Both the real President and the fake President have a long history of reneging on deals, and not paying up. DGE seized the Treasury’s payment system, so they could remove money from the people’s bank accounts. The tariffs have a good chance of plunging the U.S. into recession, and $1 million really isn’t that much compensation for taking on the risk, especially if inflation gets going in earnest. They’d be on the wrong side of trade barriers with the economic bloc that’s geographically easier to trade with. Would this regime bail them out?

In short, trustworthiness matters.

I’m not versed in modern military strategy, but I’ve heard others say that the U.S. carrier fleet has been a dominant force because the U.S. has only taken on adversaries that didn’t have submarines, and anti-torpedo systems aren’t foolproof. Also, it seems to me that they’re for force projection, and not so great for defensive action, to since there are only 11 of them. That is, the U.S. has a lot of assets that enemies could strike while the carrier groups are elsewhere.

I guess I’m not convinced that the carriers would be decisive in a conflict with a modern military, instead of the usual U.S. MO of picking on the weak.

If you can’t explain it, then it’s not all that simple. Maybe don’t denigrate millions of men as “too afraid of rejection,” eh?

So which is it? Pay attention to social cues, or ignore them and take a shot anyway?

This doesn’t make any sense. So we should ignore the cues that they’re not interested and take our shot anyway, even though men ignoring signs of disinterest is annoying, and they love getting attention from men who pay heed to their boundaries when the boundary is not wanting our attention? Or should we take no for an answer and handle rejection gracefully by not hitting on them when they’re not interested, because that’s the proper way to hit on women?

Or is it because we’ve been told that women are sick of being hit on all the time?

One that Linux should’ve had 30 years ago is a standard, fully-featured dynamic library system. Its shared libraries are more akin to static libraries, just linked at runtime by ld.so instead of ld. That means that executables are tied to particular versions of shared libraries, and all of them must be present for the executable to load, leading to the dependecy hell that package managers were developed, in part, to address. The dynamically-loaded libraries that exist are generally non-standard plug-in systems.

A proper dynamic library system (like in Darwin) would allow libraries to declare what API level they’re backwards-compatible with, so new versions don’t necessarily break old executables. (It would ensure ABI compatibility, of course.) It would also allow processes to start running even if libraries declared by the program as optional weren’t present, allowing programs to drop certain features gracefully, so we wouldn’t need different executable versions of the same programs with different library support compiled in. If it were standard, compilers could more easily provide integrated language support for the system, too.

Dependency hell was one of the main obstacles to packaging Linux applications for years, until Flatpak, Snap, etc. came along to brute-force away the issue by just piling everything the application needs into a giant blob.

It’s the same principle as what you can 9 people at a table with a Nazi. These agents deserve no nuance.

Well, President Musk has been accused of helping Epstein’s trafficking, we know for sure that his Oval Office puppet was involved.

Well, you did out yourself.

Assuming they’re federal agents, then yes.

We got a Nazi here.

ZFS is more than just a filesystem, it’s a fully-integrated disk management system which replaces mdadm, LVM, LUKS, nfsd, rsync, as well as the filesystem. It’s great for NAS boxes and file servers, since you can give it a big pile o’ disks, and it slices and dices, and offers simple commands to create whatever volumes you need.

If I remember this site correctly from back then, it was one of those run by idiots that made you upload a PDF of your résumé, and then enter all of the same info in web forms. This tracks.

You have so thoroughly captured the Windows experience. Bravo!

What I know from publicly-confirmed information: Tesla (hence Musk) have access to the camera feeds, GPS location, remote unlock, remote control of the driving at least sufficient to back the car out of a parking stall to facilitate repossession, and, of course, remote software update. The latter could provide full remote access to everything through new software.

If only they weren’t making it so easy.

The media still won’t mention the obvious signs of mental decline, so… not soon?