IHeartBadCode

Nah. People changing minds they've already set, that's a mighty tall task.

I like to think Fermi had it down and we just are really hesitant to embrace the whole conjecture of the great filter. As each day passes, I find more evidence to support that the sole purpose of intelligent life is for it to become intelligent enough to destroy itself.

If I built a social media mega hub that can be abused to brainwash humanity

Humanity is capricious as fuck. You can brainwash them, but then after a while, you just got to brainwash them again. Gets old.

I would like to think keeping it off the wrong hands is priceless

Yes, BUT have you ever considered that with enough money you can just not care?

Also, look at what's his face that started Twitter. Now he's got insane levels of Musk's cash and started yet another social media company, Blueksy which a lot of people ran over to. I punch those numbers into my calculator, it makes a happy face.

If you need to do something shitty, soften the blow.

"But why though?"

— Elon Musk

It wasn't super secret, it's just that the HTTP protocol standard is getting quite large. HTTP standard site.

Same with HTML, the standard for HTML 5 is just so massive no one person can know all of it. It is completely unknowable to a single person at this point (without referring back to the standard).

The protocols and standards underpinning the Web have become over engineered in my opinion. I'm sure it was with "best intention" but I recommend gemini protocol at this point for "fun" and http for "business". Corporations owns HTTP at this point and there's little that can be done to change it. It has become the modern Adobe flash with the veneer of openness to satiate the causal observer.

But that's my two cents.

Side note for anyone wanting to visit Tennessee. We don't know how to drive and we're very eager to show you how much we cannot drive! As our State motto goes:

Tennessee. Have you ever wondered how good your car insurance was? Wanna find out?

There's so many legal issues with the manner by which the Governor implemented this program, this case is just going to become a black hole for Texas tavpayers.

One, Federal navigational servitude. The Rio Grande river falls into Article I, Section 8, Clause 3 of the Constitution. Furthermore, United States v. Rands 389 US 121 establishes that no State can act by itself on waters used for commercial purposes. So, the emergency order by the Governor cannot just unilaterally lay claim to the river in a manner that allows them to erect these structures without consent from Congress.

Two, you can secure a border by deterrence. You cannot secure a border by murder. That flies in the face of so many international treaties and just up right violates due process in the 14th Amendment Section 1. A common refrain that some tend to spout is securing a house. Yes, you can secure your house with your gun, but what you cannot do is rig your gun to go off whenever a door is opened. That's a booby trap and it's illegal in every State. So a court is going to have to look at these buoys and decide if razor wired topped, net entrapping, buoys that rotate you underwater constitutes a trap.

And no, it isn't "they made choices". Deterrence is the upper bounds a nation can do to prevent someone entering a country. When they enter you can arrest. But at no point is killing someone before they enter your country legal in any sense. Even if they make the choice to enter the river. It would be one thing for someone to die of thirst because they cannot get over a wall. It's an entirely different legal domain if the wall has a sensor that causes it to fall over and crush someone getting too close to it.

Again, a judge has to draw the lines on these things, but considering that the US is filing in Austin, I think they're going to have a fighting chance to convince the judges of the dangers the barrier presents.

Three, the whole wildlife thing. Congress has granted a lot of broad authority for the President to manage wildlife. Now, this is one of those that'll be really scrutinized by the court. But it does mean that there's got to be a State's interest in overriding the Federal government on this point. If the US Government can show that numbers of crossing are indeed going down, that'll hurt Texas' claim to have some interest in protecting their population in this extreme manner (not the buoys but the emergency declaration which authorizes the buoys).

The navigable waters point is one that courts can come down hard on, especially considering the river we're talking about. Texas is going to have to go out of its way to really show it's point on this one. Judges of both flavors aren't really cool with industry being hurt by political stunts. The point about killing people will come down to safety studies and if one was conducted, how it was conducted, and so on. I'm just having a hard time thinking that some safety engineer green lit razor wire on top of floating rotating barrels with an entrapment net underneath. No part of how these are being used sounds like safety was remotely considered, and yeah, we have to consider the safety of illegal immigrants, that that whole "due process" thing we created in the 14th amendment.

nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law

And it says "any person" not "citizen". That's because when the 14th amendment was written slaves were largely not considered citizens so the amendment needed to include literally any human being the government interacts with. And thus, that means it applies to literally ANY HUMAN BEING, including the ones crossing the border illegally. They are granted a right to due process under the law and a right to protection of life, which means that safety has to be considered in the construction of this barrier of theirs.

And the thing is courts do attempt to do the action of minimal effect, if the barrier can be made safe, that's likely where the courts will go. But if making them "safe" renders them useless, then the court usually will fall back to status quo. Which that's brings us to the whole emergency order that authorized them. A return to status quo would rescind the emergency order and thus make the barriers no longer a Texas thing, but trash that the Federal government would have the right to clean up. Since there's nothing legally authorizing their existence.

It's odd Texas picks this hill to burn so much of its tax payers' money on, but I guess this is the fight they want.

Clearly the original was Mythos Games when they produced XCOM. Musk just added a fucking dot and thought that made it "original".

🔫 𝕏lways 𝕏as bee𝕏!

This just in, Elon Musk's company will no longer support nVidia out of the box.

Shocking literally no one.

Let me be very clear—Republicans will use the power of the purse and the power of the subpoena to hold the swamp accountable.

-- Kevin McCarthy (Jan 15th, 2023 during his Speaker acceptance speech.)

The Speaker of the House literally said he was going to do this very thing. Why would anyone be surprised for him to do the thing he said he was going to do?

Sssshhh. You'll start a Wayland vs X flame war talking like that. And before you know it's the GNOME vs KDE, sysvinit vs systemd, and Emacs vs vi folk will show up. Or worse yet, Linux {{insert distro}} users vs other Linux{{insert distro}} users.

Damn Linux users, they ruined Linux users!