You better be Mormon. Polyglotimy is only allowed for them for some reason.

It’s an album cover for sure. Album titled Milf Hunter.

Every finite range has 2 limits. A bottom limit and a top limit.

But that still doesn’t change the belief that a creator could have created the universe in whatever state it currently exists in. That’s why these arguments never go anywhere with hard core young earth creationists. It’s also not worth the energy arguing with them because they often believe that anyone trying to convince them otherwise is an antichrist trying to lead them astray.

There’s a lot of stuff everyone has that they don’t need. What’s your point? Are you going to go vegan? because technically you don’t need meat. Are you going to stop driving an automatic transmission? Because you don’t need that. Oh, social media (Lemmy included), you definitely don’t need that.

Yes a totally normal thing to say about a sexual assault victim who was murdered by her assaulter.

Yes but that isn’t changed by the amount of data used. There is no cost to supply per kb supplied, only a cost to maintain the equipment that governs the speed of the connection.

Here’s an analog example. If the city you lived in started charging you more for the water to come into your house faster as well as charging you for the amount of water you use. Obviously you should pay for the amount of a finite resource you use but the speed at which you acquired that resource should be limited only by the physics of the water transportation system.

Data on the other hand, is not a finite resource. There is no limit to the amount of data one can acquire given endless time and energy. So the only way to bill for that becomes the speed at which you acquire the data. You pay for the data speed and that funds the infrastructure to supply that speed indefinitely. End of story. The only reason data caps exist is that they want to charge more money for you to use less bandwidth so they can sell that bandwidth to other people. When what should really happen is, they should invest in higher bandwidth capacity and sell that to their customers to return on that investment.

Either supply me infinite speed and bill me for the amount of data used or supply me infinite data and bill me for the bandwidth. Not both.

3 seconds when under 65. 5 seconds when it’s raining or I’m moving faster than posted highway speeds. It pisses people off but I’m hauling a ton of steel and plastic around, I’m not going to risk my life and everyone’s around me just because some guy is late for work or can’t be patient and needs to get where he’s going a few seconds before me. People tend to lose the reality of the situation when driving their super fast metal explosion machines.

Pink as well.some cultures still just refer to pink as “light red”. Some cultures don’t distinguish between blue and green. Some cultures make specific distinctions between blue and light blue. (see Italian; Azzurro)

I actually go out of my way to shop from Palestinian owned businesses and donate to Palestinian causes. Don’t question people like that, it’s not up to people to disclose private donation to a cause. It can also lead to persecution down the line. Lots of non-jews died in the Holocaust for helping Jews too.

Guess who will also commit war crimes? Conservatives. Guess who gets into office if too many people vote third party? Conservatives. Third party literally has 0 chance of winning this election. And if conservatives win, third party may very well never win any election ever. So you shouldn’t be voting for the change you want right now, you should be voting for the right to vote for the change you want to see tomorrow. It’s pretty simple.

I think I want him to be president.

What is absolutely absurd to me is the fact that there are votes against from Texas, Florida, and Louisiana. The three states who vastly out consume the FEMA budget annually since 2015.

We didn’t call WW1 a world war until america joined 3 years into the European war. The second world war wasn’t called that until after the war had formally ended. Who knows.

But then you have the issue of voter retaliation and discrimination. That already happens in certain places in this country if someone even thinks you vote a certain way. If there was a reliable way to find out who someone else voted for in the most recent election, there would be huge social implications.

What if you lose a job because of the way you voted? An employer would not have to disclose that as the reason or any reason at all. Most states are employ at will states where you can be hired or fired for any reason at all with a handful of exceptions. And even with those exceptions, it is very very difficult to prove if those exceptions have been broken.

Even if you could make a perfect digital system through encryption and keys and further complexities, to the layman this is effectively a magic black box that they have to trust does the job. If you can’t explain it simply to that layman without saying “trust me bro”, it doesn’t fix the primary problem we currently have with our voting system, the lack of trust in the system.

My point was not that these examples are issues to be concerned with in a voting system. Instead I was pointing out that computers fail at counting all the time. It’s also not even my full argument. You dissected one portion of my response and still missed the point I was making.

That’s awesome for Brazil. They discovered a perfect flawless man made system. I completely believe it is entirely tamper proof. It’s much easier to change whole datasets than to edit enough paper ballots to make a difference in a vote where many millions of people have submitted paper votes. Ctrl+a, del… Goodbye data. Not that it’s possible to do in the Brazilian system. But it certainly is possible in many databases…

Then why don’t you create that system?

And then proceed to convince every American that it is good and reliable and will work because it only takes a vocal few to stir question about it. And it only takes a single person finding a small flaw that can probably skew results. And that one flaw that allows someone smarter than you or I, has the power to throw question into our already shaky political system. And you as the producer of the system are entirely liable.

We are already fighting about trust in our voting system, to add the complexity of computerized systems is not going to sway the vast majority of people.

You can’t ‘miscount’ a digital vote.

Yes you absolutely can. Look up flipped bits, look up rounding errors. Look up lossy data. Look up bit overflow. There are many many ways computers miscount things. Hell, many calculators have incongruent output to each other because they do math in a slightly different system.

Because there is no way to prove without a shadow of a doubt that any digital system is 100% reliable. Are all voting machines completely tamper proof? Running unique code that cannot be run elsewhere, and is 100% open source such that the source can be viewed by anyone without exposing itself to risk that a smart enough bad actor can cause havoc? Do these machines need to be networked? Are all the networks completely identical and have 100% uptime? I could go on for hours about the flaws in software.

The general response is usually something to the effect of “well paper ballots and human counting is also flawed” to which my immediate rebuttal is, humans have to write the code and develop the hardware and if humans are flawed, so to will the code they produce be. Digital voting is just the same human error with more steps. Nearly all of the issues with paper voting are present in digital voting and then some.