Fair

Correction, about 20-25 precent are. He’s only got 71 million votes so far in a county of over 300 million. Half are just too lazy to fucking do anything about it, even turn out to vote.

DC is 7

This seems entirely testable

I completely disagree.

An attempt to commit a crime occurs if a criminal has an intent to commit a crime and takes a substantial step toward completing the crime, but for reasons not intended by the criminal, the final resulting crime does not occur. Attempt to commit a particular crime is a crime, usually considered to be of the same or lesser gravity as the particular crime attempted.

You cannot audit law enforcement by attempting to commit crimes and use that as an excuse to get away with it. While, yes, receiving a second ballot is not in itself a crime, doing it intentionally is clearly an action that serves no legitimate purpose and only serves to allow them to commit the crime of voting multiple times. He inarguably took substantial steps to commit a crime. And he had the intent to do what he did (i.e. he didn’t forget or get confused or was misled. He knew what he was doing and did it anyway). Therefore, this was pretty clearly attempted voter fraud.

If you still disagree because he only tried to collect a ballot, but hadnt yet attempted to cast it, let me give you a comparable situation that may make the crime a bit more visceral feeling. Your landlord gets caught installing a hidden camera in your bathroom. Technically, all he had done at that point was responded to your notice of a broken outlet, entered your apartment with the necessary notice, removed your broken bathroom outlet, and had a hidden camera outlet device on hand and no other replacement outlet. Technically none of the individual acts were illegal and you caught him with the device before it was installed. He claims that he was never going to turn it on, he was just testing you to see if you were being vigilant against such dangers and checking for hidden cameras in your home. So did he attempt to commit a crime? If your answer to this is yes, but not to the ballot thing, please explain the fundamental difference legally for me?

So cool it hurts, apparently?

I had to Google to check my decription for this acronym. Turns out it is Fuck Around and Find Out, which makes sense. But I also like my initial guess in this context, which was Fascist Asshole, Fuck Off.

Copyright laws are bullshit in that their terms are way too long and are often too easily abused against people who are using copywritten materials under fair use. However copyright as a concept is not bullshit. Creative works, including photography, should absolutely be protected from unauthorized use for the benefit of the creator.

Also, there is nothing redeemable about Trump. Even if you feel that copyright law is somehow fundamentally wrong, the correct position can actually be “fuck all parties involved” instead of supporting Trump hawking his swag to pay for his campaign of fascism.

It wouldn’t be such a problem if it was just about quality control. But the app stores pocket big bucks from the apps you download, including a large cut of subscriptions to services entirely unrelated to the store just because you downloaded the app through them. If I recall, Google takes something like 20 percent and some takes something like 30 (I can’t recall the exact numbers, just that Apple is marginally worse about it).

For example, I love Dropout, a comedy media platform from the former people at College Humor. They offer a $5.99/month subscription for access to their entire catalog. If I went to their website, created an account and bought a subscription, that is $5.99 directly into the hands of the creators I wish to support. I can also then go download the app and enjoy the same service throught that account on my phone or other devices.

However, if I go to the app store, download the app, and buy my subscription in it, Dropout now has to pay Google or Apple a sizable chunk of that $5.99. And not just for that month. For every month that follows for the life of that subscription. Just for the benefit of having an app available to users on devices that hold monopolies on these services.

You might be thinking, well, they could just raise the price for the subscriptions when you sign up through the app to offset the extra fees. You would think that, but no. If I recall correctly, Apple and Google both also require apps to sell subscriptions at the same price as they would be sold outside the apps. If you don’t comply with that, they’ll drop your app altogether. That means that everyone has to pay more, whether you got your subscription through the app or not, to offset those extra costs.

There are many other problems, including anti-competitive/antitrust practices, and ironically, shitty quality control. But such things are inevitable with monopolies.

I didn’t sign a release!

As a python developer, I’ll accept the shower joke in stride. But who are these Esperanto speakers you’re shitting on?

