This feels… Scammy? Not to be accusatory, but gpt 4 is expensive to run. It is impossible for people to use it for free.
What llm is actually providing the response here? Either someone is footing the bill for an API and acting as a proxy, a situation which raises many red flags, or the model you’re talking to is something far cheaper to run, like a mistral model.
Figuring this one out myself too. Liaobots is a chinese site and when asked about the gpt-4-plus model it mentions that it’s based on the gpt-4 architecture but i’m not too sure as well. My guess is that the chinese reverse engineered gpt-4 and put it out there, like a bootleg gpt-4.
Bing tends to get heavily ratelimited.
So maybe, yes you’re there’s a sketchiness and too-good-to-be-true factor to this so maybe calling it “free gpt-4” is a bit misleading. But it’s still super cool to have an all-in-one interface for all your llm providers and models :)
There is almost no chance that it is truthfully based on gpt 4. If you want a free, open source llm with 32k context and generous limits, I recommend using huggingface.co/chat/
The nous-hermes model (you can select different models) is uncensored, and performs really well for a open source model. Plus, they have data controls so you can turn off data gathering per model. Huggingface is a reputable vendor, and doesn’t claim to be something it isn’t.
I mean, be careful. These llms can be honeypots for data. Like, if you’re using it for cover letters, or work, you’re sending tons of personal info to random websites.
I would recommend sticking to actual, reputable vendors for llms, or running your own. I have a GTX 1070 and can run some pretty decent models these days locally using koboldai.
Bing is probably the only way to use gpt 4 without paying for it, and Microsoft probably won’t steal your bank account info.
Sadly that will never happen (peacefully) because the smaller states would never vote to reduce their own power. That’s not even considering it would require a constitutional amendment, which is notoriously hard to pass.
The House used to regularly increase in size and has only been at 435 seats since 1911 and capped at that size since 1929. This is changeable through normal law making.
The Senate was the solution, the house is meant to be population based but they ran out of space in the chamber and capped it instead of just building a bigger room so now Wyoming is massively overrepresented.
You want less than one congressman per state or what? California has 40 or 50, there’s like 5 states with one congressman. Spare me the crocodile tears about you’re so under represented.
They weren’t suggesting that there be less than one congressman in Wyoming. You seem to have entirely ignored the actual suggestion they were making, which seems difficult.
Nah. They were just crying because they think their team will have an easier time pushing someone else’s team around if certain states get even more congressmen
And that one congressman represents 500k people, Meanwhile each of Florida’s represents 800k people. Why should the people of Florida’s votes be worth 60% of a Wyoming voter’s? Why should we not just give Florida 11 more congresspeople so it’s even?
California has 678,945 residents per elected representative versus Wyoming’s 284,150, meaning that Wyoming’s residents have an almost 3x voice. Wyoming is the most represented state by population ratio and California is last.
As others have said, that’s what the senate was for, while the House should have a static ratio across all states with the count increasing by total national population.
boo fucking hoo. they have 40 plus representatives, Wyoming is a big state. 2 senators and a congressman. Person could easily argue a Californians vote is worth much more, that state has a whole team going in the house. the ratio is basically static, except for states that no longer the population to get one. Like do you want Wyoming and north dakota to share a house member? That’s not practical either.
In area, sure, but most of it is empty or populated by more cows than humans. You’re basically saying that empty land and cows deserve equal representation to humans.
Person could easily argue a Californians vote is worth much more
You could, but you’d be very very wrong. A third as much is not more.
Like do you want Wyoming and north dakota to share a house member?
Wouldn’t be any more stupid than the current situation 🤷
i am so surprised you’d immediately say that. just shocked. You’ve quite the grasp of west coast slang and politics that’s either method acting or bullshit,
If your really are, you’re oddly obsessed with american life and never spell anything wrong.
When America sneezes, Europe catches a cold. Besides, American politics is all over the internet, so it’s not like you have to search that hard to know about it.
And I make spelling errors and/or typos all the time, I just fix them as I catch them. That’s why most of my posts and comments have that [edited] icon next to them.
