For those squares at the bottom to qualify as squares, they’d have to be… you know… squares.
You don’t put a chess board on a round table and say the area around the board is another “square” do you?
Incidentally, that’s why square tables are banned at the highest levels of play.
I imagine there was a time when this wasn’t obscure, but I’m guessing people today don’t remember Caldera OpenLinux. That was the first Linux distro I installed/used. A guy from church gave his copy.
Caldera eventually became SCO. But I’m pretty sure I was using Caldera OpenLinux before the whole Novell patent suit thing.
Short version: cable is more optimized for sending everyone the same content at the same time. (And all users connected to cable get all channels all the time, even if they’re only watching one or two at the time.) Internet is made for each user getting what they ask for when they ask for it.
Either technology can be used for either use case, but they were originally built for different purposes and so are optimized differently.
Just like a subway train would make a pretty crappy private one-person vehicle for commuting to work and the grocery store. As would a fleet of cars be crappy for public mass transit.
Nope. Lots of stuff commonly believed by Christians isn’t from the Bible. (Though sometimes they’ll do a lot of mental gymnastics to assert that what they believe is from “the only reasonable interpretation” of the Bible.)
Just a few other things commonly believed by Christians not (or at least only dubiously) from the Bible:
What icon pack? (Is this post supposed to be a link?)
Edit: Ah. Now there’s an image.
Oh shit. Don’t scare me like that. I’m in the middle of a show on Freevee through Prime Video. I was afraid it was going to become unavailable.
(Hell on wheels. Really good. 10/10 would recommend.)
Is there supposed to be a link?
It’s bad enough that blockchain weirdos, LLMs, and grifters like Futo have been trying to leverage the term “Open Source” in deceptive ways for one or another ulterior motive. Now sovereign citizen bullshit?
Edit: Oh. This is this user’s only post after joining 2 days ago.
“Streisand effect” comes to mind, but like “sunk cost fallacy” it’s just an example of something “becoming more popular the more it fails.”
Source? This is the first I’ve heard of it.
I feel like we’ve said this to OP already too, but:
…it came off that he was so popular…
However it may have come off, not enough people voted for him to win him the primary. He wasn’t that popular. For reasons mentioned elsewhere.
It’s possible some people who favored Sanders over Hillary voted for Hillary in the primary anyway fearing that she was more likely to win the primary and not wanting to chance unintentionally boosting the chances of someone other than Hillary or Sanders getting the nomination. I don’t know of any polls or anything that might have indicated that was or wasn’t the case. But that still means people didn’t vote enough for Bernie.
…because fewer people voted for him than for Hillary?
Not quite sure what kind of answer you’re fishing for here.
He just wasn’t “as popular as you believe he was.”
Yes, but how do you think candidates get “popular?” With Hillary’s and the DNC’s thumb on the scales, Hillary’s campaign had an unfair and underhanded influence on the public.
I’m not sure if anything Hillary’s campaign did was “illegal”, but it definitely broke things like the DNC’s own bylaws.
No president has tried it before. Whether he can get away with pardoning himself has yet to be seen. For him not to get away with it would require someone to bring some sort of court case challenging it. And to bring a case, they have to have “standing.” (That is to say, they have to have some credible justification why the self-pardoning action the president took wronged the petitioner in some way.) Which would probably require some legal argument that has never been made before.
I’m guessing Trump probably could get away with it, but given that no president has tried this, we’ll just have to see for sure.
deleted by creator
I doubt the term “time tangled in knots” is sufficiently well-defined for any reasonable answer. At least in terms of real-world physics.
If you’re talking about scifi technobabble time tied in knots, my answer is “Looper.”
Yeah, good answers. Thank you.
Are you expecting someone to provide you with all the answers?
Only to explain the answers that they’re already bringing up.
And, honestly, your answer and OP’s answer are exactly the sort of answers I needed. Thank you.
I guess the short restatement is something like “work with others to create an alternative to depending on the capitalist/fascist system for crumbs and then protect that alternative system on a self-defense basis with firearms. (And be ready to before you actually have to.)”
Oh jeez. I forgot about that. I had that running on my DS back in the day from a GBA flashcart with a big-ass CompactFlash card sticking out the bottom. Good times.