usufruct
So... reading the Wikipedia article on it for more info, it doesn't seem to place any limits on what you can own. It simply lets you makes allowances for others to use something of yours. It doesn't seem to mention forfeiting unused property in the least.
It's basically just being a landlord, but with other stuff, no? I'm not following how this isn't corruptible unless there's something I'm missing.
Me too. It's faster than texting and gives you a whole lot of missing context.
I appreciate it! I mod !actual_discussion@lemmy.ca if you'd ever care to join us.
We try to disagree in good faith and not attack each other there.
I misused a term, my apologies (I'm Canadian and my terminology was a little off). I was using Democratic Primaries in place of whatever the Democrats have as a candidate debate session like this was for the Republicans. If you let me know what it's called, I'll correct my post! Regardless of the name, did they have a fact checker there at that event?
Again, I don't believe the candidates have a chance against Trump UNLESS he is rejected as a candidate by enough states or other lawsuits have results that prevent him from running. If those do occur, then it will have been useful because it's not like the Republicans are just going to not field a candidate. Also as I mentioned, if a candidate has a strong base that really believes in them, sometimes they won't vote for the person that beat "their" candidate, thus splitting the vote. This is a good thing from the opposite side.
It's also a good thing because they're abiding by the Equal-Time Rule (essentially an updated version of the Fairness Doctrine).
Was there a fact-checker at the last Democratic primaries? If not, then why would there be a double standard?
And I think you may be mistaken about what these debates exist to do. They aren't there to "check facts" and make sure everyone only has correct opinions (which I would argue that even some on Democratic side do not have). They are there to show what the candidates believe, how they behave, and how they respond to pressure. They show how they act in front of a crowd, and how they respond later to missteps during the debates. In effect, they show a good public face for judging a politician.
The simple fact is that you aren't going to have every fact going into, say, a negotiation with China - you have to think on your feet.
That might be what you wish they are learning, but I assure you that's not the case. There may be more of those Highway blocking protests that you're thinking about, but you're simply hearing about them spread across many, many locations. They are not occurring frequently enough in one location to warrant a change to the way people commute. I have never even heard of anybody linking those two points together before.
If they're blocking a highway, it's not like you can just see the protest up ahead and turn off instead instead of choosing to be stuck. Often they are held in the middle of long stretches where they will trap as man cars as they are able on both sides.
And the lesson most people learned from COVID was that there was absolutely no reason why we couldn't work from home. Although I could potentially see a link between working from home and, when the time comes to replace the infrastructure, replacing it with something more environmentally sane... but they'd have to convince big business owners to not force people to come into work for no reason, and good luck with that.
It seems like there's a lot of wishful thinking to get from "those protesters are blocking this street" to "man, we should completely redo the entire infrastructure of North America because of these protests."
Ah! A few ways to do things:
If you have questions, ask away!
But manually looping any part of it inside the video which you can do past the first 2 minutes would still not be an ad. Also, who doesn't use an ad blocker on YouTube? All of those problems that you listed have incredibly easy solutions that you can execute with zero training.
And realistically if they are looking for profit (and they absolutely are) I still see no reason why they would keep these up. The benefits are absolutely minimal at best and the drawbacks are quite large.
Sometimes they are, if it's just audio and a static image. Some of them definitely are not that though. The ones with visualizers or full music videos or the like are not nearly as compressible.
So to combat use cases like this, why not just add a repeat option? There would be no break if it cached the beginning again.
Also just download the audio you want and loop it yourself. It would take roughly 2 minutes and use way less bandwidth.
My liver may be flower-scented, but I tend to not paint situations in broad-stoke terms like "woke" that are used to dismiss valid arguments.
You can't disprove a label (especially a vague one that someone else applies to you), however you can very much disprove points.
So you missed out on the series finale where it's a 45-minute flashback to Bigfoot barebacking Scully?
Edit: I apologize for the weird boner I just gave someone.