They passed three pro-statehood referendums since 2012. It doesn’t seem to matter. Presumably, if they passed a pro-independence referendum, it wouldn’t happen either.
Your vote for president has zero power outside of your state. Your vote informs your state’s electoral representative as to who to vote for.
States elect a president as the leader of the executive branch, a federal role, which affects relationships between a federation of states. Federal government’s role is supposed to be limited to managing the relationships between states.
It’s not a popular vote. Never has been, and would be inappropriate to make it so. Basic civics.
There’s way too much attention paid to the office of president, when there are ~500 other federal politicians who are ignored by doing so.
I know how the system works. I’m not disputing it. I’m saying the status quo is bad, not that it’s false.
It’s not a popular vote. Never has been, and would be inappropriate to make it so. Basic civics.
Pointing out it’s “basic civics” that that’s how it works currently, and using that to sneak in the huge claim that it’s also “basic civics” that a popular vote “would be inappropriate”. If that was intentional, it was clever.
Since COVID, Migration from large, expensive coastal cities to sparsely populated rural states is one of the greatest opportunity to permanently flip representation. Idaho was the largest percentage population gainer in the US since COVID and almost all of it coming from CA, OR, WA. Were this to continue you’d probably be looking at a blue state in an election cycle or two. I think this is one of the reasons, long with insane sadism, that Rs are trying to push such radical agendas t state levels–to scare moderates and progressives from moving there. Wyoming could be permablue with one year of concentrated migration.
Even states like Texas, thought of as Red stronghold are not that disproportionately voted Red; 2020 was a difference of 600k votes. 100k net Californians(only CA!) were moving to Texas a year during the pandemic, if you add in other states we might actually see it flip in a few cycles, though the radical agenda being pushed is going to kill those numbers perhaps. Very curious to see 2024 shifts.
Spent ALL day driving rural Mississippi and Alamba and has the same thoughts about WFH. I’m happy where I’m at, but what if I wanted to move or retire to one of the picturesque small towns in Alabama? How many people have done exactly that?
Same reason I may take my wife back to the Philippines when we retire. Money spends different when an apartment is $150/mo. and a loaf of bread is $.15.
Huh, I think they all flew to Mexico, I did a road trip from Mexico to Austin TX recently and I do recall having not many bugs in my windshield in the USA… But back home to Mexico they all started to appear LMAO.
It’s two things, one personal vehicles are designed to bend air around them rather than slice through or just brute force through air resistance. This means that more bugs are pushed out of the way with newer vehicles now, compared to older vehicles which just had the bug hit the windshield. The second and much more impactful reason is because the insect population has dropped significantly in the last 25 years.
Unfortunately yes. This story by NPR isn’t an academic source but it’s definitely worth listening to. On average bug populations have declined by 2% a year for decades or more in some areas, less in others. It’s an average.
Now truthfully, whether or not a declining bug population is the main cause of fewer bugs on our windshields or if it’s better aerodynamics I don’t know. What I do know is a more aerodynamic vehicle isn’t something I need to worry about, a declining bug population is.
I just drove through Tennessee, Arkansas, and Texas and confirmed there are still enough bugs out there to make you use a squeegee when you fill up for gas. But I remember when I was younger having to stop just to clean the windshield or else you wouldn’t be able to see.
Car design change? I’d assume that more aerodynamic cars airflow that sweeps more bugs away rather than smacking them into the glass. I can assure you that they still hit motorcycle visors.
I use light mode on Discord, and just about everything really. I don’t like the feeling of being in a gamer cave. I always have a bunch of lamps on, and light themes too.
It is always ethical to not starve to death. (Caveat: assuming you are not directly harming someone else) If the only job available to you is making supplies for the military, don’t beat yourself up. We live in a capitalist hellscape, you need to pay rent, you need to buy food, you need health insurance, you need to be able to have vacations and save for retirement and do fun things from time to time. If you can do anything to mitigate that harm–participate in demonstrations, donate to aid organizations, etc–do that; but if you’re not in a situation to be able to do those things, you’re not being unethical. You’re just doing what you can.
