable.
What do you mean here by "incentivizes fraud"? Lying on the campaign trail is not fraud. In any case, the same argument about fraud still applies, you just need to target swing states.
Every system has edge cases. You can't defend the possibility of millions of people having zero representation just because they did not vote either.
I think it's obvious what fraud I'm talking about: fraudulent votes. It stands to reason that a large state can generate more fraudulent votes than a small state can generate legitimately. Fraud is always an issue but it is more of an issue with popular vote because who can question extremely high voter turnout?
Can you name edge cases of popular vote system that electoral college system does not also have?
You do realize that just because the popular vote is national does not mean that all the votes would be dumped at a desert in New Mexico and then tallied? Vote tally would still happen at the level of polling places and then aggregated - exactly how it's done in the electoral college system now. The only difference would be an introduction of one more level of aggregation (from state to nationwide). You could still detect fraud at earlier stages.
I did already name an edge case of popular vote that the electoral college system doesn't have (sorry, in another thread). Actually more than one. If a state has low turnout for any reason then their contribution to the election is proportionally diminished with popular voting. That DOES NOT happen with EC, because the weight of the state is decided by its population.
>You do realize that just because the popular vote is national does not mean that all the votes would be dumped at a desert in New Mexico and then tallied? Vote tally would still happen at the level of polling places and then aggregated - exactly how it's done in the electoral college system now.
I don't trust the vote counting systems we have now. We have unverified ballots by mail, voting without ID, and unaccountable voting machines. If you look into it you'll find that it is surprisingly easy to harvest votes from invalids at nursing homes, homeless people, and dead people. There is no way for me to to make sure my own vote is counted and no illegitimate ones are counted. Compare our elections that are increasingly uncertain for weeks or months to other countries like Argentina where everyone is required to vote and the result is known the next day.
Yeah, people that don't care enough to vote should not be weighted in, that's the whole point. Weighing them in does not mean they actually get represented. The only problem is people that want to vote but can't are going to be disenfranchised, but that is true in both systems and should be addressed separately. This is what is actually exploitable with EC - suppress the vote of a specific population within a state and you're going to kill 2 birds with 1 stone as they not only didn't vote against you, but they also will be weighted in towards you on the national scale.
Your entire point about fraud does not get worse with popular vote system so it's irrelevant here.
Does Argentina get automatic recounts? How many people are covered by a single polling station in Argentina? How many people count the votes within a single polling station? Those are all the things that'll affect how quickly the results are known, not how the votes get aggregated later. And EC can slow things down significantly more than popular vote (one slower state could be deciding factor for EC even though nationwide results would already be known because the uncertainty is too small to matter on national scale; Bush v. Gore).
That does not feel like burning the money, more like propping up the private sector (naively, government's deficit is going to be private sector's surplus if you don't actually reduce the amount of money in circulation).
100% this. This reminds me of what my SO says: if you have to work, you are not in the upper class. I don't think I agree with this statement fully (I personally think that top decile by income is already upper class), but I feel like I'm becoming more open to re-evaluating my opinion...
Most upper class work. They work different jobs, but they are generally not sitting around retired. They might or might not get a paycheck, but they are working. (if you own a restaurant you will probably pay yourself minimum wage when you do work - dishwashers start at double that - talk to your accountant but this is often the best legal way to handle your hours that are trackable) Steve Job's was famous for taking a salary of $1/year - he clearly was working and upper class.
Most middle class don't have to work either - they are just not willing to accept the lifestyle that forces. Even poor people could find enough savings by 30 to not work if they really want to live that lifestyle. (I don't blame anyone for not wanting to live like that)
> they are just not willing to accept the lifestyle that forces
Jeez the pedantry around here.
Let me spell it out: Upper class people don't have to work to maintain their existing lifestyle. Steve Jobs could have continued wearing black turtlenecks and paying fines for parking his Mercedes in handicapped spots for the rest of his life, without doing a lick of work. That he didn't is a credit to his work ethic and passion for the work.
Out of curiosity, how much money do you think is needed to survive ~55 years ("savings by 30" + life expectancy around 85ish = 55yrs) without working? Also, please spell out biggest assumptions you're making.
Eat rice and beans $50/month. Live in a $200 tent with a warm sleeping bag replace every 10 years. every year you get $100 for clothing at goodwill (walmart for underware) No other possessions. don't get sick as you don't have health care, but you should on average live to 70 or so [5-10 years less than average with health care], assuming you are not unlucky. so about $70/ month.
I wouldn't want to live like that and I wouldn't wish it on even the most undeserable (life without parole prisoneers). you could do it. Some do it for a month or two in college as they see the world - but they go back to a more normal life and just fondly tell stories.
You may want to revise the life expectancy estimate on a rice+beans diet, scurvy is a thing and based on my googling you would not get enough vit. C. I'm probably missing some other disease too, so "don't get sick" is probably also out the window on this diet.
One can of beans is ~400kcal and costs ~$1.30+tax in my closest QFC, so you need around $4 per day just for beans (3 cans). 5lb bag of rice (50 servings, 160kcal per serving) is $5.50, & you need 5 servings per day to reach 2000kcal, so +55¢. That's $135/mo just for rice and beans, and I have not checked if that satisfies daily protein intake needs.
Where will you set up your tent without getting arrested? Needs to be walkable from a Goodwill, otherwise you need transport once a year. How are you cooking the rice? Where are you getting the potable water from?
Decent sleeping bag is another $100.
Even your unserious response is underestimating the amount of money required.
Not if you have to pay to set up your tent legally, which you conveniently forgot to respond to. The only place I found so far that is free is BLM dispersed camping, but they allow only 14 consecutive days in 28 day period, and those places are far from civilization, so buying those beans is going to be a challenge.
Sorry, but with such an outrageously low estimate (US poverty line is $15k a year), you have to put in a bit more effort and show some receipts.
Footnote in the article provides the following explanation:
"The standard imposes this limitation because the implementation may need to add default function parameters, template default parameters, or overloads in order to accomplish the various requirements of the standard."
What are your thoughts on hentai then? It's all made up after all.
Meta-point is that different people get off on different things, so using seemingly objective language ("the whole point of A is B") to describe something extremely subjective is imo counterproductive.
How was your experience from the time of pandemic lockdowns? I don't know about you, but I was pacing around the house like a caged animal after first couple weeks, and I was free to leave the premises and e.g. go for a hike anytime I wanted.
Then you should have just left the premises to go for that hike or a walk in some park at least. There was no moral or practical reason or, as you mention, legal reason not to. The virus wasn't/isn't a demon that hangs around in the open air for days. If you avoided others in open spaces, you'd have put no one at risk. What you describe sounds like some strange obedience fetishism.
Nowhere did I write that I didn't go out for a walk/hike on my own. I limited my activities among other people to the level I deemed safe and moved the rest of my social activities to the Internet, but just that was sufficient to feel caged. It made me recalibrate my opinion on what "1 year in prison" must be like.
It was ok, but I was with people. I'm sure prison is good or bad depending on who you get locked up with. And, given the selection process, maybe those odds aren't great.
Time passes quickly when there's no stimulation. I feel two years would go by in the blink of an eye. In a way, maybe that itself is the punishment.
"The thickness of oil required to take the life out of the camphor movements lies between one and two millionths of a millimetre, and may be estimated with some precision at 1’6 micromillimetre."
Looks like a primary guess to me, even if the table lists more data points.
