It wasn't an election, it was a tabulated public survey designed to give the selection committee better feedback to instruct the process.
That more people voted to troll them than to give serious feedback in no way interfered with the intended process. They simply ignored the trolls, and selected the most popular name that was consistent with the other elements of the selection process, such as honoring somebody British.
Similarly, in a real election if you write in the name of a cartoon character, the cartoon isn't actually eligible.
This doesn't tell you anything about democratic processes; your complaints about them are universal; you can say that no matter what happens in an election. (and a few people do)
That's not a real rule, that's a style guide you didn't understand.:o
Welcome to English, please enjoy your stay.
Also, the best correction to offer would be to add a word such as "getting" before the word "less." That's the obvious omission due to the necessary brevity of headlines. Presuming a grammatical fake-mistake is presumptuous to start with, but absolutely needless here where even if you believed in the "rule," it wouldn't apply.
And for the record, they never offered to name the ship based on the votes. The voting was just a way for the public to give input into the naming; the goal wasn't an election, but simply an improved input process. So everybody wonkish enough to be paying close attention knew from the start that it wouldn't be named Troll Blahblah or whatever, and Attenborough has been considered the leading candidate (based on the voting) all along.
There is no way I believe the real Satoshi Nakamoto makes that particular mistake.
The mistake itself could be harmless, but it would be expected that the real person would be very embarrassed by it and would correct the technical part of the mistake right away and with excessive apologies and embarrassment. It would be totally normal for a smart recluse to screw up what he's best at when making a rare foray into the public light. It would be abnormal to be casual about the same mistake, or leave it uncorrected.
That's not how taxes work. Elvis impersonators don't pay extra tax because somebody as their country's tax office believed they were really Elvis. If people believe him, but he doesn't have the money, he wouldn't pay any tax.
And if he has the money, and didn't pay the tax, he can still be charged with crimes. It doesn't matter if the public believes he's so-and-so or not; the jury will only be asked to decide if he payed the taxes due on the money they found in his bank accounts or under his mattress.
Like I was taught as a teenager, "trust isn't about if somebody is going to harm you. If that is a concern, there is no chance of trust. Trust is knowing that they're not going to leave you out on a limb. Trust means you know they're always going to have a receipt to give you, the paperwork is already in order. Trust means you're confident they're not going to ask to be trusted, to leave you without the correct paperwork."
If you're willing to go without the paperwork, you might as well be prepared to get screwed, because you will be. Why else would they want you to not have the paperwork?
And in this guy's case... why would all his own private money be "in a trust" that he doesn't control? Isn't that a bit of an odd situation? It seems more like, he just doesn't understand the financial details relating to his lie; he knows people who have money that is in trusts, and he knows they can't access it. He also knows rich people sometimes put their money in trusts. But he doesn't understand the details, that the people he knows who can't access it inherited that money, and it is in a trust because it isn't actually theirs, it is just earmarked for them on a schedule. If the person who put the money in was alive, they could remove it or make changes. If he actually had that sort of financial planning, his words would be narrower.
He's just a con way out of his depth. The wider world is less credulous of his claims than the locals around him, and he was caught off guard by that. He needs to flip off the world in a way that saves some face with his local supporters. That's what his statement-similar-in-some-ways-to-an-apology was for.
It never "serves them right," it is always sad when people give up their software freedom, and are harmed. What is even more sad? Few of them will recognize their mistake, even in hindsight.
Typical Apple user; the company confirmed it, but you still don't believe, because if true it would suck. And Apple can't suck, even if they admitted to the behavior! groooooaaaaaaan
EULA's aren't binding in a lot of places. In some countries, they're not even considered a form of contract or agreement because the EULA attempts to waive rights which can not be waived, which makes the entire thing void.
No, it makes the narrow part of it they're suing you for unenforceable.
Courts do not throw out a whole contract because a part of it is not enforceable. Courts make the narrowest change possible that leaves the agreement in place. If you try to sue them for copyright infringement, and then try to claim it is a violation because you're challenging the permission you gave them, that is going to just piss off the judge. You'll never get any money out of that situation.
Why? Because once they've uploaded your crap and deleted it all, you can't go back. You'd have to replace your whole media library to switch to a different OS. For a lot of users, this means Apple basically owns them.
Sure, sure, but the fact is that the suicide rate in those factories is low; they're simply big enough to be the city of cities, their population is large enough that there will be some suicides. The rate is low, and most of the workers are happy to be there.
