The trick is the US can and does feed itself. Very few populous nations can actually do that independently. You'd need about 2 decades of dustbowl-level disaster for the US to actually need anything from any other nation.
Many 15" and larger laptops have space for multiple 2.5" drives. Often you give up the optical bay to do it.
You also have the option of doing embedded SD/USB storage as well. Running your secondary OS off of a good micro SD card or one of them tiny USB drives permanently attached to the mobo is an option.
Absolutely nothing. Laws requiring them to vote a certain way aren't even constitutional. I believe the current laws require people to pledge to vote a certain way before becoming electors, but no one can hold them to that pledge.
How about the fact that it's not just one smaller swing state, it's all of them together, and all the voters in them, often near an even split, that have a large impact. California still gets a buttload of EC votes, and they're always blue because it's winner-takes-all. How do you think someone in Alaska feels when they see CA? How do you think a bunch of rural states that, combined, get less than CA gets?
Electoral votes are distributed to the states based almost entirely on population, so comparing any winner-takes-all state to another winner-takes-all state means your vote mattered as much as theirs, minus any rounding errors.
One Person, One Vote is fundamental to democracy and would be best enacted by simply counting the popular vote rather than having a fiction that states, rather than the people, elect the executive.
The only fiction is yours, buddy.
This isn't a democracy. It's a representative democracy and a democratic republic. States do elect the President.
I would actually prefer a popular vote, but that's not at all how this is designed and there are good reasons for not doing a straight popular vote.
Except you're not the majority. And no farms, no food, buddy. I doubt whatever city you live in could go 10 days without the support of the rural areas you hate before devolving into a Mad Max situation.
Tell your state to distribute votes according to the popular vote instead of being winner-takes-all.
Bam, In a worst-case scenario your vote matters up to half as much, minus a small rounding error, as anyone in a winner-takes-all battleground state. Then get on that state's ass and tell them how much better it is and convince them to drop winner-takes-all.
But really it is there for a REASON. You are a citizen of your state first, and then a citizen of the United States.
The voting set up in the college, gives more equal proportional voice to all states based on population. If this were only the popular vote nationally, we'd forever have policy and presidents dictated based on 3 or so states, most on either coast with more extreme views and vast different needs from those other states between them.
I don't like that potentially voters in the Electoral College could vote how they want instead of how their state laws say....but again, I like the principal of the EC, maybe just tweak the rules a little.
You're an idiot, and modded to +5 insightful in typical slashdot fashion.
The point of the electoral college isn't some bullshit about being a citizen of your state first. The point is the thing you fear - that the electors have the power to vote however they want. That includes ignoring the outcome of their state's election. Yes, even if they sign a pledge first. This hasn't been tested in court as far as I know, but the Constitution absolutely grants the electors the power to cast their votes as they see fit. The supreme court has only tested whether requiring a pledge was okay, not whether someone would have to stick to the pledge.
If you have a problem with the popular vote not matching the EC vote, then tell your state, or the electors, to not be a winner-takes-all state and instead to divvy up the electoral votes based on the popular vote in your state. In any state that does this, you're effectively getting popular vote with rounding.
If you want to force this nationally you have to get rid of the ability of the electors to vote however they want, thus removing the entire point of the electoral college. The electors could decide Trump is really a bad idea and refuse to elect him. And let's face it - that's what you really want.
Fuck that. Separate disks / arrays with power on passwords. On boot only supply the password to the drive you want to power up, be it Windows or Linux.
If your OS of choice was any flavor of Windows since Vista, then you'd have the spyware installed at every boot. It's injected from BIOS/UEFI into Windows at every boot.
While 365 d/y is fixed, but everything else can be changed.
100 second, 100 minute and 10 hours a day could be easily done. In fact, the french already tried to adopt decimal time : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
10 seconds, 10 minutes, and 10 hours, or 1000 seconds, 1000 minutes, and 1000 hours. Pick one. Otherwise you're just as inconsistent as imperial.
Not for making a pound cake. Or telling time. Or the date. Or splitting up common real-world measurements of land, livestock, produce, beer, food, commodities, etc. How do you split a liter 8 ways? What about a gallon? What's 1/12th of a kilometer? What about 1/12th of a mile? Or discriminating typical temperature changes where you live. (Use Kelvins or STFU.)
The imperial system is simply superior for everyday life. The units scale to their purpose, from inches to miles, teaspoons to barrels, and ounces to tons. They typically have 2 and 3 as factors, not just 10, so you can split things equally and cleanly many more ways.
