According to Practical Engineering, tracks are no longer given a gap. The gap causes premature wear and excess noise. Instead, they lay the track under tension, and weld the joins between sections.
There is still a limit on how much heat they can handle before buckling, of course. I just thought that was a neat innovation.
Roughly speaking, there are three different ways people handle when something they enjoy is changed in a way they don't enjoy.
The first simply cut their losses and move on, abandoning the thing. Nothing wrong with that. Things change and it's okay to move on to something else. Companies that are causing harm to their user base should suffer the consequences of their decisions. Do this too much, though, and you may find you abandon your loves too easily.
The second just accept and bear it. Arguably nothing wrong with that as long as you still enjoy it. Just be careful that apathy is not taken for permission for further change.
The third will attempt to fight back in an attempt to preserve it. These are the type who still use Reddit even though they know it's broken. They do not abandon it because to do so is to lose it entirely. They are trying to work within the system to change the system. Nothing wrong with that either, as long as you know when the battle is lost. They obviously don't believe it has been lost yet.
Because the Republicans control Congress, and at this point only an act of Congress can restore it.
It comes down to this: a Republican president would veto any abortion protection law, but a Democratic president would pass it. But the law has to get to his desk first.
But do the terms you signed say they are allowed to change the terms at any time with notice?
"By continuing to use the software, you agree to the new terms..." which is, of course, hogwash, but wouldn't stop them from say "Sorry, the new terms were released and you agreed, so pay up."
We know when you lie. We can see uptime stats.
ZZ
We're not talking about a diseased animal, we're talking about people who are making conscious decisions knowing what the results will be. I can and so absolutely blame people for that.
Your metaphor insinuates that Republicans are unable to control their actions. If that were the case, that's all the more reason to vote and get them out of positions of power.
I'm not saying planned obsolescence isn't a thing (because it is), but that's not the only reason. Making phones smaller, lighter, faster, and more feature-dense all mean that the phone has to be built with tighter manufacturing and operating tolerances. Faster chips are more prone to heat and vibration damage. Higher power requirements means the battery has a larger charge/discharge cycle. And unfortunately, tighter operating tolerances mean that they can fall out of those tolerances much more easily.
They get dropped, shaken, exposed to large environmental temperature swings, charged in wonky ways, exposed to hand oils and other kinds of dirt, and a slew of other evils. Older phones that didn't have such tight tolerances could handle all that better. Old Nokia phones weren't built to be indestructible, they are just such simple phones that there isn't much to break; but there's a reason people don't use them much anymore. You can still get simple feature phones, but the fact remains that they don't sell well, so not many are made, and the ones that are made don't have a lot of time and money invested in them.
Now Voyager is an extremely simple computer, made with technology that has huge tolerances, in an environment that is mostly consistent and known ahead of time so the design can deliberately account for it, had lots of testing, didn't have to take mass production into its design consideration, didn't have to make cost trade-offs, and has a dedicated engineering team to keep it going. It is still impressive that it has lasted this long, but that is more a testament to the incredible work that was and is being put into it than to the technology behind it.
Also QA, issue tracking, and litigation protection. This includes worker protection.
"Those bolts? We have the record right here from the very wrench that tightened them that shows they were tightened to spec on that plane."
I'll be honest with you, I would rather have the ban lists than not. No server is required to use them, and the amount of spam and fraud they filter out is enormous. If someone gets on an IP blocklist because they either can't or don't know how to secure their system, then no one should trust anything from them. Having a way to identify them before they cause a problem is enormously helpful.
There is already a project underway to identify federated servers that just spew spam, and I am all for it.
That poses an interesting question. If they can change the terms, and say that you agree to the changes by continuing to use their software, and they remove the clause allowing you to use the previous agreement, then can you use the previous agreement? It's a bit of a buried shovel problem. Have you agreed to not use a previous agreement by continuing to use the software, or can you stick to the old agreement that lets you use the old agreement?
I would suggest doing so anyway. If they come across a firearm by happenstance then they at least won't panic and will know what to do to be safe.
Roulette is not a positive sum game, though. If you keep playing, eventually you will lose everything to the house.
A positive sum game is where repeated plays will average out to a net gain. The secret is having enough initial capital to keep you alive if your initial gambles don't pan out. People living paycheck to paycheck don't have that
And it took a lot of hard work by a lot of people to adopt new date standards to avoid that problem. Now it's time to adopt new IP standards, and it's going to take a lot of hard work by a lot of people.
Both the student loans and the ACA were actively gutted by Republicans, so they are a perfect example of why getting Republicans out is beneficial to you. You want student loan forgiveness? Get rid of the Republicans that are blocking it. You want single-payer or socialized medicine? Get rid of the Republicans that are blocking it. Both have been introduced by Democrats, both were voted on along party lines and failed due to Republicans.
You are missing my point: you are only hurting yourself and your goals with that strategy. Voting third party only helps Republicans and isn't seen as any kind of protest by anyone who matters. No one says you have to LIKE voting for either of the parties, but only one party is closer to your goals, is actively trying to achieve your goals, and has a chance of actually getting elected so your goals can be achieved.
As someone who works with small businesses, most of whom run their own internal email server, I completely disagree. Yes, it does take some knowledge of DMARC, DKIM, SPF, and DNS, but any well-managed server would have those set up properly anyway. GMail has no issue accepting email from a correctly set up server.
AOL servers, on the other hand, are a massive PITA.