A lot of the features like free on-site housing that people in the West complain about are perks. The workers are mostly migrants, they're not from across town. They're not there to live the good life in the city. They don't have their families there with them. They're there to work for a few years, save most of the money they earn, and then go back to where they are from and have enough money to start a new life, go back to school, open a small business, or even retire early.
Just like, if you're hiring people to work in a factory in Alaska, away from their families, a lot of people are more willing to do it if you make sure they don't have to spend money on expensive local products while they're there.
Hating Apple is great, but hating them on behalf of Foxconn workers is ignorant.
Maybe the problem isn't with Apple, it is with proprietary software in general? If it didn't even respect your freedom, why would it respect you at all?
Well, I agree it's horrendous, but a bug? No, this is an intentional feature! Maybe it proves Apple's proprietary crap is malware, but it sure doesn't stop this from being a feature. That users tolerate being treated that way is shocking to me.
Wow, that's how you expect users to be treated? Non-story? I'm so glad I don't own any Apple computers! Look at how bad they can treat users and many are simply trained to expect it.
Absolutely false. Really, really weird place to encounter relativism. Moral relativism is stupid enough, but physics relativism? It means something different. It doesn't mean, gosh, the cars all weigh the same.
This has got to be one of your stupidest comments ever, sorry. I'm gonna stick with, old heavy cars change speed and direction much slower than than newer lighter cars. Duh. There is no argument possible there, sorry. Pretty basic stuff.
No, they just assume somebody in a big, old, heavy car is going to be limited to slower reactions. That big old heavy steel car has lower crash survivability than most of the new little light things. Because of crumple zones. Big old heavy cars mostly crumple inside the passenger compartment when they crash.
It is just plain unpleasant to drive near a slow-reacting, heavy vehicle. Even if your technical driving skills are good, you'll be a step behind everybody else.
I used the online fillable-forms from linux again this year, no problem. Still exists, still works.
Forms are still available at my public library. If yours doesn't carry them, complain to the library, don't blame the IRS.
You can also go to your local IRS office and collect the forms. Rural folks should really have an in-person conversation with their librarian before complaining that it is a hassle to drive to the nearest office; the forms might simply not be on the shelves, they might have them in the back, or be able to get them by mail for you.
You don't actually even need a computer to do your taxes, so linux users shouldn't have any problems. That said... fillable forms.
You start out missing the part where on Fedora you don't need to fork to offer a different choice. Then later you talk about spins anyways, but you can't really address that intelligibly if you're also saying a fork would be required.
Maybe it isn't offered because nobody has a use case for it, and the whining is pure-non-technical-whining?
And no, there is no cause to speculate that you can't do this with the spin system. That is silly. Of course there isn't an official RedHat spin for this; nobody actually wants it. The anti-systemd trolls on slashdot, for example, are mostly windows users, and "can't switch" because "games."
Kids are not usually trying to find a datasheet, and even if they're nerdy enough to have read about them in internet forums they're not going to have even the technical vocabulary to understand them. They aren't complete, they don't have glossaries; even for adults who read a lot and understand jargon from related industries they can be rather opaque at times because of the low quality of the writing. Often there are formulas with variables that are not explained anywhere on the sheet, and they're not constants or something that can be looked up. You have to have a lot of experience with technical documentation to root out all the numbers you actually need to complete even the basic formulas given in the "applications" section of many datasheets. Often you have to root out variable values by figuring out the other name for the thing, and understanding that it is the result of one of the formulas given. And the formulas are almost never given in the order that a student, using available parts, would need to do them in to figure out the values of the components that they have to select.
That is true even for very smart kids who are doing more interesting things than what the datasheet is about. Kids who are building awesome things and learning a lot that is generally in the subject of engineering, and who will go on to be awesome engineers, do not necessarily benefit from having "good engineering practices" placed in their path. If they're not excessively dull, they'll simply reject that sort of nonsense at that age; best practices are best practices for real reasons that schoolchildren are not yet facing.
And best practices that are followed even before having done it the "wrong" way are not understood by those following them, and often lead to design flaws.