Through the lens of the first amendment... any limitations on making death threats, committing slander, leaking intelligence to foreign governments, yelling fire in a theater, printing bootleg copies of movies and selling them, and perjury, are all obviously" unconstitutional too. And yet you probably support at least some of those.
No "lens" needed. It's written plainly and simply. Any limitations violate the first amendment and are unconstitutional.
I don't support any restrictions on speech, including whatever strawman you want to prop up. The government cannot restrict speech. You can be held responsible and culpable for the direct results of your speech, however. If you can't see the distinction, you're a useful idiot.
Yet within seconds of the first unconfirmed report of a celebrity being dead Wikipedia is updated by a horde of ravenous "volunteers".
Wikipedia is awful for many reasons, but the worst is the entrenched editors with moderator powers that police certain pages. The reason why more people don't volunteer to update shit is because the majority of the time some aspie comes along and reverts the updates if they don't like the facts. If you try to find out why on the "talk" page, you'll see that there's one clown policing the page and making sure it presents the story they want it to present, not the facts.
Our election is important enough that it's foolish to trust it to unauditable, easily hacked voting machines when the alternative of hand counting is not that hard.
To them, our election is important enough that it's foolish to trust it to voters.
Remember when they kept trying to get people to believe that North Korea hacked Sony over a shitty movie? Remember when there was zero evidence of that happening or even being remotely possible? Remember when they quietly dropped it when the truth started coming out?
Scroll up. There are far more instances of voter fraud in favor of Democratic candidates.
Using a puffed-up New York Times deflection piece (written and published in response to the revelations of the Democrats cheating, as referenced above) doesn't help your non-argument.
Slashdot Mirror
The trick is the US can and does feed itself. Very few populous nations can actually do that independently.
You'd need about 2 decades of dustbowl-level disaster for the US to actually need anything from any other nation.
Many 15" and larger laptops have space for multiple 2.5" drives. Often you give up the optical bay to do it.
You also have the option of doing embedded SD/USB storage as well. Running your secondary OS off of a good micro SD card or one of them tiny USB drives permanently attached to the mobo is an option.
At the current count, Hilldog is slightly ahead in the national popular vote.
Absolutely nothing.
Laws requiring them to vote a certain way aren't even constitutional. I believe the current laws require people to pledge to vote a certain way before becoming electors, but no one can hold them to that pledge.
How about the fact that it's not just one smaller swing state, it's all of them together, and all the voters in them, often near an even split, that have a large impact.
California still gets a buttload of EC votes, and they're always blue because it's winner-takes-all. How do you think someone in Alaska feels when they see CA?
How do you think a bunch of rural states that, combined, get less than CA gets?
Electoral votes are distributed to the states based almost entirely on population, so comparing any winner-takes-all state to another winner-takes-all state means your vote mattered as much as theirs, minus any rounding errors.
One Person, One Vote is fundamental to democracy and would be best enacted by simply counting the popular vote rather than having a fiction that states, rather than the people, elect the executive.
The only fiction is yours, buddy.
This isn't a democracy. It's a representative democracy and a democratic republic.
States do elect the President.
I would actually prefer a popular vote, but that's not at all how this is designed and there are good reasons for not doing a straight popular vote.
Except you're not the majority. And no farms, no food, buddy.
I doubt whatever city you live in could go 10 days without the support of the rural areas you hate before devolving into a Mad Max situation.
(No, I don't live in a rural area.)
My guy did lose. I'm not pissing and moaning right now. (I plan to do both later, but that's unrelated.)
Tell your state to distribute votes according to the popular vote instead of being winner-takes-all.
Bam, In a worst-case scenario your vote matters up to half as much, minus a small rounding error, as anyone in a winner-takes-all battleground state.
Then get on that state's ass and tell them how much better it is and convince them to drop winner-takes-all.
But really it is there for a REASON. You are a citizen of your state first, and then a citizen of the United States.
The voting set up in the college, gives more equal proportional voice to all states based on population. If this were only the popular vote nationally, we'd forever have policy and presidents dictated based on 3 or so states, most on either coast with more extreme views and vast different needs from those other states between them.
I don't like that potentially voters in the Electoral College could vote how they want instead of how their state laws say....but again, I like the principal of the EC, maybe just tweak the rules a little.
You're an idiot, and modded to +5 insightful in typical slashdot fashion.
The point of the electoral college isn't some bullshit about being a citizen of your state first.
The point is the thing you fear - that the electors have the power to vote however they want. That includes ignoring the outcome of their state's election. Yes, even if they sign a pledge first. This hasn't been tested in court as far as I know, but the Constitution absolutely grants the electors the power to cast their votes as they see fit. The supreme court has only tested whether requiring a pledge was okay, not whether someone would have to stick to the pledge.
