So if I were to announce my candidacy, go there with a professional photographer, then yell and push people I would also get away scott free, right? Or is the permanent backing of an angry, violent prone mob also a requirement.
When the number one result in Google is a site answering my exact question with "did you try googling it first?" I have no incentive to interact with that site.
It was a lot easier to pretend to be a good person when every moral failure you make wasn't broadcast around the world the moment it was discovered. Case and point, look into Bill Gates more. He wasn't always a respectful guy, got caught up in the whole "filthy communists" schtick when the government was investigating his company, advocates for more restrictive control of aid distribution favoring manufacturers more than those he's trying to help, conflicts of interest in his charity, opposing twitters ban of Trump after the insurrection, etc.
I love mine. I bought one as soon as they went on sale and it has completely replaced my gaming laptop when I travel. What I like most of all is that it makes it easy for me to play games in my backlog that I would not otherwise have plaid. I have almost 900 games in my library and it's opened up my playtime in platformers, casual story games, puzzle games, racing, space sims, and more. The fact that I can do that on a plane or wherever on holiday is awesome. I have no doubt that there are games in my library it can't play, but I've not actually tried to play a game on it that just didn't work.
If you aren't a gamer I don't know how much value there is for you. If you want to become a gamer it's a well balanced device with a solid store behind it and your library will be accessible by any PC you buy in the future. If you are considering it as a gift for a gamer, just keep in mind if they aren't primarily a PC gamer (that is to say they play on a console) they will have to rebuy some games if they want to play on the deck.
As far as being a full laptop replacement, I wouldn't bother.
Sometimes people put the year they were born in their username like janedoe1969. Sometimes people abbreviate the year to the last 2 digits like janedoe69. Sometimes 2 digit numbers mean something else like 69 or 88. Sometimes people use the non year meaning as an indicator like whitedaddy88. Sometimes people don't immediately recognize the alternative meaning of a number and accidentally use a dog whistle in their username. Sometimes people don't want to be confused as being a Nazi because of an innocent mistake they made on a forum years ago. Sometimes they use that negative experience as an opportunity for a meta referential joke.
They have touted for a long time their false equivalency that restriction equals security. If they backtrack on that (I believe) they believe they will lose customers. In reality their fanbase will likely stick with them because that's what they know and the added functionality will make their offerings a more appealing product.
Now that Europe is forcing their hand on some of this we can see the impacts it will have on their market growth in the coming years. There are other factors that impact this potential shift in market share too:
Is your current phone still working
Have you had a lot of problems with your current phone or phone manufacturer
Are you willing to ignore Apple's past regresses in anticipation of actually being able to use their hardware as you wish
I side load. That's why I stick to Android. If they get rid of that I need to find something else. Restricting what your users can do is actually a bad business process and the key thing keeping me away from Apple. If Apple were to actually open their systems and start respecting their users they would get more customers.
There's a lot more to my post that you neglected to address, so I'll just stick to your reply. I am writing this followup not in an attempt to convince you, but to seek clarity and understanding; unfortunately my rhetoric is often not perceived that way, though I do mean it earnestly.
Trump or Harris will win.
I have no doubt.
Do you have a preference of the two? Are you okay with either of them winning?
The notion that a 3rd party vote dilutes is based in strategic voting
Which I don't practice nor believe in.
What do you mean by that? I practice voting strategically, it's certainly a thing that exists. Are you saying you believe people in general shouldn't or do you really mean you believe there is no such thing? Are you also positing that you still believe it is based in fear?
According to YOU. I mean, just accept that some people don’t believe the same way you do. And if there are more of them that vote for their candidate, than yours, then that’s how the American voting system goes.
What are you talking about? I listed a diverse selection of thoughts then stated truthfully that they were diverse. Is your fault found in my understanding that those thoughts are not causing democracy to thrive? People living under dictatorships, authoritarian regimes, and week democracies do not necessarily think in unison. People the world over have different thoughts and opinions even within their own communities and ruling structures. That doesn't cause democracy to spontaneously arise or even thrive. The distinction between democracy and other ruling structures is the ability of the people to vote. If you want democracy to thrive then the people need to actually be able to vote, not just think differently.
I fully understand that not everyone believes the same things I do, that has nothing to do with the ability for a 3rd party candidate to win.
If democrats are that scared of Trump winning, then they should pic a candidate strong enough to over come his and any third party votes. Also maybe they shouldn’t have waited till last minute to make Biden step down.
I fully 100% agree. I just also expect that people will vote in their best interests, but recognize they don't necessarily, and I don't understand why that is. Voting for a 3rd party candidate does nothing for you, while voting for a major party candidate possibly can do something for you. I am a gay leftist atheist. One of the major candidates doesn't want me to be able to vote (or potentially live) the other one isn't immediately dismissive of who I am and can be reasoned with. If I vote for the former I am contributing to active oppression against me. If I vote for the latter I am not. If I vote for someone (or no one) else I am complicit in whatever happens to me. I don't know you. I'm sure there is some category that means a lot to you and that you see Dr. Stein recognizing, but she will not be able to act on that, whereas a major candidate will.
I bet they actually don't.