Am I tripping? They’re just saying that they think it’s bad that these kinds of big decisions are up for 9 people to decide. Like, “it’s bad that a court of 9 people has this much power”. I don’t see a “both sides” argument here at all, if anything what I see is a language barrier…

Your iPad sounds pretty broken, that’s not normal.

So you’re talking about SaaS / business tooling then? Again though, that’s just one of many segments of software, which was my point.

Also, even in that market it’s just not true to say that there’s no incentive for it to work well. If some new business tool gets deployed and the workforce has problems with it to the point of measurable inefficiency, of course that can lead to a different tool being chosen. It’s even pretty common practice for large companies to reach out to previous users of a given product through consultancy networks or whatever to assess viability before committing to anything.

Then we’re very far away from the 21st century though.

I don’t really get this point. Of course there’s a financial motive for a lot of software to work well. There are many niches of software that are competitive, so there’s a very clear incentive to make your product work better than the competition.

Of course there are cases in which there’s a de-facto monopoly or customers are locked in to a particular offering for whatever reason, but it’s not like that applies to all software.

I gotta say mRNA vaccines. It’s not technically a 21st century invention, but much of the work to make them viable started in the early 2000s. The speed at which the COVID vaccine got developed and widely deployed was honestly incredible and a massive W for humanity. I remember thinking a vaccine would be years away.

Is there some story I missed about his family being assholes?

Tbh the reason for that is probably just that IMDB is wildly more popular

I think this is a horrible idea but just because I know many of y’all only read the headline: the proposal is NOT for a “database” in the sense that the federal government is going to start directly keeping track of pregnancies. Rather, it’s for a website where you can find motherhood-related information and a “database” of service providers. The “tracking” part is apparently that you can register on this website, and the gov reserves the right to then keep this (voluntarily surrendered) personal data to “reach out” to moms and “help” them.

Of course none of this would offer any info on abortion. Because this is coming from Alabama.

Sure, I’m not saying debt should be the only factor.

The risk of doing something can’t be a factor. Having done something should

I think that’s a very narrow view. Of course risks matter and should be considered when choosing a candidate. In fact, if a candidate has not yet been president before, all you can do is to assess what they might do once they are.

This amount of debt absolutely must be a factor. It puts someone at so much more risk for being coerced or bribed.

Google literally has an official list of IP ranges for their crawlers, complete with an API that returns the current IP ranges that you can use to automate a check. Hardly a moving target, and even if it is, it doesn’t matter if you know exactly where the target is at all times.

How are day one patches a “scam” exactly? Maybe they’re inconvenient, but calling it a “scam” is a bit of a stretch. There’s really nothing malicious about the idea at all. Also VAC bans, really?

• privatized, poorly regulated health insurance.