If you have a problem with the popular vote not matching the EC vote, then tell your state, or the electors, to not be a winner-takes-all state and instead to divvy up the electoral votes based on the popular vote in your state. In any state that does this, you're effectively getting popular vote with rounding.
If you want to force this nationally you have to get rid of the ability of the electors to vote however they want, thus removing the entire point of the electoral college.
The electors could decide Trump is really a bad idea and refuse to elect him. And let's face it - that's what you really want.
I hope you eventually get this working right, just so I can see wtf it's supposed to look like. Also I hope "homosexul" is the intended spelling.
Fuck that. Separate disks / arrays with power on passwords.
On boot only supply the password to the drive you want to power up, be it Windows or Linux.
If your OS of choice was any flavor of Windows since Vista, then you'd have the spyware installed at every boot. It's injected from BIOS/UEFI into Windows at every boot.
You can just say appropriate, or apt. You don't have to be a shit.
probably no one here knows how many cups are in a gallon without looking it up
What is the "here" you're referring to? A school for the retarded?
2 Cups = 1 Pint
2 Pints = 1 Quart
4 Quarts = 1 Gallon
Bonus Tip: 1 Pint weighs 1 Pound since 1 (fluid) Ounce of water weighs 1 Ounce.
While 365 d/y is fixed, but everything else can be changed.
100 second, 100 minute and 10 hours a day could be easily done. In fact, the french already tried to adopt decimal time : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
10 seconds, 10 minutes, and 10 hours, or 1000 seconds, 1000 minutes, and 1000 hours. Pick one. Otherwise you're just as inconsistent as imperial.
Not for making a pound cake.
Or telling time.
Or the date.
Or splitting up common real-world measurements of land, livestock, produce, beer, food, commodities, etc. How do you split a liter 8 ways? What about a gallon? What's 1/12th of a kilometer? What about 1/12th of a mile?
Or discriminating typical temperature changes where you live. (Use Kelvins or STFU.)
The imperial system is simply superior for everyday life. The units scale to their purpose, from inches to miles, teaspoons to barrels, and ounces to tons. They typically have 2 and 3 as factors, not just 10, so you can split things equally and cleanly many more ways.
Through the lens of the first amendment... any limitations on making death threats, committing slander, leaking intelligence to foreign governments, yelling fire in a theater, printing bootleg copies of movies and selling them, and perjury, are all obviously" unconstitutional too. And yet you probably support at least some of those.
No "lens" needed. It's written plainly and simply. Any limitations violate the first amendment and are unconstitutional.
I don't support any restrictions on speech, including whatever strawman you want to prop up. The government cannot restrict speech. You can be held responsible and culpable for the direct results of your speech, however. If you can't see the distinction, you're a useful idiot.
We've come a long way since COPS was in production.
We usually skip the screaming, running, etc. and go straight to shooting them in the back now.
"Not properly sourced."
But you provided all the links to sources.
"No original research."
But it's not my own research. Look at the sources I provided.
"Not noteworthy."
What? This is a hugely significant!
Page has been locked, your IP has been banned from editing.
Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. Please click on Jimmy Wales's ugly face to donate.
Yet within seconds of the first unconfirmed report of a celebrity being dead Wikipedia is updated by a horde of ravenous "volunteers".
Wikipedia is awful for many reasons, but the worst is the entrenched editors with moderator powers that police certain pages. The reason why more people don't volunteer to update shit is because the majority of the time some aspie comes along and reverts the updates if they don't like the facts. If you try to find out why on the "talk" page, you'll see that there's one clown policing the page and making sure it presents the story they want it to present, not the facts.
Yeah, shiny rectangles with a fruit logo are much better.
Our election is important enough that it's foolish to trust it to unauditable, easily hacked voting machines when the alternative of hand counting is not that hard.
To them, our election is important enough that it's foolish to trust it to voters.
Your words echo Trumpsky's denials but US Intelligence service says otherwise:
http://www.theverge.com/2016/1...
Wow, what a trustworthy source!
Remember when they kept trying to get people to believe that North Korea hacked Sony over a shitty movie? Remember when there was zero evidence of that happening or even being remotely possible? Remember when they quietly dropped it when the truth started coming out?
Scroll up. There are far more instances of voter fraud in favor of Democratic candidates.
Using a puffed-up New York Times deflection piece (written and published in response to the revelations of the Democrats cheating, as referenced above) doesn't help your non-argument.