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.

SLASH’EM

This is a roguelike for people who find Nethack too easy. Then you have the option of layering in challenges like blind, pacifist, and vegan. Go ahead, try playing through as a blind, vegan, pacifist Tourist. I dare ya.

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.

Oh See Paren Left Brace Whatmark

For loads of alternatives, see the Jargon File

Yes, it’s legal in much of the US. Many states require a permit for concealed carry, but not for open carry. WalMart has signs at the front of the store “requesting” people not to open carry, but apparently not prohibiting it.

Slow down there - you’re making some rather large assumptions about why they have guns. Sure, some people have guns for “self defense” (some for valid reasons, others because racism). Others have them for hunting. Sometimes they’re inherited and have sentimental value.

Edit: Also, kids aren’t the only reason not to keep them loaded. Keeping guns and ammo separately secured introduces enough of a delay to reduce the risk of suicide, for example.

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.

It can be

Pornography is close to full sex work

FTFY

Pacifica then.

That would be true for competent web developers. Unfortunately, those are a vanishingly small subset.

Not completely ignoring - I assume that was the swipe about “only engages in genocide reluctantly” was about.

Myself, I agree with you that we haven’t seen much sign of that reluctance.

Nah. This has happened with every major corporate antivirus product. Multiple times. And the top IT people advising on purchasing decisions know this.

Florida.

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.

Little Bunny Foo Foo, I don’t wanna see you …

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.