It is always ethical to do less harm. If your company makes support equipment for military applications–desk chairs, for example, or toilet paper–your job is more ethical than the job making, you know, bombs or bullets or napalm or whatever. A job making things that are not inherently harmful but can be used in the course of causing harm– well, let’s be honest, that’s every job.
A job in military supply is as ethical as the company you work for and the military they sell to. If your company is selling smart bombs to Russia’s military, try to get out. But if your company is selling to a military that uses the products of your labor to mount a defense against an invading force, what you’re doing might even be helping to reduce death.
But overall, “ethicalness” is not a binary, and it’s not the same in every situation.
Very good criterias! I think OP posted a great question, and your philosophy seems to be a very interesting merge of a virtue-based approach (that A/B is always good/bad) and an utilitarian one. I like it at a lot :)
I really have bad luck with Manjaro, even when I don’t use the aur it always breaks on me. I just stick to arch, I started with it and I’m sticking with it.
I haven’t used it personally but I’ve seen a lot of folks bad mouthing Manjaro.
Lots of complaints of instability and it being poorly run project. One of the more objective complaints I’ve read is they have a slower release process so security fixes take longer then Arch.
No. Manjaro is more likely to break than arch because they hold of updating their pakages. What you are looking for is EndavourOS. I consider it to be “the new manjaro”
I’ve been using manjaro for around a year. It broke on me once, probably my fault, idk. I enjoy it! I’ve distro hopped many places and a year is a long time for me, so much about it is right for me. You’ll certainly get a worthy experience of what arch is capable of, I believe.
That being said, I plan on swapping to arch really soon.
I’ve been daily driving Manjaro for 4 years without any issues. Generally speaking I’d recommend seeing if there is a flatpak for an app before using AUR. I don’t update as soon as updates are out though, so usually any issues there may have been have been shmoothed over before I get to it.
The short and unsatisfactory answer to your question is that this isn’t a hostile work environment. A hostile work environment is narrowly defined. You telling everyone about his rape of your friend is closer to the definition than him being a rapist.
An unsafe work environment applies only to physical hazard, so the same goes there. You’d have to demonstrate and prove that he is causing you current harm. Basically, unless he sexually harasses you or attempts to rape you, and you can prove it, there is no leg for you to stand on.
The law was built by men. It’s built on what has happened, not what could happen. It doesn’t protect victims, only inconsistently avenge. The bulk of protections in place are for accused/ perpetrators.
You're allowed to like a story you grew up with as a child and also dislike its bigot author, they're not mutually exclusive. Talking about Harry Potter doesn't give Rowling magical transphobe powers; Voldemort logic doesn't work in real life. The rightsholders have already taken great strides to distance the HP property from Rowling and adopt it to be more inclusive in spite of her TERF bullshit. It's not a hate crime to like a story about child wizards anymore.
If people want to geek out about some books or movies they like, they should be allowed to do so without the insinuation that they're by default enabling transphobia or something. But the beauty of the Fediverse is that your community has just as much right to exist as any other, so as long as you can maintain a healthy, hate-free community that isn't posting a bunch of pro-Rowling bullshit, I say go for it. Anyone who would block your instance for merely existing probably isn't worth your time, anyway.
Let me pose a hypothetical to you then. If the transphobic rhetoric of JKR escalated, and transphobes took action, like just started doing even more harm to the trans community than they already have. At what point would you say “you know what, I’ve had enough of HP. It’s just distasteful to engage with this anymore”.
Let’s say a trans person enters, participates, and becomes a part of your HP fan community. What if they are directly, or even indirectly, harmed by JKR’s transphobic rhetoric? If you continue to engage with how great the content is, while ignoring what just happened, was that trans person, who was harmed, ever really part of your community? Or were you just paying lip service to your community’s inclusivity?
These hypotheticals can happen, it’s not even remotely outside the realm of possibility. At what point is engaging in HP fandom distasteful?
At what point is engaging in HP fandom distasteful?
I'd say when the material that makes up the HP franchise, itself, becomes distasteful. I'm not hugely invested into HP, but last I've seen of it, the franchise is LGBT-inclusive, directly in spite of Rowling. I see no reason why one shouldn't be allowed to enjoy the story.
