To be fair, the "change one" part is wrong. Two particles that are quantum entangled maintain the same quantum state when separated. But if you change the quantum state of one it doesn't propogate. They are just in sync.
There's a lot of unjustified doomerism here. The article even says that Alito has basically already called the California gerrymander acceptable.
I'd give 3:1 odds that they don't overturn it.
Honestly, I'd be surprised if the results were any worse than 1-8, and that only because Clarence Thomas is a literal psychopath. Maybe 2-7. Alito is two-faced as all hell.
Why did they use a picture of SCOTUS that's two justices out of date? This article was posted today. And they captioned it with all the justices names and locations in the picture, so it had to be intentional.
I mean, I don't think there's never a scenario where we can interdict shipments. Sanctions are important. If Venezuela had been shipping nuclear fissile material to North Korea and we stopped that boat, I'd probably be on board.
The argument for this one was that it was oil being sent to sanctioned nations. I've not seen any convincing evidence that that was the case though. And, even if it was, I'm unconvinced oil shipments rise to the level of interdiction.
But I say all that to say the world isn't black and white. While I agree this interdiction was wrong and Jessie Waters is an idiot, that doesn't mean that we can paint all US interdictions as obviously bad. Each must be weighed on its own merits.
Is it possible for Chic-fil-a to ever redeem itself in your eyes?
If they fired everyone involved with every controversy and started donating every cent of profit to LGBT charity groups, would you say they were a good company, or is it once tainted always tainted.
Chic-fil-a has made a lot of changes in the past decade and a half, and I'm of the opinion that, if no amount of self reflection and change can ever make us reconsider our condemnation, then there's no reason for anything to try and change, as it won't stop the hate.
Not that Chic-fil-a is perfect, but I would argue they are now as good or better than any other fast food chain we're not actively hating on. They actually pay their employees more than minimum wage and give them one guaranteed weekend day off if nothing else.
So why continue to put them down now that it's "mission accomplished?" If the goal was for them to change, and they have, it seems that we should bring them back into the fold, no?
I feel like their analysis is, "it would be costly and risky so they probably won't do it," which could be said for literally any war ever. I'm not sure I find it a particularly compelling argument.
No, YouTube does track that internally. I meant that I don't wan to have to sit down, open up YouTube and search for the thing I was watching again.
This is particularly egregious if you were watching something in a playlist, as YouTube won't suggest a playlist on the front page, just the video you were watching (and that only if you stopped in the middle of an episode, which is rare), so you have to search the channel, click into it, go into playlists, and potentially scroll down a bunch to load them all if there are a lot, just to find the playlist you were watching.
There's also streaming platforms like Dropout that make getting back to where you left off similarly onerous. Because you have to search the show, swap the search to "series", find it in the search results, switch from season 1 to whatever season you're actually on (if you remember), then scroll down to find the episode.
And sure, this is probably only around a minute's worth of work every time, but when it's a daily or more occurrence it becomes frustrating. Especially when the alternative is just having the history page pop up as your launch page and clicking something in the first few options.
I can't use Firefox unfortunately, as my main use case hinges on the history menu being remotely usable.
But yeah, that was kind of my point. When evaluating trade offs, at the time I switched, Brave was the only real browser that checked all the boxes, which is why I use it.
I don't actually care about tab sync. I mostly care about this for machines I use as browser based media players, which means I need my history synced.
Main use case is using machine 1 to watch YouTube, then resuming where I left off, via the history menu, on a separate machine.
The Firefox history menu is absolute trash, and there are no extensions to make it behave in a way that's remotely usable.
But my whole use case is not "keeping my content disjointed," which kind of is my point. If my use case was your use case, then sure, your setup is reasonable. But it's not.
And I don't maintain a personal NAS anymore. I realized I just wasn't getting utility out of it, and it was one more thing to get set up again after a move (it wasn't an off the shelf NAS, but a Pi set up with an external storage array.)
Sure, notionally. I could also write my own browser from scratch and make it to my exact specifications.
I've lived in "cobble together everything I want using a combination of half a dozen browser extensions and bash scripts" land before, and I'm old enough now to realize that maintaining systems like that is almost never worth the time or effort.
It's worth it if that's your hobby, but I have more interesting projects to work on than getting a baseline Chromium or whatever up to a usable state.
So when there's a 95% answer for my use case, it's a hard sell to get me to switch to an 80% solution where I need to jury rig the last 15% to just break even with the out-of-the-box option.
I'd be happy to switch away the moment someone recommends me a better chromium based option.
Firefox just doesn't work for my use case. I know it's pithy, but their dev tools suck, and the history menu is dogshit. And since my main use case is pulling up recently used pages, that's a huge impediment for me.
I'd switch to vanilla Chromium, but it's (reasonably because of what it is) super feature poor. Not having a good way to device sync on Linux basically makes it a non-starter for me.
So what's my alternative? What browser should I use? It's a genuine question, as I've tried several, and Brave is the only one that's remotely usable for my use case.
Compare it to China then, which does state sponsor.
Or, hell, South Dakota can state sponsor their Patriot Games athletes if they want, to try to give them an edge. Make it a point of state pride or whatever to pull better competitors than a state that's bigger but doesn't care.
Alabama does better at college football nationally (historically) than much bigger states because of a culture difference. The idea that California would outperform them just because they're bigger does not in fact bear out in reality.
To be fair, the "change one" part is wrong. Two particles that are quantum entangled maintain the same quantum state when separated. But if you change the quantum state of one it doesn't propogate. They are just in sync.