Meaning car companies will either need to start making vehicles people can afford or the public pressure for public transportation will massively increase. Win-win.
Meaning car companies will either need to start making vehicles people can afford or the public pressure for public transportation will massively increase. Win-win.
Oh See Paren Left Brace Whatmark
For loads of alternatives, see the Jargon File
Gonna have to disagree with #3 - stopping Vim is not necessary for this. There’s the builtin :!
command.
Don’t forget /auto, for things that get automatically mounted when you first access them (autofs)
Slow down there - you’re making some rather large assumptions about why they have guns. Sure, some people have guns for “self defense” (some for valid reasons, others because racism). Others have them for hunting. Sometimes they’re inherited and have sentimental value.
Edit: Also, kids aren’t the only reason not to keep them loaded. Keeping guns and ammo separately secured introduces enough of a delay to reduce the risk of suicide, for example.
Not a choice he had to make. The NFP parties agreed on a consensus candidate - Lucie Castets.
The opposite headline would have been more true. This ruling DOES disenfranchise those very same voters for state and local elections.
They won’t get to vote on little things like who draws the voting districts, who runs the elections, who certifies (or refuses to certify) the elections. Same for who decides on school book bans, policing priorities, medicaid expansion, or mask bans.
This may be a smaller loss than expected, but painting it as a win is disingenuous.
As a presidential candidate, she’s been perfectly clear that she does not intend to change that policy if elected.
Easy. You either set it up as a nonprofit (still not great in terms of incentives) or, better, as a consumers (or members) cooperative.
Alternatively, you don’t - you modify the incentives. Agency sets a one time, lifetime membership fee. Every failed match they set you up with refunds you a percentage of the balance.
Let’s assume it’s a $1000 membership, 5% refund.
First match works out? They keep the $1000 First match fails? You get $50 back. Second fails? You get another $47.50 (2% of the remaining $950) By match #45, you’ve been refunded 90% and they’re still holding less than $100.
This strongly incentivizes the agency to make the best possible match as quickly as possible. Users aren’t incentivized to join fraudulently because they’ll never get more out than they put in. The agency has no reason to create fake profiles, since a bad match costs them money.
This incentive structure is designed for long-term, monamorous relationships. It fails to account for poly relationships. People using it for short term hook-ups would settle over time into #2 below.
After a certain number of bad matches, it’s not worth it to the agency to put any effort into making a good match. Since they make the most money on early matches, their incentive is to connect the most “desirable” candidates with new members. People with more failed matches will most likely be connected to … other people with more failed matches.
Arguably, this is a feature not a bug. For new members, it means they don’t get spammed by long-time members that are hard to get along with or not actually looking for a long term relationship. For the ones that the early match algorithms didn’t work put for, it means they’ll at least get exposed to different groups of people over time - including others that failed to match for similar reasons as themselves.
This would not do wonders for their reputation and is probably not a good long term strategy for them - at least on the early matches. After a certain number of failures though, it might be an effective way to cut losses.
Pornography is
close tofull sex work
FTFY
Not completely ignoring - I assume that was the swipe about “only engages in genocide reluctantly” was about.
Myself, I agree with you that we haven’t seen much sign of that reluctance.
Nah. This has happened with every major corporate antivirus product. Multiple times. And the top IT people advising on purchasing decisions know this.
The context is that the original version of the keyboard didn’t have the q a and z keys on the right side at all. QMK and similar keyboard firmwares have features that let a key send one code when tapped and a different code when held or pressed, and even another when double tapped.
The keyboard designer made themself a keyboard where ESC, Tab, and Shift keys were set up to send q, a, and z on a quick tap, and got so many comments on multiple videos asking how they could possibly use a keyboard missing three letters that they made another keyboard with the three cockeyed keys added on the right as a joke.
Favorite would be a highly customized zsh.
fizsh (not fish) is what I actually end up using, as I can’t be bothered to copy that config around and retune it for each machine. Gives me the syntactic sugar of zsh with common default options on by default, an OK default prompt, and doesn’t break POSIX assumptions like fish. Also Installs quickly from the package manager without needing to run through the zsh setup each time - unlike oh-my-zsh. And if I still need customization, all the zsh options are still there.
And that assumes no second hand
Having known multiple trans people and heard them talk about the arguments for and against early disclosure: Fear.
They may not be public about their status, and fear exposure to family or coworkers seeing their public profile.
They may fear harassment from transphobes. This could range from DM accusations of pedophilia to religious screeds to doxxing to death threats.
They may be trying to avoid “chasers.” There are some people for whom a trans body (particularly a transfem body) is a fetish, who don’t actually care about the person inside. Plenty of transpeople don’t appreciate that kind of attention.
Fear of rejection. They may believe that nobody will respond if they’re open about not being cis.
Also two less fear-related (and less common) possibilities:
Ideology. To some people, specifying “transman” or “transwoman” reinforces a social distinction they find invalidating or don’t accept. How many profiles have you seen that specify themselves as “cisman” or “ciswoman”? For these people, it’s a way of rejecting cisgender normativity.
Maybe they just aren’t ready to talk about their genitals yet, or have their first conversation be about their surgical plans or history. Not only can get really repetitive having that be the first conversation with every single match, it means they don’t get any of the information they’re looking for about a potential partner until much later in the process and have to invest a lot of their own time up front. Just like you want the salient information you care about early on, so do they.
My apologies - I should have caught that. Fixed.
deleted by creator
The most encouraging thing in the whole talk for me was when he told a roomful of IT folks that they need to join or form Unions and they cheered.