Yeah, Rowling may still profit from it. But the bitter pill is that she's allowed to. People are entitled to make money from their IPs, it's how society enables creatives. Just because somebody's a shit person doesn't mean they're not allowed to earn a living. And realistically, she's going to make money from it, anyway. Blocking a Lemmy instance has literally zero impact on Rowling's bottom line, making the act little more than posturing.
The HP material, itself, is fine. And the HP community largely seems inclusive toward LGBT fans. I can't think of any reason to consider liking it or talking about it to be distasteful. Rowling's a TERF shitbag, and I think most of the HP community is generally onboard with that notion, too.
I’d say when the material that makes up the HP franchise, itself, becomes distasteful. I’m not hugely invested into HP, but last I’ve seen of it, the franchise is LGBT-inclusive, directly in spite of Rowling. I see no reason why one shouldn’t be allowed to enjoy the story.
It’s not about ”allowing” people to enjoy the story. I’m only pointing out consequences both intended and not intended incurred by choices to engage with, and inherently validate, an author who has engaged in transphobic hateful rhetoric.
Engaging in communities that reinforce a positive viewpoint of a story written by a transphobic hateful person is harmful to those communities in ways that are both overt and subtle. If you are okay with that, then at least don’t deny it.
Yeah, Rowling may still profit from it.
I never mentioned boycotting her material because it somehow might starve her of profit. You are obfuscating the argument from the main point. This farcical argument is often brought up as if the harm that the trans community experiences from JKR’s rhetoric is directly related to JKR’s wallet. It’s not. It’s her hate speech and the complacency around that hate speech that is the issue.
Rowling’s a TERF shitbag, and I think most of the HP community is generally onboard with that notion, too.
Obviously I agree on Rowling being a TERF shitbag. And in all truth, I’m sure the majority of the HP community aren’t blatant transphobes. The problem is not in any obvious transphobia exhibited by the HP community, but rather what an HP community inherently must ignore in order to enjoy the material. To continue to find the HP franchise tasteful, you must ignore the hateful rhetoric of it’s author, and the repercussions of said rhetoric.
Again, if you’re okay with that, then I’d encourage you to admit that to at least yourself.
Engaging in communities that reinforce a positive viewpoint of a story written by a transphobic hateful person is harmful to those communities in ways that are both overt and subtle.
How? If the community at large is against Rowing and is inclusive in defiance of her stance, then it would seem to me that they have enough self-awareness to take care of themselves and mitigate any of this nebulous harm.
Because continuing to engage with her content is a form of endorsement of her viewpoints (As mentioned in my previous comment, it is not inherently monetary support).
By saying, ”I enjoy the content. I don’t support her views, but I’m not going to go out of my way to condemn her, and I’m going to continue to engage in positive discourse about her work.", you are indicating “I don’t stand against trans bigotry unless publicly pressured to do so. I value the entertainment of her work more than dislike the harm my turning a blind eye to the harm the author causes with her hate speech.” Most commonly followed by “I’m just going to pretend it’s okay because it makes me uncomfortable to think otherwise. I’m not a bad person, and refuse to even acknowledge that I might be wrong here.”
This simple line of thought that is understandably easy to fall into is often used amongst outright hate groups, transphobes in this case, to empathize with people within this community.
With that empathy built off of a mutual dislike for the trans people making them feel bad for just wanting to like their little HP fan club, they form a bond of an us vs them mentality, where the “us"becomes less and less about their love of the content, and more and more about their dislike of the " other.”
Part of this discourse I’m engaging in here isn’t in the hope that somehow I can dissuade anyone from joining this community. People gonna do what they’re gonna do. But pointing out the potential pitfalls of founding and perpetuating this community is meant to instill in those that join an awareness of exactly WHY trans people and their allies are so upset that people are willing to turn a deaf ear to their voices when they tell you to think more carefully on this, to reconsider your position.
then it would seem to me that they have enough self-awareness to take care of themselves and mitigate any of this nebulous harm.