Enforcability is one of the major issues, and why companies try so hard to keep issues like this from the courts.
Because Google is Google and can't keep their own shit straight, there is a bit of confusion. "Google Pay" is going away, but "GPay" is not. You can still use the GPay app for person to person transactions. Google Wallet is used for things like tap-to-pay. Both apps link to the same underlying account.
Nope, you can do that with GPay, which is not the same as Google Pay, which is not the same as Google Wallet, but they all connect to the same account. Yay Google naming 😑.
And what happens in the mean time? Third parties almost always take votes from the Democrats. (That is to say, most of the people who vote third party would have voted Democrat if the third party was not on the ballot.) This gives a huge advantage to the Republican party on close elections. The result is further entrenching of the party that has the larger vested interest in not reforming the system. As a result, any generational movement has no chance of succeeding because the party that directly opposes their goal is always in power.
(To expand: since Democrats lose votes to third parties, they are the ones who would greatly benefit from any kind of ranked choice voting, so they tend to support such reforms. Since Republicans benefit more from FPTP, they tend to oppose such reforms.)
It's all well and good to send a message, but that message will be received by the people who benefit most by ignoring that message.
The better method is to get people in power now who support election reform, get those reforms passed, then third party candidates become viable.
Focusing on the general idea of the last statement of your first paragraph, I completely disagree. I would much rather have a smart evil person in charge over an evil idiot.
A smart evil person will, at the very least, work for their own self-preservation. They can be negotiated with, even reasoned with, because they know that some give and take is required to meet their own goals.
An evil idiot will just break everything and take everyone with them if they don't get what they want simply because they don't understand what it is they are breaking.
I agree. Please read my last sentence.
The statement, however, indicated that they were more annoyed that a politician would change their stance because of poling numbers rather than because it's the right thing to do. My point is that our political system is designed for just that. Politicians have always done what is best for themselves, and expecting different from any politician is naive. Our system is deliberately designed to allow people to put pressure on politicians to (try to) keep them from sacrificing the people they are supposed to govern for their own gain.
I was talking more to the general sentiment of the statement, not to these specific circumstances. Don't blame a politician for bowing to political pressure from the people. That's what they're supposed to do to keep your vote. Allow them to change their policy, even if they don't change their stance. Instead, blame the ones that double-down on harmful decisions because they don't want to appear "weak."
This is all theoretical, of course. Recent elections have shown that too many people are willing to be sacrificed to allow those in charge to appear "strong."
The metrics are the only important part! How else are we supposed to know how good the line is unless we constantly stress test the line by collecting data? Your ability to use the line is not a useful metric, so we don't worry about that.
You know, I'm sure I came across one earlier, but I can't find it now. I did find https://git.sr.ht/~kline/firebee now though, but I don't think that's what I had found before.
Why engage with people you don't agree with? Because they will get you closer to what you want. What you want is voting reform, so vote for the people who are pushing for voter reform:
https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/senate-bill/3313/text
https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/senate-bill/5048
And not just federally, but locally as well:
https://fairvote.org/ranked-choice-voting-legislation/
It's no coincidence that these bills are being introduced by Democrats. If you want these bills passed, they also need support to get them passed. As long as the house and senate are split between the Democrats and Republicans, these bills will not get passed. Simple as.
I'm not saying that voting Democrat will make them reverse course. I'm saying that voting Democrat so they have enough control to get these bills passed will let them complete the course they are already on so that you can get what you want.
"Google Pay" app is going away, but the "GPay" app is not, and you can use that for person to person transactions. Yay Google naming conventions.
I believe the issue isn't one of laws, but enforcement. If a person is physically capable of modifying the code their cars runs and then operating it on a public road, then someone will, illegal or not. That is what puts the lives of others at risk. Hell, I can already imagine websites where you can download untested mods to apply to cars that people will apply with no knowledge of how it works.
Basically, yes, though I think they have special hydraulic pullers, too. I forget the exact name. They have to take special measures if the day is too cold.
Oh, no. A politician doing what the people want in order to save his job.
That's how it's supposed to work. It's better than the usual m.o. where the politician does whatever they want and screw the people. Yes, it would be nice if they did what you want from the get-go, but I will vote for the one that changes their stance due to popular pressure over one that "sticks to their guns" no matter who it's hurting.
(I'm speaking in generalities here. Obviously Biden hasn't changed his stance yet.)
We absolutely can unless he wants go go for an insanity plea, because that's the only way it could be claimed that he is unreasonable enough to not be held accountable. If he can't plead insanity, then he must be a reasonable enough person to be held accountable.
Intent is always hard to prove. Not a lawyer, but I believe this is where the standard of "reasonableness" comes in. Since we can't read Trump's mind, we can't just guess that he thought they were there and wave it away. We have to ask if a reasonable person, under the same circumstances, would have known whether or not those 11k votes existed. Given that he was told by basically everyone with knowledge of the matter that they didn't, we can conclude that he knew the votes were not there, and asking for the votes to be "found" was asking for them to be conjured up.
And now you compare the Republicans to some natural force, as if they are inevitable and inescapable. Gravity has no will, no plan. It just is. Republicans have a will and a plan. Getting mad at the Democrats for not being good enough to stop that is akin to victim blaming. The Republicans should never have gone down this road in the first place.
Do you blame the thief, or do you blame the homeowner for not having better locks? Who do you hold accountable?
Correct. Infant botulism can result from bacteria in raw honey that is otherwise harmless to anyone with a developed immune system.