It looks like the synthesis of those two seemingly contradictory things is: If Congress is still in session after the 10 day grace period for the president to sign it has passed, the bill is treated as signed and becomes law. However if the 10 day grace period goes by and Congress is no longer in session at the end of that period, the bill is treated as vetoed.

Another approach: Does nibbling on it count as a signature?

I get where you are coming from, but this event is pretty much entirely the fault of Crowdstrike and the countless organizations that trusted them. It’s definitely a show of how massive outages are more likely when things are overly centralized and proprietary, and managed by big, shitty, profit driven organizations. Since crowdstrike operates in kernel space, it doesn’t matter which operating system it’s on, it can break it if it does something stupid. In fact they managed to break some redhat machines not too long ago, and some Debian machines not long before that. It’s just the impact wasn’t as far reaching as this recent utter fuckup, just because fewer critical machines were affected, so we didn’t hear about those smaller fuckups in the news.

I was gonna answer that most animals don’t live as long and reproduce faster than humans (so populations survive despite increased cancer risk), but when I looked into it I found a deep rabbit hole. In the case of wolves, I’m sure plenty died early on, because the populations present appear to have some genetic immune adaptations that protect them from cancer. I know other species (like frogs) have dark skin because the melenin increased the survival rate of the darker frogs at the time of the accident. So that is to say probably a lot of wildlife died, and that natural selection lead to some critters that are pretty resistant to radiation.

Risks of medical intervention always should be weighed against risks of nonintervention. If there is a significant probability a child is trans, delaying puberty may be the least intrusive option. There is a chance of negative effects, like with all medical interventions, but if they are most likely trans forcing them to undergo puberty is much more likely to have long term negative effects (including suicidality). Why is this specific medical decision equivalent to kids having sex? Do you view other procedures, like deciding to have braces, the same way? What about much riskier treatments with a muddled short/long term prognosis, like some heart surgeries?

I’ve encountered IT departments with an unencrypted passwords.xlsx file that they store on the network. Not always super small companies too.

I think it also just took on a bunch of technical debt and was poorly managed, so I don’t know if they could have pulled it off with more time. Like they were forced by management to use KSP1 code, and were not allowed to talk to the KSP1 devs, and repeatedly hemorrhaged workers meaning even less of the code base has experts. I think they maybe would be better off starting from scratch (reusing assets) at this point if they wanted to deliver their more difficult goals like multiplayer.

They are talking corporate death penalty (as evidenced by the rest of the comment), not literal killing of people. And they are correct.

How is it that we are the same person

Have you tried screwing it into a socket?

Do you know how much work it is to live unhoused? How uncomfortable and dehumanizing? If you are completely without shelter, how it is after it rains, or the air is choked with smoke during fire season?

It seems like you have just one explanation for everything here. When there’s a problem, it’s because of some moral failing that has to be punished. The publication you reference is telling.

Your attitude toward both Roma and unhoused is an outside look in, entirely through the lens of criminality. There is no understanding there. You are missing the big picture, the why behind all of the things people do.

If you really want to scam people, you start an LLC and live comfortably off of other people’s work, like, you know, rich people do.

You are completely divorced from the reality on the ground.

A good chunk of the unhoused (at least where I live, US CA) have jobs, it’s just not enough for rent or they can’t find a place because of poor credit, which means the places available are even more expensive. Rent has increased faster than median income, and way faster than low income.

Most unhoused are there temporarily. Anything nice they have may be from before they got into their present situation. And what are they supposed to do? Pawn off their cell phone for pennies on the dollar?

The explosion in number of unhoused people is not just a bunch of people happening to have some sort of moral failure all at once. The simpler explanation is that our economy and society is failing. And what do we expect to see as resources are hoarded by the powerful at exponentially increasing rates? Where do those resources come from?

Also self report on your attitude toward Roma people.

That’s what my doctor keeps telling me

rip:(

I think the meme is fairly clearly making fun of American conservative/fascist discourse. Like the whole watering down of any semblance of a working definition of CRT when referenced by right wing pundits and moral panic board meeting parents, where right wing people call every call to be somewhat decent human beings “CRT” or “wokism”, and then have no actual working meaning for those words except as something that seems left wing and makes them uncomfortable.

Oh neat! Thanks for pointing me toward that. Will definitely check that out:)

Heh no that’s the mushroom forager’s bible right there, going back many years, it’s assigned reading for mycology students and very reputable. It’s funny how much it looks ML generated, but it well predates ML image generation. For reference, he’s holding a flesh colored mushroom and a trumpet.

Why not call someone what they want to be called? It ain’t new. Just like it’s polite to ask someone “can I call you x” or “do you prefer x or y” when you start to call someone a nickname or more personal name, someone can ask to be called x, and it’s polite to do so. Names are arbitrary things, but at the same time often deeply meaningful to people.

I don’t quite recall, but I think they were moved again to an office or something. No idea who was moving computers around and properly connecting them to the network, it wasn’t us (contracted IT). At least they put both this guy’s computers directly next to eachother. But nothing was labelled. I recall trying to get someone onsite to label the computers both times and I don’t think it ever happened lol.

I think another wrinkle was that most of the attorneys were at that time being migrated or already using a single remote desktop server in a Colo, so I don’t know why the customer got this guy a second remote computer. The owner had a tendency of just buying computers without consulting us, and this particular lawyer was a bit of a squeaky faucet with tech, and the RDS was… less than perfect. So that’s probably it.

I had a client at a law firm who moved to a different city, but continued to remote into his computer at work. At some point someone moved it to some other spot in the building so they could have someone else use his desk, and he continued to use it without issue.

Until one day it shut down, while he was in the middle of something very important and lawyery. No one at the firm was willing to look for it (as they were all lawyers), so we had to send a technician on site to just check each room until he spotted an old computer connected to power and Ethernet in the corner of a mail room.

Some months later it happened again, in a the middle of another important time sensitive lawyer thing. Except now he had two headless computers which he used both of (an old computer and a new one he was migrating to), and he still didn’t know where they were physically. Luckily there was a intern on site to do the search this time, but it took some time to figure out which was which when we did locate them.

I’m a bit confused if I watched the same thing as OP and you. I don’t think those comments are from him, but rather random people responding to his video? The video seemed like an argument that pure self-interest is self defeating, and on the importance of solidarity, in response to someone saying that supporting blind access is virtue signaling. But with a clickbaity and a bit misleading title (note apostrophe position in Redditor’s vs Redditors’)