Finally, yes! Anyone who wants to vote for a third party should instead spend their time and effort fighting for a different voting system (ranked choice, star, etc) that could mathematically allow a third party to actually succeed.

More details on this?

For phones, Pinephone is very nearly this. The only thing is that GPS and cell service are on the same switch (because they’re handled by the same chip on the board)

For phones, Pinephone is very nearly this. The only thing is that GPS and cell service are on the same switch (because they’re handled by the same chip on the board)

This city is a monument to man’s arrogance.

• Peggy Hill

I’ve recently started putting together a home studio and made the mistake of asking online what I should consider before painting my monitors. Nearly half of the people who responded said, “Don’t do it, it’ll ruin the resale value.” Like dude, I’m not here to be on a god damned gear treadmill. I’m here to make music. Gear is just a necessary evil to me and if I never have to buy monitors again I would be so happy. So, If I can get some extra joy out of them and make them mine, I’m gonna.

This is not correct. English is simply not phonetic and therefore it’s impossible to spell any English word phonetically.

The Shavian Alphabet!

I wholly agree with your initial sentiment, although I envision it being structured differently. I think it makes sense for a person to have a name when they are growing, especially one given to you by your parents since they are (typically) a huge part of who you are at that point in your life.

But, no one stays who they are when they were 7, or 12, or 16. By the time they’re not a minor I would argue that they’re hardly the same person. Thus, I think it should be expected and tradition for people to change their name once they truly become individuals.

And I think it doesn’t even have to be a legal thing. Parents can just be like, “think about and pick your new name” and once the person decides, they (and everyone else they inform) just starts calling them that name.

Maxwell Atoms, is that you?

It’s important to note that for this specific situation/question, percentages (i.e. “half of all wealth”) aren’t actually useful. Depending on what the actual flat numbers are, it would still be possible for “half of all wealth” evenly distributed to the entire population of the planet to not be a lot of money per person.

That being said, I looked at your linked article which actually includes the flat numbers which means you can do the math and see what an even distribution of wealth amounts to for each and every person.

That article claims that in 2022, total global wealth was 418.3 trillion. Looking elsewhere for total global population in 2022, I’m finding ~8 billion. Those numbers give us a per person wealth value of ~52K. It’s important to note that this isn’t a yearly salary - it represents the sum total of all assets each person would have. Also important to note that the population number includes children - something like global adult population would likely be more useful but I couldn’t easily find that number.

So 52K is our answer, but interpreting it is I think a very complex question all on it’s own. I have no idea if this amounts to a “modest” living or even what “modest” really means (PCs? Air Conditioning? Year round access to global fruit supplies?). I thought for a long time that if we could evenly distribute wealth that everyone could live a “good” life - but the numbers might literally not shake out for that. I still hope they do. I want them to. But I’ve never seen a clear answer. Also, this isn’t an argument against an even distribution of wealth. I think it’s ethically correct to evenly distribute wealth basically no matter what. I just don’t know if anyone knows what the lives of people would really look like in that scenario.

Jenius

Daily reminder that no individual action is lawful or chaotic.

I appreciate the story.

Moscow Mule hold the Moscow. Been making these a lot lately. Not decided on what my preferred ginger beer for it is though.

Huge soda fan so picking just one is super hard but I’d say:

Oronamin C or Sweet Blossom’s Rose soda

Oronamin C is a Japanese soft drink with a taste that is often described as “drinking (American) Smarties”. It’s incredibly refreshing and delicious. Sweet Blossom is I think an eastern European beverage company and they make a rose flavored soda that is to die for. It has far and away my favorite quality of carbonation (very fine, soft bubbles).

Other honorable mentions include Ocean Bomb: Sailor Mercury (i.e. pear flavor), and as a big fan of cherry colas, Bawls Guarana Cherry Cola and Fentiman’s Cherry Tree Cola.

I think this is a greater problem with games that are technically aimed at children. There is so little respect for your time generally, but I think it’s especially egregious when it comes to menus, dialog, and animations. Additionally, there are many things that are in sequence (with large unneeded gaps between) that could happen more or less simultaneously.

Conspiratorially, I think this is to pad play time, and for kids the animations and what not are jingling keys that keep then occupied enough they don’t care or notice.

So, I understand what approval voting is, but I’m not sure I follow with “fiver member districts”. Is this referring to something like congressional districts, but instead of electing one person they elect five? Or maybe it means breaking a constituency into a huge number of tiny 5 voter districts?

EDIT: Seems like maybe combining districts that only have 1 representative into larger districts that elect 5 representatives?

Hell yeah another fan of Darwin!