Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)KE
Posts
0
Comments
355
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • The fact that the number of delegates is not exactly proportional to the population of a state has never resulted in a popular vote mismatch eoth the college. It may happen, but it's incredibly unlikely. Every time there's been a mismatch has been because states allocate delegates in a winner take all manner. One of these this is a real problem amd one is a hypothetical problem. Solving the real problem is straightforward, and involes state level action of only a few states. The hypothetical problem is difficult to solve smd requires coordinated effort of many states at ones. You can spend your time solving a hypothetical problem and maybe achieve success in 70 years. Or you you address the real problem and succeed in 20 years.

  • What you're describing has never resulted in the popular vote winner losing the electoral college. The popular vote winner has always lost because states allocate delegates as a winner-take-all system.

  • The real solution is to allocate delegates proportionally to how citizens vote, as is done in Nebraska and a couple other states. This achieves exactly the same purpose as the NPVC but is actually politically tractable.

    No state has any incentive to assign its delgates to a person the citizens of the state didn't vote for. You can do what the NPVC does and make it contingent upon everyone playing along, but that requires everyone to play along and is incredibly tenuous. Even if it ever goes into effect, as soon as states allocate delegates to someone who wasn't the most popular candidate in their state they'll pull it, and the whole thing will fall apart.

    Every state has incentive to allocate its delegates proportionally. That's exactly what people want. They want that more than winner takes all. It doesn't require a huge chuck of states to buy into it amd it isn't tenuous. But it accomplishes the same goal; if states allocate delegates proportionally to how they vote, then the most popular candidate gets the most delegates. If you're in one of the many states that has winner takes all, advocate to do what the few more democratic states have already adopted and are happy with.

  • These network transactions cost between 2 to 4 % for merchants, which is a cost passed to consumers by businesses raising prices. That's a fairly large "inflation", and certainly it seems out of line with the effort they out into it. It's anticompetitive practices that keep it in place.

  • Every state should allocate its delegates proportionally to how its citizens voted. It's the most democratic approach. If just a few (5 to 8 key states) states did this, it would be very unlikely for mismatches between the electoral college and popular vote.

  • If I were to create an assignment, I would make a learning goal the purpose. Learning critical thinking is a good goal, but I wouldn't peg it to Lemmy. If the point is thinking critically about social media sites, then you could offer suggestions of places to look, including Lemmy.

  • I have no evidence of her motives. Campaign donations are public record, and she receives funding from oil companies. The idea that politicians are not swayed by finance is absurdly naive. They don't need to accept that money. And, regardless whether convincing swing voters is a part of the campaign's consideration, it should be clear that influence from corporations is not an influence. Then we could sit here an take them at their word. As it is, it's impossible to think that millions of dollars from oil companies is not affecting the decision to make a complete u turn on supporting fracking.

  • That does sound better doesn't it? If I were a presidential candidate, I would definitely say "We support fracking because we need Pennsylvania" instead of "We support fracking because our campaign has accepted millions of dollars from the oil industry".

  • There are a lot of things that try to replace FancyZones but I don't know that any do well. There are gTiles and Linux PowerToys if you haven't seem those already. I've never searched for alternatives to VS or Teams.

  • I don't know about games. Steam stuff is supposed to work but it's something I do much anymore. I was referring more to casual use, Web browsing, streaming, emails. Ironically Linux now seems more suited than Windows to people who use computers for simple stuff.

  • Permanently Deleted

    Jump
  • It seemed odd to me that a Web site could write to or read from the clipboard without the user approving it. That would be a pretty obvious security and privacy issue. From what I gather, on Chrome sites can write to the clipboard without approval, but they need approval to read. On Firefox and others any access requires permission. Thus this exploit seems limited to Chrome users.

    @SkaveRat pointed out that it doesn't require permission, only interaction. So likely there's a button that's clicked that writes to the clipboard, and most browsers are susceptible to this.

  • I had an old computer and Linux is all that I installed. Not everyone is going to have an extra computer to do that with. However, this computer is more than 10 years old. It was quite good at the time, but it's junk compared to modern ones. Yet, it is more responsive than my very nice modern laptop that's running Windows 10. It's not going to beat a new computer in a race to solve a computational model, but for streaming, browsing, and day-to-day stuff, the lack of bloat means things open quickly and UI elements respond immediately. There is probably a fair number of people with computers they think are useless that would actually work very well with Linux.