I hope he does run: for inmate trustee of the month.

There has been a lot of coverage about how state Republican organizations have been taken over by MAGA. The result has been incompetence, mismanagement, and an alienation from the "elites" who we used to call the "donor class".

I'm too old to be optimistic, but Trump sure looks like the leader of a loosing campaign.

Meanwhile, Putin is going to visit Twitter (formally X) to thank all the people who are helping his war effort.

Too many innocents go to jail behind false arson accusations. You never know if the building was into it at the time, but then felt ashamed later and cried arson. And then it's just your word against the fire investigators. Just the accusation can destroy your reputation, no trial or nothing.

There is no amount of training, experience, or ability that can prevent gun accidents.

Other activities that are life/death like surgery or airline piloting use checklists because they know that training, experience, and ability are not enough. Making rules like "a gun is always loaded" or "careful where you point that thing", are not sufficient because instead of solving human fallibility, they ignore it.

I'd go further and say that these "rules" are more mantra than procedure. A kind of protection spell that's spoken more than it's followed. These spells are cast in a flurry every time someone has an accident. Not to reinforce the lesson, but to reassure that we're not going to get hurt.

Is there a way to learn this power?

This isn't a rule. Some bureaucrat was mistaken.

The same thing happened to another girl a couple weeks ago.

Why does this article make the US sound like a battered wife in the situation? We'll just go along and hope for the best!

This isn't a partizan issue, just like immigration, Democrats are fucking horrible on homelessness too.

The problem with this "econ101" thinking is that it insists that the whole system runs on the choices of actors in a deterministic system.

Keanu must really believe in this stuff because we know he's no good at pretending.

If you read the article, this is minor plagiarism. Four sections, of about 2 paragraphs each have been shown to be copied. However, the content copied were factual: dates and definitions, not ideas or the thesis. It's reasonable that all of this is explained by the bad sourcing of an ameture author.