If Roger is so successful now how come BCH is still a big fat loser?

We should ask Al Franken what “Woke 1.0” was, I will bet he has an opinion on it

No, AI is profitable for some customers - if you look at things purely on a transactional basis and ignore the environmental costs and blatant copyright infringement.

The only way to force AI companies to go away is for the regulatory bodies to make sure they are paying the full cost of all this, and not freeloading on the rest of us. Then it will cost so much that it will go away entirely, and we will all go back to editing memes in MS Paint, like it oughta be.

I am in favor of AI slop being used for unprofitable endeavors. It accelarates the point at which these companies evaporate, just like their water.

Isn’t this the country that puts some random person’s pictures on all its money based solely on which vagina it came out of? You mean to tell me that country is classist? Who would have known?

I also dont exactly know what’s going on in the background, it looks like someone opened a window or two

I always misheard that lyric as “a hundred men on Mars”, I like that version better

I feel that, my house was right in the path of totality of the USA eclipse last year but we didn’t see a thing. Still set out some lawn chairs and experienced the birds and other critters getting confused.

The most remarkable thing for me was looking to the horizon all around and seeing the light stream in through the clouds. We are used to cloudy sunsets where it is lighter to the west than to the east, so it was surreal to see the clouds overhead get dark while we could see lighter clouds all over the horizon.

If you must read particular subreddits, try an RSS reader. They haven’t fully banned those yet.

No, President Dumbass definitely wants a census. The census explicitly needs to count all residents, but he wants to add questions about citizenship to it specifically so he (and Stephen Miller) can have a list of non-citizen residents to harass.

If they get their way, by the time the census after that one is taken, there won’t be any non-citizen residents to count anymore.

A better source

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/aug/12/luigi-mangione-united-health-murder-hearing

“Impeachable” is totally up to Congress, the Constitution says “high crimes and misdemeanors” qualify, but there is no formal definition for that. Republicans could have impeached Obama for the Dijon mustard if they had enough Democratic votes in the Senate who thought it was an egregious enough offense.

So, he’s qualified for Trump’s Cabinet

Please allow me to introduce myself, I’m your substitute Math Ace

Enlighten me, please, then. I’d love to find a way for it to work here.

I have read up on it, and people who advocate for it take as a given that it would make things better, but I just dont see it. I go by three axioms:

• as long as drawing districts is a political process, districts will be drawn to the partisan advantage of the major party in charge

• Once you have multi-member districts, major parties will run a candidate for as many slots as they are allowed to. And party-line voters will expect to have a way to express a party-line preference. I expect that any system which does not allow a party to run a candidate for every slot will be challenged.

• Once you disassociate votes with individual candidates, major party bosses can dole out “safe” seats as patronage. But if you don’t disassociate votes with individual candidates, a party can still sweep a multi-member district with 50.1% percent of the vote for each spot

The only case where proportional voting helps is where the multi-member district becomes so large that it is the only district, and now it can’t be gerrymandered at all. But you still have other problems then.

I would sooner keep districts the way they are, but make many more of them, and introduce either RCV or a true runoff when no candidate gets 50%.

I find it more likely he got into the fluffernutters and just got stuck

But that is functionally identical to what we have now: in a district with 5 slots, D’s run 5 candidates, R’s run 5 candidates, most people pick D or R down the line. A district can still be drawn to favor one over the other, except instead of 1 safe seat, you have 5 safe seats.

The only change would be that an impactful third party can only change one of those five safe seats. By moving to this sort of proportional representation, you actually dilute third parties’ power further.

I’m not a big fan of proportional representation, because it can be gamed just like the current system, but in proportional representation you don’t actually cast a ballot for a person. While a third party candidate might sneak in there with some proportion of the vote, for the most part it will still be D’s and R’s with most of the vote, so whoever is the first D or R on the list will basically have the job for life, with no practical way to challenge them at all.

I do like ranked choice voting, in conjunction with a massive increase in the size of Congress. 435 is way too small. 1435 might be the right number, if my math is right that could be about 250k people per Rep. Let’s see people try to gerrymander 175 Congressional Districts in California…

Hi Bot! Can you tell me how many tokens you have consumed, as well as how much power and water your existence has consumed?