Cool, one state. Certainly not federally, which just means you can go to another state and have it not tracked. It's certainly not tracked in SC where I live, sure that's across the country but pick a border state of California and have it not be a tracked sale. We're back to the problem.
I can promise they are VERY compatible with Linux, HPC systems use their GPUs, in a completely Linux environment. They are fantastic GPUs to use in a Linux environment performance wise.
So what? Add another question to the background check "are you a Nazi?" because the "are you a terrorist?" question should already take care of that one, so it seems to be working really well.
What about how I can just gift a gun to a family member? Or maybe how no one has followed up on me since I've purchased a gun, maybe I'm a crackpot now. People change.
Responsible gun ownership is impossible to enforce, sure my shit is locked up in a safe, but no one knows that and it isn't required. No one comes around to check that it is safely secured, no one comes around to check that I haven't fallen down a QAnon conspiracy rabbit hole, no one comes around to check that I'm mentally sound and don't have any anger problems.
Ammo sales aren't tracked either, so sure I have a reasonable amount of ammo but I could have enough to cause serious problems as no one would know.
So really this comes down to two solutions right? Take away guns, or spend a fuck ton of money to regulate sales, registration, send therapists to people's homes to evaluate their mental health periodically, track ammo sales, install biometrics on guns so that only the owner can fire it and as evidence of when the gun goes off who must have shot, install trackers and sensors on gun safes to feed information back to the government to know how often a gun is safely locked away and when it's not where it is... Etc honestly.
For you, a hard g is more popular and comfortable, and that's great. Doesn't make it correct, but it's still great.
Actually that's exactly what makes it correct, language is democratic. The more popular way to convey ideas is the correct way, as that is the entire purpose of language (to convey ideas to other individuals) and that's why language changes over time.
It's the difference between believing the pyramids were built by ancient Egyptian gods, and believing they were built by aliens.
Can you explain that difference? Because that sounds exactly the same to me, any sufficiently advanced alien culture would appear as gods to ancient civilizations.
So the person you cross posted this from does not seem to have read this.
This is not impactful of extensions or different browsers. The main point of this actually seems to be replacing captcha.
The dumbed down version is, attestation of the software stack such that it is reasonable to assume a human is actually using it and not an automated process.
Quite frankly, as a web dev I can already prevent certain browsers from accessing my webpage by trying to access unique functions of a browser as a condition of loading the rest of the content.
So what the other user is concerned about already exists, in fact Google meet already does this to prevent Firefox users from accessing certain features, changing user agent doesn't change the outcome of whether or not the features are available. (In this case it's because Firefox will crash, but most of the time this is done is for bad reasons).
Indiana Jones: Kingdom of the Crystal Skull is a fun movie to watch. Sure it is insane and unrealistic
Yes, as compared to the other completely realistic Indiana Jones movies, ark of the covenant, Kali Ma, you chose poorly... Lol I never understood the complaints about aliens, the entire series is ridiculous.
Some sites (notably Google ones) are notorious for implementing anti-competitive behavior, where if their website is visited other than a chromium based browser, it slows down or a functionality stops working.
I assume you're referring to Google meet (and the screen blur functionally), this is an open issue in Firefox for years, Google is using open standards to implement that, it's an issue in Firefox with how deadlocks work which is an extremely low level part of the browser. So it's not an easy solve.
There's a lot to complain about with Google, but this one isn't their fault. They use non-proprietary implementations and it's not their fault that Firefox will crash if they allowed Firefox users to use screen blur, the issue isn't a high priority for Mozilla.
Yeah, I don't like my sweet tea like that, but I've been to people's houses that it's just diabetes in a glass.