Vance’s comments was the context in which my comment was made. Context matters

First, you missed the part where the actual price now is not 4 dollars? He lied. It was 3 dollars, per the sign right behind him.

Second, national inflation is calculated off a broad spectrum of goods and services providing insight into the relative buying power of tthe dollar itself, so it is not missing the point to compare based on the adjusted buying power of the dollar. It is a more accurate reflection of the true rise in cost of this individual good comparing how its rise in price has outpaced the average rise in costs across the board. It reflects the extra pressures put on the egg market from the avian flu outbreaks and possible other factors rather than the general inflation of the entire economy.

Third, if Vance’s goal was to demonstrate that inflation in general had gone up tremendously and blame Harris specifically for that (despite how ridiculous that is), using eggs as a specific measure of the effect of their policies when the price hike on eggs have significantly outpaced other goods and is clearly due to non-policy related circumstances outside anyone’s control is obviously disingenuous. And that was before he lied and tried to add another 30+ percent on top of the already inflated price.

Not to mention the price spike on eggs specifically is also way less than he would like to make it appear. Yes, in 2020 dollars, a dozen eggs was $1.50. But adjusted for inflation to today’s dollars, that 1.50 is actually about 2 dollars today (inflation being a much broader issue and highly affected by covid). So the price didn’t jump from 1.50 to 4 dollars, an increase of 167%, nor even from 1.5 to 3 dollars, an increase of 100%. It only went up from 2 dollars to just under 3 dollars (given the signs), an increase of just under 50 percent. Considering all the avian flu outbreaks that is an entirely reasonable price hike on a high demand good.

If there were a 4th spatial dimension and you could see in 4 dimensions, yes, you could see the inside of things that are enclosed in 3 dimensions. It wouldn’t be like x-ray vision exactly though. Think about a sphere in 3d. It is enclosed. When you take 2d projections of the sphere by slicing cross-sections of the ball, from a 2d observer on that plane, they would also see an enclosed circular object. But from the 3rd dimensional observer looking down at that cross section they can see everything enclosed in the circle. From the 4th dimension, then it stands to reason they would have a similar view of a 3 dimensional objects innards. But rather than seeing through the object like in an x-ray, they just see the whole thing laid out in every detail at once like we see the insides of the 2d circle.

I disagree. I think we are very much hardwired to innately understand 3d space in an intuitive level. All else about higher and lower dimensions is learned experientially and/or academically, and it’s near impossible not to understand it in terms that relate to 3 dimensions or math. I also think that thinking about 4 dimensions in relation to 3 dimensions makes it impossible to truly understand 4 dimensional space as a whole. We can describe every detail of it mathematically, but still not be able to visualize it in whole. Regardless, given the fact that there is no 4th spatial dimension, I doubt either of us will ever have a definitive answer.

I’ve read it. Recently actually. It is really cool. It kind of supports my point though. It’s hard for those to both comprehend and describe that have been in higher dimensional spaces and much of what they do describe is in 3 dimensional terms, (enclosed spaces being visible as if by an open top being a good example of trying to comprehend a thing that would be uncomprehendable in 4d through a 3d mindset). Of course, it’s also written by an author that hasn’t actually experienced such things and is also trying to imagine what it would be like to experience his interpretation of the phenomenon, so… not exactly conclusive either way.

Interact with, yes. Process and perceive it as it truly is? I don’t believe so, no.

You are correct that 4d toys (and other games) already simulate 4 spatial dimensions. But those games all display the 4th dimensional space from a 3 dimensional projection. I think what OP is suggesting is creating a game that displays an actual 4 spatial dimensions. I have argued in another comment that I don’t think this is possible in a way that our brains could ever percieve or process due to the limitations of a brain evolved in 3 spatial dimensions.

For clarity the word is perpendicularity. A 4th spatial dimension would have to be perpendicular to all 3 other spatial dimensions.