Sloppy engineering annoys me for entirely personal reasons, and I'm not a schoolchild, so it doesn't annoy me at all that many childrens games are unsuitable for me. I certainly wouldn't want to mislead myself to think that because I don't enjoy a game, or a type of educational play, that it must somehow be "bad" or "offensive." Students should never be told not to do something merely because adult professionals would consider the technique "crappy." Is doing something in a crappy way even less educational than skipping ahead to avoid those lessons? And are the lessons taught by a raspberry pi even EE lessons, or they more likely to be IT, CIS, and CS lessons? Is "your hardware kinda sucks, but it can do stuff so deal with it" even a crappy lesson?
Seeing adult makers use arduinos where they didn't actually need to disappoints me mostly for business reasons; many of these people intend to eventually put their doodad into a product, and they'd be a lot better off using an AVR on a breadboard from the start, and they wouldn't even lose any time. Their first project, when they're unsure about the power supply, etc., it makes total sense. Makers who don't intend to sell their thing, they just want to make it and share the design, arduino is perfect for them because the forums that they get to by following the cattle guards will be filled with like-minded people. Ones who want to sell their stuff should at least use avr-gcc with standard APIs instead of the Arduino software. Using the hardware crutch at the start is harmless, if the software is the same. And the forums they'll find themselves in will be filled with engineers who are interested in helping them.
Congress holds hearings on everything. That doesn't have meaning. Look it up.
There is no "cautionary tale" because nothing almost happened. If you're looking back to history for cautionary tales... look to all the many things that did happen. The one you're pointing at? A few people tried to do a thing, and predictably failed. The lesson you're claiming that teaches is simply not a lesson taught by that history. Find real examples, and then teach the lesson when those subjects come up.
All you really teach is that you knew better; you had all the information to see that there was nothing to the claim; people only remember it because songs were written making fun of it and calling out Tipper Gore by name.
The nonsense at the end about "we definitely would have had a federal law" is an unsupported load of horse shit. The voluntary rating system was enacted because it sells more records when you tell the customers that something is naughty.
Melanin is a social construct? I don't understand.
I specifically addressed what you don't understand. If you didn't understand at all, why did you reply? You didn't ask a question that is likely to increase your understanding. My statement was specifically and narrowly targeted at people who either know what a Cline Map is, or who will look up whatever technical terms they don't understand.
Your dog hypothesis is already disproven, because dog "breeds" do not have significant genetic differences; differences are very superficial. They're all the same species, they have the same genetic capability to be different colors. They narrowly express different subsets of those genes. They do not really even approach the amount of difference as varieties, such as broccoli and brussels sprout. They certainly don't have different types of colorization.
Chips, and a couple bags of crystals. Plain C. Emacs.
It isn't all rainbows and unicorns, I do have one 328 stuck at 32khz. Which would be great, except for a software bug in the timer; it is supposed to have a bicycle blinker controller, but it waits 3 minutes to toggle instead of 1 second. I didn't realize that without a fancy expensive programmer, I had to have the code perfect before setting the fuses for that speed.
But it's worth an occasional bricked $3 chip to have the pleasure of working directly on a breadboard. It is just more fun for me. And I end up with a whole circuit, instead of just some firmware. I like to think about, "what if I was just using discrete logic ICs? What algorithm am I actually using, and how big is it?" In software it is normal to have 10, 20, 1000, 10000 times as much code as there are basic steps in the algorithm, just to package, protect, and glue everything together. If I'm building a kitchen timer or something for the house, I might not want or need that many steps. I might get a better device if it is very simple. Or just a door stop, if it is too simple. But still, a microcontroller is more practical than a handful of logic ICs.
Cline Maps show that for every trait there is a different geographic distribution. The traits differences don't group into the races. Even skin color, a single trait, doesn't map onto the concept. It is not a genetic difference at all, it is an artificial social construct.
No, the United States does not have a designated national insect. However, Congress did consider the Monarch butterfly as the national insect, but the legislation did not pass. Some U.S. states have "state insects," which are usually noted on state government web sites.
And List of U.S. state insects. Interestingly I recently head an entomologist talking about state insects on NPR. Apparently there had been cases where specific insects were nominated, but they actually weren't native species.
Monarch Butterflies fly back to Mexico every year, so no wonder they never got the bill passed. Don't tell Trump, or the wall will have to get taller.
Slashdot Mirror
It wasn't an election, it was a tabulated public survey designed to give the selection committee better feedback to instruct the process.
That more people voted to troll them than to give serious feedback in no way interfered with the intended process. They simply ignored the trolls, and selected the most popular name that was consistent with the other elements of the selection process, such as honoring somebody British.