They don’t though. Because to mitigate the harm would mean having a more difficult discussion on how JKR’s works and awkward stumblings around inclusivity in her works have been nothing but tokenism. A facade of inclusivity made in bad faith. But that’s not what this community would ever want to do, because to do so would be to point out exactly what I’ve been arguing this entire time, that to ignore the fact thst you are celebrating the works created by a bigot means you silently are endorsing her, even if you vocally condemn her.
People claim to care, and heck, words matter. But words only matter inasmuch as what those words do, or inspire people to do. JKR’s words obviously have inspired a lot of people in a lot of different ways. But what have they ulimately inspired people to do really?
At best, they inspired people to get together and engage in conversations about a fantasy world, maybe come up with amazing stories of their own. At worst, they inspired some people to go out and make some poor trans person want to kill themselves.
The question I pose is, does the good really outweigh the bad? I don’t think so.
Lol. How so? Seems like a lot of people here singing the praises of the work while condemning the author have a pretty hard time squaring with themselves that maybe enjoying the work somehow makes trans people feel unseen, unheard?
No, because that directly supports Trump. That's hardly an apt comparison to talking about HP on an obscure website with no ads or links to Rowling whatsoever.
Let me ask you this. Tell me what companies and what countries pass this purity test? Where is the line drawn? If someone spends money on leisure in the states for example, are they supporting racism, transphobia etc due to their moneys going to states like Florida, Texas etc? What about people that buy video games even though companies are known to work their employees into depression and have harmful ethics regarding female employees with sexual harassment? Are people that buy games endorsing that culture? How should those victims view fans that continue to make those companies money? What about companies that outsource their manufacturing processes to China? Some companies have put suicide nets to prevent employees from unaliving themselves. Many companies use China for manufacturing. By purchasing products are we endorsing that culture that has led to people taking their own lives?
Whoa, lots of whataboutisms going on here. I don’t think you’re making these questions in good faith, but hey, I’m always willing to field questions from z’haters.
If someone spends money on leisure in the states for example, are they supporting racism, transphobia etc due to their moneys going to states like Florida, Texas etc?
No, only if they knowingly support the businesses of those who are racists, transphobes, and other hate groups. Yeah, their tax money goes towards very hateful politicians, but as long as their beliefs don’t align with them, then they’re just people trying to survive in a state run by shitty politicians.
What about people that buy video games even though companies are known to work their employees into depression and have harmful ethics regarding female employees with sexual harassment?
Yeah, don’t play those games, and let those companies know why! Video games and entertainment aren’t inherently necessary to your survival, and if you knowingly purchase, and engage in positive rhetoric around those games, you are endorsing the bad practices that made that game possible. I know game devs just need to make a living in a shitty industry, but that industry will remain shitty unless you hit those corporate asshats where it hurts, and the only place it hurts is their wallets. It sucks because the devs don’t deserve to be dragged down monetarily with the asshats up top, but that’s the way the capitalist cookie crumbles right now, and the only moral choice in my view is to not buy those games at all.
Are people that buy games endorsing that culture?
If they buy those games specifically, while also knowing about the disgusting business practices that were engaged in during it’s production? Yes.
How should those victims view fans that continue to make those companies money?
As ignorant participants in a flawed corporate infrastructure in which they are trapped in at best, and uncaring knowing participants at worst. If these employees speak out, they are left without a means of a living wage income due to horrific minimum wage laws and no social safety net. I’ve met people in the video game industry, gotten beers with them, talked with them, most of them didn’t know how toxic it was going to be when they got into it. But they invested so much time, energy, and usually also money in their education, that they have little recourse now to abandon their job for my “purity test”, as you put it. I am sympathetic towards their plight because their livelihood and lifestyle depends on it. The same cannot be said of those wanting to create a little HP fan club.
What about companies that outsource their manufacturing processes to China?
Ah yes, the big elephant in the room, right? You can’t get away from Chinese products, their everywhere! You can’t live cheaply without China’s horrible work practices, right? All the while they additionally suppress public forms of dissent, have a literal dictator for life as a “president”, have displaced the Dalai Llama, have imprisoned dissidents in Hong Kong, refused to acknowledge the statehood of Tibet and Taiwan, not to mention the horrific treatment of the Uyghur Muslims. So yeah, it’s a shitty situation and in the US, many goods are difficult to find that don’t come from China, and most cheap goods are produced in China. So what about that?
