Meaning car companies will either need to start making vehicles people can afford or the public pressure for public transportation will massively increase. Win-win.
Meaning car companies will either need to start making vehicles people can afford or the public pressure for public transportation will massively increase. Win-win.
Not true.
He can’t prevent anyone that received the code under the GPL from using (and distributing it) under the old license. He also can’t relicense code that he received under the GPL only under the new license.
If he receives a new license from the other contributors to distribute under a more restrictive license, he can do that because he has a dual license to the code and is not relying on the GPL for his right to distribute.
The opposite headline would have been more true. This ruling DOES disenfranchise those very same voters for state and local elections.
They won’t get to vote on little things like who draws the voting districts, who runs the elections, who certifies (or refuses to certify) the elections. Same for who decides on school book bans, policing priorities, medicaid expansion, or mask bans.
This may be a smaller loss than expected, but painting it as a win is disingenuous.
As a presidential candidate, she’s been perfectly clear that she does not intend to change that policy if elected.
Pacifica then.
Nah. This has happened with every major corporate antivirus product. Multiple times. And the top IT people advising on purchasing decisions know this.
At the nation-state level with an ex-president target, pumping heated liquid through the arteries of a dead body isn’t much of an obstacle.
Probably not actually what they did, but seriously people - a single biometric security factor is not going to secure anything when a government has the body and actually cares about getting in.
So basically Biden with a less shitty stance on Palestine. I’ll take it!
I see the down votes, but I took this as a Wag the Dog reference. They’re pointing out just how terrible an idea it is for Biden and the democrats to keep trying to sleepwalk through this election while Trump and the republicans pull out all the rhetorical stops.
Which is honestly a better ratio than I would have expected.
Same as it ever was.
The context is that the original version of the keyboard didn’t have the q a and z keys on the right side at all. QMK and similar keyboard firmwares have features that let a key send one code when tapped and a different code when held or pressed, and even another when double tapped.
The keyboard designer made themself a keyboard where ESC, Tab, and Shift keys were set up to send q, a, and z on a quick tap, and got so many comments on multiple videos asking how they could possibly use a keyboard missing three letters that they made another keyboard with the three cockeyed keys added on the right as a joke.
There are two sides to the equation though - depopulation and repopulation. Hate and discrimination may not be causing (most of) the exodus, but inclusion and acceptance could be part of the solution. I’ve known more than a few people who have wanted to move to rural areas but have avoided them for exactly that reason. The braver ones have made the move, but only as a group able to support and protect each other.
Here you go, but it appears to be down at the moment.
No - it was the language that I said was transphobic, not the author. Given that there were two different word choices (“transsexual” and “perceived gender”) that reinforced each other, it seems more likely than not that they reflected the mindset of the author, but not having looked further for their other writings I was not sure. That’s why I said " transphobic language" and not “transphobic author”.
More, but there’s an even simpler solution. In the context, the author is distinguishing between “sex assigned at birth” and “perceived gender.” The equivocating word " perceived" could simply be dropped with no loss of clarity.
There’s nothing wrong with the example in and of itself, but the word “transsexual” in place of “transgender” is not generally random. It is explicitly chosen by Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminists (TERFs) as well as by right-wing transphobes as a dog whistle to conflate gender dysphoria with drag queens and cross-dess fetishists so as to delegitimise transpeople and suggest some sort of sexual deviance. Coupled with the equivocation of “perceived” gender, motive doesn’t even have to come into it. The words themselves and the concepts they reinforce are transphobic and harmful.
A witch hunt would have been for me to say that the author is a transphobic asshole whose writings need to be wiped from the internet - which is very far from what I actually posted, which was regret for the way the language they chose distracted from the flow of their argument by reinforcing the social stigmatization of trans people. (Edit: That was a deliberate choice on my part. Not knowing enough about the author to be sure of motives and having no desire to deep dive into their history, I decided that it was only appropriate to point out the hurtful nature of the language and not imply motive.)
A well argued point. Could have done without the random transphobic comments about “transsexuals” and “perceived gender”.
The most encouraging thing in the whole talk for me was when he told a roomful of IT folks that they need to join or form Unions and they cheered.