I'm pretty sure the military cares, at least to the extent that it will cause instability. I'm 99% sure there's something from the Pentagon to support that. I wanna say Pentagon wants us to address it before it starts making them do their job a whole lot more.
AHemlocksLie
joined 8 months ago
The problem is they lose their email address, which is tied to just about every digital account they have. Losing your email can royally fuck you. Many sites send an email to the old email of you try to change it, so you'll have to get in touch with support to get it changed, and then support will want proof it's your account somehow, and the whole process is gonna take days or weeks to fix all your accounts. God help you if you forgot any passwords because now you can't login or even reset the password since that goes through email.
I don't see that as a viable path forward. If lack of voters decide the election in favor of the opposition (from your perspective), the party most aligned with you will move away from you to stay competitive. If sufficient votes for third party decide in favor of the opposition, you might get some decent movement towards the third party. If there are so many third party votes that your favored main party loses and the third party rises, the dying party may want to enact change, but they're out of power, and the newly entrenched party won't want to do it because it's now helping them.
Note that none of these result in voting reform. We know because it's happened. It wasn't always the Democrats and the Republicans, but it has pretty much always been a two party system once we got through a few elections.
If you want voting reform, unfortunately, the only way to make that a serious possibility is by making it a serious campaign issue and by fighting to enact it locally and work our way up to the federal level. It'll be hard to go straight for the top, but some areas are starting to experiment and prove it's viable. Next step is to go a little bigger or expand into new areas.
Unfortunately, a first past the post voting system always eventually results in a two party system. Rarely, a third party can rise, but always ushering the demise of one of the previous two. The only way we can escape a two party system is by reforming our voting systems to something like ranked choice or approval voting.
Ah, it came across as thinking they were actually right, that conversion was the reason for the increase. I think that misunderstanding is why you're attracting down votes.
They're not right because they numbers didn't go up from conversion. They went up because people could admit who they are without fear of violence. The true number didn't change, we just became capable of getting a more accurate count.
Yeah, it's bullshit, but unfortunately, homes in an HOA are contractually obligated to obey the rules. In at least some cases, failure to comply results in fines that, if left unpaid, can result in the loss of the home as the HOA effectively gets to sell it to recoup what they're owed.
And cities are encouraging them all over the US, so it's getting increasingly difficult to find a newly built home that isn't in an HOA. Cities love them because they raise and spend their own funds to maintain things, which means the city doesn't have to spend tax money to do those things.
That shit drives me nuts. Wanna be trusted with my life savings, but they can't be bothered to implement modern security features until they're already being phased out. I don't know what will replace modern 2FA schemes, but I guarantee banks will adopt the current ones about three years after the replacements become standard.
Also, they're charging you a poor tax for not having enough money, whether that's a minimum balance or just accidentally spending a nickel more than you had on hand.
Classic Doom 1 and 2. There's gotta be over 100 levels if you count TNT and Plutonia, which I think were sold as Final Doom? Anyway, if you just get the base games for 1 and 2, there are thousands upon thousands of community made maps, including some total conversions, so you can play new Doom content until it physically pains you to continue.
Of course, I feel obligated to mention that even though it would be super easy to pirate the WAD files and play with a free modern source port like GZDoom, like absolutely trivial to find copies of DOOM.WAD and DOOM2.WAD floating around the net, probably showing up easily on Archive.org, but... Um... Where was I going with this? Oh, right, don't pirate. Cheap on GOG last I knew.
Riiiiight. You just completely coincidentally claim that instances of resistance to your aggression are bad. The only time you find resistance to you acceptable is when it’s impotent.
The topic at hand was Russia's invasion of Ukraine in the context of attempting to avoid war. I made no direct comments about other topics, nor did I intend to imply anything beyond that. To quote the comment that sparked all of this:
it’s pretty clear that Russia tried very hard to prevent the situation in Ukraine from devolving into a war.
Russia is responsible for their own actions. Regardless of the facts that form the basis for the decision, if their true goal is to avoid war in a region, the best solution is to not militarily invade that region. That's it. That's my full claim. You can try to argue about whether or not Russia was justified to invade, but that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about Russia wanting to not fight in a region they attacked after making a deal to not invade that region.
Saying that an armed invasion is an act of war and that acts of war are generally not good ways to avoid war is not claiming that resistance to aggression is bad. It is literally pointing out an act of aggression. According to the Budapest Memorandum, the deal for Ukraine giving up nukes was that Russia agrees to respect their sovereignty. And then Russia invaded Ukraine to annex territory. Twice now. I don't believe you're so stupid you can't grasp that, I think you're just that disingenuous.
I am not advocating that resistance to aggression is bad, and I think you know that.
I'm not disputing that they want to use AI. I'm disputing the idea that the military doesn't care about climate change. Climate change will cause instability and greatly increase the odds of them having to actually fight. As much as the military enjoys a good flex now and then, they generally prefer to win without fighting.