Similarly, in a real election if you write in the name of a cartoon character, the cartoon isn't actually eligible.
This doesn't tell you anything about democratic processes; your complaints about them are universal; you can say that no matter what happens in an election. (and a few people do)
That's not a real rule, that's a style guide you didn't understand. :o
Welcome to English, please enjoy your stay.
Also, the best correction to offer would be to add a word such as "getting" before the word "less." That's the obvious omission due to the necessary brevity of headlines. Presuming a grammatical fake-mistake is presumptuous to start with, but absolutely needless here where even if you believed in the "rule," it wouldn't apply.
And for the record, they never offered to name the ship based on the votes. The voting was just a way for the public to give input into the naming; the goal wasn't an election, but simply an improved input process. So everybody wonkish enough to be paying close attention knew from the start that it wouldn't be named Troll Blahblah or whatever, and Attenborough has been considered the leading candidate (based on the voting) all along.
There is no way I believe the real Satoshi Nakamoto makes that particular mistake.
The mistake itself could be harmless, but it would be expected that the real person would be very embarrassed by it and would correct the technical part of the mistake right away and with excessive apologies and embarrassment. It would be totally normal for a smart recluse to screw up what he's best at when making a rare foray into the public light. It would be abnormal to be casual about the same mistake, or leave it uncorrected.
If it's cryptographically safe and they can't trace it, it doesn't fucking matter whose idea it was.
What if it has tracing built in, like... bitcoin?
That's not how taxes work. Elvis impersonators don't pay extra tax because somebody as their country's tax office believed they were really Elvis. If people believe him, but he doesn't have the money, he wouldn't pay any tax.
And if he has the money, and didn't pay the tax, he can still be charged with crimes. It doesn't matter if the public believes he's so-and-so or not; the jury will only be asked to decide if he payed the taxes due on the money they found in his bank accounts or under his mattress.
Never trust. Never.
Like I was taught as a teenager, "trust isn't about if somebody is going to harm you. If that is a concern, there is no chance of trust. Trust is knowing that they're not going to leave you out on a limb. Trust means you know they're always going to have a receipt to give you, the paperwork is already in order. Trust means you're confident they're not going to ask to be trusted, to leave you without the correct paperwork."
If you're willing to go without the paperwork, you might as well be prepared to get screwed, because you will be. Why else would they want you to not have the paperwork?
And in this guy's case... why would all his own private money be "in a trust" that he doesn't control? Isn't that a bit of an odd situation? It seems more like, he just doesn't understand the financial details relating to his lie; he knows people who have money that is in trusts, and he knows they can't access it. He also knows rich people sometimes put their money in trusts. But he doesn't understand the details, that the people he knows who can't access it inherited that money, and it is in a trust because it isn't actually theirs, it is just earmarked for them on a schedule. If the person who put the money in was alive, they could remove it or make changes. If he actually had that sort of financial planning, his words would be narrower.
He's just a con way out of his depth. The wider world is less credulous of his claims than the locals around him, and he was caught off guard by that. He needs to flip off the world in a way that saves some face with his local supporters. That's what his statement-similar-in-some-ways-to-an-apology was for.
It never "serves them right," it is always sad when people give up their software freedom, and are harmed. What is even more sad? Few of them will recognize their mistake, even in hindsight.
Typical Apple user; the company confirmed it, but you still don't believe, because if true it would suck. And Apple can't suck, even if they admitted to the behavior! groooooaaaaaaan
It is a crime to make a false police report.
The cops will be a bit pissed when they find out you gave permission to take the stuff, and fibbed about the theft.
If you freely give away your software freedom, no crime was committed. Only a foolish act.
EULA's aren't binding in a lot of places. In some countries, they're not even considered a form of contract or agreement because the EULA attempts to waive rights which can not be waived, which makes the entire thing void.
No, it makes the narrow part of it they're suing you for unenforceable.
Courts do not throw out a whole contract because a part of it is not enforceable. Courts make the narrowest change possible that leaves the agreement in place. If you try to sue them for copyright infringement, and then try to claim it is a violation because you're challenging the permission you gave them, that is going to just piss off the judge. You'll never get any money out of that situation.
Why? Because once they've uploaded your crap and deleted it all, you can't go back. You'd have to replace your whole media library to switch to a different OS. For a lot of users, this means Apple basically owns them.