My take on it is if you can do without Chinese products, do it. If you don’t need it for work or school, then yeah, you get a pass from my “purity test”. If you can’t afford to buy a more expensive product that doesn’t come from China, and again, you really actually need it (and don’t simply want it), then buy it. Then go out and condemn the Chinese Communist Party regardless. Condemn them loudly and in public, on the internet and IRL, as often as the subject comes up. Bring up the topic from time to time if it bothers you, and it should.
Ultimately your bad faith arguments are basically saying “There’s a lot of bad in the world, and if you do any of the things I mentioned, your hands aren’t clean! You’re not holier than me, you’re just like the rest of us, so STFU!” But that’s the whole thing, I’m as disgusted with this shit as the rest of you, the only difference is I refuse to STFU about it and say nothing.
I’m not blind to the fact that some people are in bad situations they can’t get out of. Capitalism as a whole and the history of racism, homophobia, and transphobia that have plagued human history has put us all in a shit situation that we can only play our small role in, and survive in. But that doesn’t mean things can’t change. Slavery was once thought a necessary evil that propped up the American economy during the 19th century, the Feminist movement was ridiculed as promoting an “unnatural” restructuring of the existing social hierarchy, Racism was silently accepted by the majority until the Civil Rights movements upended the status quo, and Homosexuality only became more socially accepted after the Stonewall Riots occurred and people died for their right to personhood. Societal change has never been solved by a comfortable nice conversation or sticking your head in the sand. It has always happened because disenfranchised people stood the fuck up, said something, and did something, and very often this had to happen many many times over before society at large got the fucking message, heard their voices, and changed (we’re still addressing all these issues on some level or another right now, and our rhetoric around these subjects continues to change, overall for the better, thanks to these initial challenges to the status quo).).
Now, you could argue that joining an HP fan club can do the same from the inside, but, obviously, I disagree. Many of these aforementioned movements didn’t succeed because they ignored the bigotry around them (though trust me, many of them wanted to, they tried, and they failed). These movements only succeeded when they called out the hatred, bigotry, and INDIFFERENCE for what it was over and over and over again.
Something about the little girl in purple shirt crying always gets to me. I think it triggers the memory of the tear-gassed “birthday girl” photo from 2019 Hong Kong
I get that you’ve got good intentions, but this reads like an email I would find my spam folder and I can’t imagine it would inspire any reddit mods to move over to Lemmy. The mods who were so dissatisfied with Reddit that they would be willing to migrate with the information in this script have already done so.
There are likely be some who might be willing to migrate if they get personal support from an instance admin or some other tangible offer of assistance, but nobody is going to jump ship just because “Reddit Bad” anymore.
Make Lemmy a place worth hanging out and having a discussion rather than desperately trying to recreate the shit hole that is reddit?
People weren’t “organizing” to convince users of digg to migrate to reddit For The Greater Good. It was instead obvious digg was a mess and people went to the better site.
And everyone acknowledges that mastodon is much healthier than lemmy (… damn that is a low bar). And that is because there aren’t swarms of people constantly trying to convince kylie jenner that she should post on mastodon instead. Instead, there is very much “This shit isn’t twitter. Twitter sucked long before dipshit bought it” and it is building its own identity.
Whereas… a lot of y’all feel like the ex that sends texts a year later about how you bought a new shirt or you lost weight. And I am sure a few of you are looking to pick up some strange to show those jerks at reddit that your new boyfriend has an even bigger dick and knows how to use it before tearfully calling in the morning about how you are still in love with him and want him to take you back.
There are a couple of principles to ensure an activity drive like this is successful:
You need a significant number of contributors acting under agreed upon guidelines. The contributors will give you reach and the guidelines prevent singular actors from ruining momentum by taking counter productive actions with good intentions.
