Maybe it's just my lemmy app (jerboa ftw) but I like how your post got read as a markdown list item, like this is the 27th thing you had to say on the topic but the other 26 got deleted.

Interestingly, basically no one has any checks on sheriffs. We can "vote them out" but that's extremely difficult, and sheriffs can interfere with they're competitors with no consequences.

I get what you're saying, but it honestly sounds like kool aid drinking. "Surge" vs "dynamic" might be different in terms of back end calculation, but the external appearance is the same.

Again, you have to remember that prices are still maxed out. Think about it this way: if you normally wear 2000 calories a day, and every now and then you have an extra donut or burger and that puts you at 2500, that's only balanced if, on other days, you have only 1500 calories. If the only exceptions are in the "plus" direction, the average is up.

Dynamic pricing is done in retail already and no one bats an eye at it.

Don't mistake prior not knowing about it for people saying they think it's ok. If this is happening in retail, and people knew, they wouldn't be happy.

Surge pricing is toxic and needs to stop.

I'm not sure I understand the problem. Is the problem that they're not using matrix? Or do you prefer that it was still all on IRC? I don't hate IRC but it's definitely way less user friendly.

Obviously you're right. That said, in the universe of Trump's fiction, it tracks (kind of). If the machines were rigged and if the election was stolen, then several things logically follow:

1. Trump's actions to retain power were not only justified, but also imperative, and very much within the scope of his duties as president, since he's the executive branch; while DOJ might normally handle the day to day, a stolen election is a big deal, and it makes sense he would step in. And therefore he would be immune to prosecution for any "law breaking."

2. If you're a superhero cop - not an actual, fat ass fascist bastard cop we have irl, but the kind of cop TV says is what cops are like, you don't have time for subpoenas and warrants -- you break down the doors and you grab the evidence. Maybe you're not even sure if there's a crime, but you can't risk it -- and if you're president, you can argue there's room for "better to ask for forgiveness than permission" in that context.

3. If you're not sure whether there's been a crime but there's a massive time pressure and extremely high stakes (as would be the case if the election was actually stolen), you would need to act as if there was a crime, since the consequences if there isn't pale in comparison to the consequences if there is. So: if you are the head of the executive branch, and you are concerned that there's a crime of that magnitude, you could easily make the case that you are duty bound to investigate.

4. So, the situation is this: if you investigate, and there's a crime, you've saved the world; if you investigate and there is no crime, then you will go to jail for it. That's a bit unfair -- so, a warning that, if you investigate this and there's no crime, then you're going to jail, might've been called for.

So -- if Trump was able to produce even a single piece of evidence to support his claims, the fiction he's established on top of them is arguable, and, if you start to look at his cases through that lens, his absurd motions and arguments kind of make sense.

This is digging into pretty legal territory and copyright law is (arguably unnecessarily) complex -- but licenses are things that you use to let people use your patents. I think that's what they were initially and mainly; but then software and the copyleft movements kind of detached the concepts of licenses and patents.

The fediverse protocols could definitely be patented and licensed, but, like you said (or implied, really), that's... sketchy af. Like, anyone we could trust to patent it would probably refuse to do it -- Linux Torvalds would probably curse me out for even suggesting it, and the lecture rms gave me would probably never end.

You seem very upset about this. I doubt this will help since it doesn't seem like your reasoning is influenced by logic, but, the fact that there are fraudulent doctors and diagnoses doesn't mean science isn't real.

Oh you mean the IBM Enterprise Linux upstream? Is that ok to use on a desktop computer?

(I'm just kidding, Fedora's great.)

I was under the impression Chrome doesn't let you use ad blockers anymore? idk I use ~~arch~~ firefox btw

I feel like the generally accepted wisdom on the issue is that quitting smoking is hard. Whichever one works for you is the best one.

For me, "harm reduction" was just a convenient excuse for not really trying... And, I eventually decided, again, this is my experience, not advice, but, like, eventually, every method of quitting will eventually be cold turkey, so I just went for it.

Personally I found the nicotine addiction is overstated. I never had any trouble making it through 8 hours of sleep without a cigarette, so my claim that I needed one every hour or two kinda seemed like bullshit. Also, if I was so hung up on nicotine addiction - nicotine starts declining in your system almost immediately, so, if I was smoking for 5 minutes of every hour, I was spending 55 minutes of every hour in nicotine withdrawal. That's.. dumb. That's a dumb way to live.

(I was also a heroin addict from when I was a teenager until my late 20s - and - at least heroin lasts a while. Nicotine is a garbage drug.)

In the end, smoking is a habit - and there's not much in the way of shortcuts to changing your habits - and it's especially hard when your enjoy it. There are better techniques and worse techniques, but no cure.

For me, when me and my wife added tiny little people to the world, I realized that they would prefer me to be alive, and I didn't want to make them sad, so I quit.

Really, my ess cue ell? I say mysequel 100% of the time. But I'm trying to get into the Primagen's My Squeal pronunciation

It seems like you have a problem with the wild speculation, not the acronym. Which is legit, people don't need to have opinions on every single thing they think about, and they certainly don't need to share them. But it kinda seems like they're going to anyway. And, in that case, what's better, wild speculation or wild speculation that admits it?