Sure, sure, but the fact is that the suicide rate in those factories is low; they're simply big enough to be the city of cities, their population is large enough that there will be some suicides. The rate is low, and most of the workers are happy to be there.
A lot of the features like free on-site housing that people in the West complain about are perks. The workers are mostly migrants, they're not from across town. They're not there to live the good life in the city. They don't have their families there with them. They're there to work for a few years, save most of the money they earn, and then go back to where they are from and have enough money to start a new life, go back to school, open a small business, or even retire early.
Just like, if you're hiring people to work in a factory in Alaska, away from their families, a lot of people are more willing to do it if you make sure they don't have to spend money on expensive local products while they're there.
Hating Apple is great, but hating them on behalf of Foxconn workers is ignorant.
RedHat never did this to me.
Maybe the problem isn't with Apple, it is with proprietary software in general? If it didn't even respect your freedom, why would it respect you at all?
Well, I agree it's horrendous, but a bug? No, this is an intentional feature! Maybe it proves Apple's proprietary crap is malware, but it sure doesn't stop this from being a feature. That users tolerate being treated that way is shocking to me.
It's a non-story.
Wow, that's how you expect users to be treated? Non-story? I'm so glad I don't own any Apple computers! Look at how bad they can treat users and many are simply trained to expect it.
Absolutely false. Really, really weird place to encounter relativism. Moral relativism is stupid enough, but physics relativism? It means something different. It doesn't mean, gosh, the cars all weigh the same.
This has got to be one of your stupidest comments ever, sorry. I'm gonna stick with, old heavy cars change speed and direction much slower than than newer lighter cars. Duh. There is no argument possible there, sorry. Pretty basic stuff.
No, they just assume somebody in a big, old, heavy car is going to be limited to slower reactions. That big old heavy steel car has lower crash survivability than most of the new little light things. Because of crumple zones. Big old heavy cars mostly crumple inside the passenger compartment when they crash.
It is just plain unpleasant to drive near a slow-reacting, heavy vehicle. Even if your technical driving skills are good, you'll be a step behind everybody else.
I used the online fillable-forms from linux again this year, no problem. Still exists, still works.
Forms are still available at my public library. If yours doesn't carry them, complain to the library, don't blame the IRS.
You can also go to your local IRS office and collect the forms. Rural folks should really have an in-person conversation with their librarian before complaining that it is a hassle to drive to the nearest office; the forms might simply not be on the shelves, they might have them in the back, or be able to get them by mail for you.
You don't actually even need a computer to do your taxes, so linux users shouldn't have any problems. That said... fillable forms.
You start out missing the part where on Fedora you don't need to fork to offer a different choice. Then later you talk about spins anyways, but you can't really address that intelligibly if you're also saying a fork would be required.
Maybe it isn't offered because nobody has a use case for it, and the whining is pure-non-technical-whining?
And no, there is no cause to speculate that you can't do this with the spin system. That is silly. Of course there isn't an official RedHat spin for this; nobody actually wants it. The anti-systemd trolls on slashdot, for example, are mostly windows users, and "can't switch" because "games."
Kids are not usually trying to find a datasheet, and even if they're nerdy enough to have read about them in internet forums they're not going to have even the technical vocabulary to understand them. They aren't complete, they don't have glossaries; even for adults who read a lot and understand jargon from related industries they can be rather opaque at times because of the low quality of the writing. Often there are formulas with variables that are not explained anywhere on the sheet, and they're not constants or something that can be looked up. You have to have a lot of experience with technical documentation to root out all the numbers you actually need to complete even the basic formulas given in the "applications" section of many datasheets. Often you have to root out variable values by figuring out the other name for the thing, and understanding that it is the result of one of the formulas given. And the formulas are almost never given in the order that a student, using available parts, would need to do them in to figure out the values of the components that they have to select.
That is true even for very smart kids who are doing more interesting things than what the datasheet is about. Kids who are building awesome things and learning a lot that is generally in the subject of engineering, and who will go on to be awesome engineers, do not necessarily benefit from having "good engineering practices" placed in their path. If they're not excessively dull, they'll simply reject that sort of nonsense at that age; best practices are best practices for real reasons that schoolchildren are not yet facing.
And best practices that are followed even before having done it the "wrong" way are not understood by those following them, and often lead to design flaws.