You need lead-up time to gather contributors and establish guidelines. In this case you would probably want some Reddit mods sympathetic to your cause so that it doesn’t sound like the initiative is from a purely external group.
You need to leverage bandwagon effects. In this case those Reddit mods are critical to giving the impression that there is already momentum in this direction.
You need a well formatted landing page to establish initial impressions. A lot of folks will click on exactly one link before giving up on an effort. You need to make that link count.
I’m working on compiling guides and establishing a community to organize initiatives like this over at !digitalcommunitybuilding. The project is in very early stages but the hope is to ensure your digital activism is actually effective.
All that said I would strongly recommend against this approach unless you can make a BIG push and that takes time to organize and a lot of one-on-one conversation.
When using vehicles, unnecessary noise and avoidable exhaust pollution are prohibited. In particular, it is prohibited to run vehicle engines unnecessarily and to close vehicle doors excessively loudly. Unnecessary driving to and fro within built-up areas is prohibited if it causes a nuisance to others.
Noise is a public nusince. I definitely wouldn’t want my neighbours constantly slamming their doors at night. I doubt you are going to get fined if you are slamming your door occasionally or in the middle of the woods.
Laws exist to ensure that we can all live peacefully together. I think most people agree that excessive noise is more of a negative than a positive. Most places have similar curfew laws where excessive noise at night is not allowed.
If Biden died, his VP, Kamala Harris would become the president–the first woman president, as it happens. Everything would pretty much go on as it was.
Trump’s death is entirely irrelevant to this scenario, and not useful to consider.
Trump’s death is entirely irrelevant to this scenario, and not useful to consider.
You’re only addressing what happens with the current administration. OP’s question as stated opens the door to discussion about the 2024 election, the MAGA movement, the state of fascism in the nation etc.
Biometric login. It is available to an extent through fprint on Linux but support is not there for all hardware and it isn’t a very seamless experience to setup at the moment
Biometrics authentication seems to me to be entirely useless. It’s less secure and more easily spoofed than passwords, and if you need more security 2FA or a physical key (digital or otherwise) provide it. It would be nice to have the support I guess, but the tech itself just seems like a waste of money.
The Windows Hello camera enumerates under Linux as just another webcam that activates the flashing LEDs when it turns on (I’ve found a number of neat uses for this, including having a ridiculously low gain IR camera that I can just use for whatever and have what would be a surprisingly good emulation of the Wii sensor bar for use with Dolphin if it weren’t constantly flashing on and off), and there is software (Howdy) for using it to sign in. Unfortunately, signing in with your face of course precludes using your password for decryption, meaning that after you start some applications you’ll be prompted to type your password anyway to unlock your system keyring, and perhaps more importanty SDDM isn’t smart enough to interface with fprintd/howdy properly and doesn’t even try to activate the biometric sensor until you type something in the password box.
(Also, hilariously, because of how I set it up initially to accept my face instead of a password for sudo, I couldn’t configure it to check whether the terminal was remote, so when I ssh’d in and tried to sudo, it turned on the hello camera however far away that was and looked for my face, only prompting me for a password after facial rec timed out.)
Think of a guilty/not guilty plea as the defense declaring their stance rather than literally saying “I did this” or “I did not do this”. After all there are circumstances in which a person absolutely did the thing they’re accused of but are not actually guilty (self defense) or extenuating circumstances need to be considered (insanity plea).
Perjury requires that a person lied under oath in a specific, provable way. That’s why defense attorneys will sometimes have their client not take the stand or assert their fifth amendment rights in response to certain questions. Making the prosecution prove that the defendant did a thing is fine. Saying “I didn’t do thing X at all” and then having evidence being presented that you did is no bueno.
TL;DR: A not guilty plea basically says “prove it”. Perjury is lying about specifics and it can later be proved beyond a reasonable doubt that you lied about those details.
Your choice is “Guilty” or “Not Guilty” not “Guilty” or “Innocent”.
(And for the pedantic out there yes, there are more things you can plead than just guilty or not guilty)
“Not guilty” doesn’t mean innocent, it just means you take the stance that prosecutors are unable to prove their version of events beyond reasonable doubt.
kbin.life
Top