I’m also on Mastodon as https://hachyderm.io/@BoydStephenSmithJr .
You don’t appear to have read the second source, which contains almost identical numbers for Left/Center/Right labels. That shows that (a) both of my sources are relevant because (b) in the U.S. party politics does track left/right politics.
In addition, you have still failed to provide any evidence for your claims.
I’m not sure that’s even a crime here, as long as the mall is on county land and not some liberalized city. /s
So, it might not allocate more water than there is?
We don’t even have standards that strong in programming languages or even fucking machine code (ISAs) anymore.
I think I would like to return to that ideal time (if it ever existed), but… I feel like I’m in a vanishingly small minority.
I think it comes down to incentive structure, and the most clear incentives push away from strong stnadards. The big advantage to (a) strong standard(s) is(are) interoperability, but that’s something end users have to demand because it’s an anathema to rent-seeking-behavior (a central facet of surveillance capitalism, choke-point capitalism, enshittification, and technofuedalism). But, even there, natural incentives fail us, since most users get more utility from “innovative” features instead of low switching costs – or at least the think they do until they actually try to exit a platform/service.
Talk to your governor. What’s your budget look like for FY 2027?
/s
We are still a FPtP system, you don’t get to write off the majority, if you want to gain political power through elections. Right+Center > 50% of electorate.
Taking resources away from “bad” organizations, and using them for the socialist project is a good thing. The trick is not given them (as much) value in return.
I’d also vote for Bernie (VP or Pres.), still. But, I think there are younger progressives that could fill the role quite well.
I’d even take someone more centrist for the VP role, since that might make it easier for them to attract (Super)PAC monies.
I’d still vote for Bernie, but I don’t think he wants to run again. I’d also vote for Sen. Warren.
I generally don’t (think I) vote based on demographics. I am more interested in platform (primarily) and past performance (secondarily).
The effort I meant was not in taxing billionaires; I agree that’s easy.
The effort I meant was convincing the state to contribute that same 4b next fiscal year. My understanding is that there’s not some long-term agreement in place between the city and state and could serve as a baseline assumption going forward.
At least 4 billion of that was in infusion from the state. It seems unlikely this balance will persist without significant further effort.
Repost. But, because of that, I get to share the name for this I learned last time: “Billy Irish”
I doubt I’ll get to try one, I’ll have to get off the bupropion first.
Sort of. A friend used it to generate some “tests” of questionable quality, a cousin is using it to help her learn and use a DSL (my term, not hers) for interactive tasks for her students, another friend was using it for source code generation, but I don’t recall the specific results.
I disagree that it is no longer development, I see LLMs as yet another tool for generating code, and we’ve had generated “source” code since before C was standardized. I think the any code output by most LLMs is derivative of so many works under so many licenses that it is likely not possible to distribute it at all without violating some copyright and is certainly unacceptable for any Free Software project.; I think this is ethically true even if courts find LLM outputs are not derivative works or not subject to copyright protection at all – at least as long as copyright protects Disney. But, I know people that are working on a Free Software LLM, and “the Stack” provides enough information that you could provide all the necessary attributions for works derived from it.
While LLM hallucinations are a real concern, they can be less impactful when doing code generation because of all the automated static checks plus the culture of peer-review. But, I also tend to favor languages with static type systems.
But, with shorter terms, they also get reviewed/replaced more often, in fact with 9 year terms, they get at most 2 executives / 2 senates safe.
As a member of GenX (1980)…
Yep, that sounds like my peers. Most of them believe the marketing or are at least convinced enough to indulge. The hold-outs are getting more infrequent.
Well, if it’s good enough for quartz mining…
I support 18 years, it is better than lifetime appointment.
I would also support 9 years per term, with no limit on number of terms, but requiring full process (including Senate consultation and approval) for re-appointments.
Good, the children yearn for the lithium mines. /s
Maybe I should re-train from computer programmer to lithium miner?
So, you agree that what I claimed “Right + Center > 50%” is correct.
Thank you.