Sloppy engineering annoys me for entirely personal reasons, and I'm not a schoolchild, so it doesn't annoy me at all that many childrens games are unsuitable for me. I certainly wouldn't want to mislead myself to think that because I don't enjoy a game, or a type of educational play, that it must somehow be "bad" or "offensive." Students should never be told not to do something merely because adult professionals would consider the technique "crappy." Is doing something in a crappy way even less educational than skipping ahead to avoid those lessons? And are the lessons taught by a raspberry pi even EE lessons, or they more likely to be IT, CIS, and CS lessons? Is "your hardware kinda sucks, but it can do stuff so deal with it" even a crappy lesson?
Seeing adult makers use arduinos where they didn't actually need to disappoints me mostly for business reasons; many of these people intend to eventually put their doodad into a product, and they'd be a lot better off using an AVR on a breadboard from the start, and they wouldn't even lose any time. Their first project, when they're unsure about the power supply, etc., it makes total sense. Makers who don't intend to sell their thing, they just want to make it and share the design, arduino is perfect for them because the forums that they get to by following the cattle guards will be filled with like-minded people. Ones who want to sell their stuff should at least use avr-gcc with standard APIs instead of the Arduino software. Using the hardware crutch at the start is harmless, if the software is the same. And the forums they'll find themselves in will be filled with engineers who are interested in helping them.
Congress holds hearings on everything. That doesn't have meaning. Look it up.
There is no "cautionary tale" because nothing almost happened. If you're looking back to history for cautionary tales... look to all the many things that did happen. The one you're pointing at? A few people tried to do a thing, and predictably failed. The lesson you're claiming that teaches is simply not a lesson taught by that history. Find real examples, and then teach the lesson when those subjects come up.
All you really teach is that you knew better; you had all the information to see that there was nothing to the claim; people only remember it because songs were written making fun of it and calling out Tipper Gore by name.
The nonsense at the end about "we definitely would have had a federal law" is an unsupported load of horse shit. The voluntary rating system was enacted because it sells more records when you tell the customers that something is naughty.
Melanin is a social construct? I don't understand.
I specifically addressed what you don't understand. If you didn't understand at all, why did you reply? You didn't ask a question that is likely to increase your understanding. My statement was specifically and narrowly targeted at people who either know what a Cline Map is, or who will look up whatever technical terms they don't understand.
Your dog hypothesis is already disproven, because dog "breeds" do not have significant genetic differences; differences are very superficial. They're all the same species, they have the same genetic capability to be different colors. They narrowly express different subsets of those genes. They do not really even approach the amount of difference as varieties, such as broccoli and brussels sprout. They certainly don't have different types of colorization.
Chips, and a couple bags of crystals. Plain C. Emacs.
It isn't all rainbows and unicorns, I do have one 328 stuck at 32khz. Which would be great, except for a software bug in the timer; it is supposed to have a bicycle blinker controller, but it waits 3 minutes to toggle instead of 1 second. I didn't realize that without a fancy expensive programmer, I had to have the code perfect before setting the fuses for that speed.
But it's worth an occasional bricked $3 chip to have the pleasure of working directly on a breadboard. It is just more fun for me. And I end up with a whole circuit, instead of just some firmware. I like to think about, "what if I was just using discrete logic ICs? What algorithm am I actually using, and how big is it?" In software it is normal to have 10, 20, 1000, 10000 times as much code as there are basic steps in the algorithm, just to package, protect, and glue everything together. If I'm building a kitchen timer or something for the house, I might not want or need that many steps. I might get a better device if it is very simple. Or just a door stop, if it is too simple. But still, a microcontroller is more practical than a handful of logic ICs.
Cline Maps show that for every trait there is a different geographic distribution. The traits differences don't group into the races. Even skin color, a single trait, doesn't map onto the concept. It is not a genetic difference at all, it is an artificial social construct.
From Does the United States have a national insect?
No, the United States does not have a designated national insect. However, Congress did consider the Monarch butterfly as the national insect, but the legislation did not pass. Some U.S. states have "state insects," which are usually noted on state government web sites.
And List of U.S. state insects. Interestingly I recently head an entomologist talking about state insects on NPR. Apparently there had been cases where specific insects were nominated, but they actually weren't native species.
Monarch Butterflies fly back to Mexico every year, so no wonder they never got the bill passed. Don't tell Trump, or the wall will have to get taller.