Senator Sanders has some wise words about this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vf5MThSniiY

Yeah, money is a social construct; it’s really just numbers in computers. We can redefine capital to be numbers that actually make sense … uh, theoretically.

neither. 0.0% chance for either candidate.

This level of cynicism is unwarranted. Sure it might be low, but for Harris it’s at least 0.1%.

Weird to use an obscure source to report that Axios (a reasonably well known web presence) reported about this. A moment’s search turned up the original Axios article.

I hear you, but please still get out and vote for Harris/Walz this November. This is about keeping the infrastructure of representative democracy in place so we will be able to work towards those needed changes. If Trump wins, all that is going away, and those of us guilty of thought crimes such as believing in global warming will end up in prison at best.

So, giving you what I called the choice dialog. That makes sense. Intent intercept wouldn’t help then, it would just give you one more basically irrelevant choice to do all the things (although it’s useful for developers).

Is it actually opening up the Sprinkler app for all those other purposes, or giving you a choice dialog? If it’s actually opening up the app, maybe installing Intent Intercept would at least make it a choice dialog, as it also tries to open everything (just to show information about the request; it’s a dev tool).

https://xkcd.com/1367/

You’ve always got to show up for those school board elections now. Every. Single. Time.

No, Aileen Cannon is presiding over the case about retaining secret documents in Florida (and IIRC, she’s already dismissed it and that decision is being appealed). This “conspired to overthrow the government” case is in Washington DC and is presided over by U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan, who is treating it seriously.

I get the reference from the title-- that’s kind of clever. Too bad it’s paywalled; I guess I won’t get to read it.

I don’t often downvote comments, as I think that often that’s just a censorious way to say “I disagree”. But this comment so obviously adds nothing of value to the conversation, and indeed poisons it with petty grievance. So I feel totally justified in downvoting this comment.

Exactly. Because it’s not any better (“plenty horrible as it stands” as I put it in my original comment), the deceptive headline is not only unnecessary, but also taints the entire story with falsehood when it should not be so degraded.

Ok, the title comes from the linked article, but they aren’t banned from “mentioning anatomy”. They are banned from showing pictures of reproductive organs.

I don’t know why some people seem compelled to take a story that’s plenty horrible as it stands and give it a deceptive headline… seems like I’m seeing more of that recently. Are we really in a post-truth era?

You could have actually done the thing and shared the link instead of that annoying animated GIF that won’t stop. We get it, you’re so clever.

Here’s the link you couldn’t be arsed to provide: https://archive.ph/gPlLT

EDIT: Looks like it doesn’t get past the paywall after all. Oh well, the more you know …

It’s a parabola or hyperbola. Of course, it’s not technically an “orbit” since it isn’t closed; the Wikipedia pages are called Parabolic trajectory and Hyperbolic trajectory.

The only assumption he’s making is that, if you refer to yourself as “pro-life”, you mean what everyone else in America who calls themselves “pro-life” means. It’s a reasonable assumption, I mean, that’s the way words work.

Sounds like you better not vote then.

Note: I’m only giving you this special advice, everyone else definitely should vote.

Here: https://xkcd.com/503/

John Oliver convinced me that Jill Stein is a dumbfuck back in 2016: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k3O01EfM5fU