This guy’s company is planning to build nuclear-powered datacenters btw. Check in with yourself on whether you think that’s a good power this responsible human being should have.

Is this legal?

Yes, it’s called “opposition research” (frequently abbreviated “oppo”) and the political parties do it constantly to one another. Because they’re doing it this much, and because they have a LOT less scruples than you do, they’ve probably already uncovered everything you would. But maybe not all.

In addition, doing this publicly would put the target on alert, so they’d specifically run interference against whoever you hired. This wouldn’t make their job impossible, but definitely harder.

And, finally, whatever new dirt you do manage to gather might not matter. The things Trump has done that the public already knows about should be enough to put him in prison for life, and yet he’s still in the current US presidential election instead of incarceration.

Thirded. Immich has no right to be as good as it is after such a short time. Completely took down my google photos, finally, and I still have face recognition, word search and automatic backup from my phone.

My favorite thing I’ve done with hass is put a color-changing light bulb by my front door. It’s connected to the weather forecast. I know what the weather will be at a glance without a website or going outside. (Where I live, it’s not always obvious when I’m gonna get rained on.)

• uptime kuma

Not exactly the same. First of all, a new company hasn’t formed yet and if it does it won’t retain as many of the original staff because it doesn’t have the same momentum as one formed through a legal separation of the companies while everyone is still employed.

It also can’t retain the rights to Stray which would have provided some funding. And it doesn’t retain the rights to whatever projects they had in development, so they won’t have anything to work on for a while.

That legal spinning off was actually pretty important.

there’s a way to tie it back to circles

Not necessarily circles, but conic sections. When you take a series of a fixed exponent over a variable x, and graph it, that graph is a parabola.

A parabola is a slice through a cone. Tada, pi appears.

Mostly it’s just CYA for google since cycling is more dangerous than driving (due to the people driving), so there’s more surface area for them to get sued.

But yeah

• turns and crossings that look safe on a map don’t have very much data on whether they’re actually safe, because google has a thousand times as much information about drivers than cyclists.
• google sometimes suggests routes that can’t be traversed, legally or at all, by a bike. Same reason.
• sometimes google suggests avoiding something a bike doesn’t actually have to worry about. This is actually the category of error I see the most: google sends you around something when you could simply walk your bike through it, or ride through it, because you’re not a car.

Oh wow, I missed this. That’s a fantastic insight to pull out of this.

This one actually demonstrates some flaws in this graph format. Maybe it’s just how it’s expressed this time, but, here are some insights you might gain from this presentation that aren’t actually the case:

• “the police shot the attacker 98 times” which just sounds like a normal headline about how police handle things.
• Very near that branch, you can accidentally see “the police died by suicide 38 times”
• and, similarly, “the police surrendered 15 times” which is a surprise because I thought that only happened at Uvalde.

Like, I get what is trying to be conveyed here but the format requires a lot of work for my brain to parse and makes it harder to understand.

Also: This chart only shows what happened to the attacker. It doesn’t give you a picture of the innocent people on the scene shot by cops, the cops shot by cops, the “good guy with a gun” who shoots another good guy with a gun, and so on. 12/433 may be accurate, but by the time you deduct points for innocent deaths caused by people with guns on the scene, you’re creeping back down to zero again.

Hell, they have a tendency to shoot each other, too. Cops shooting cops and cops shooting security guards are both things that happen.

You wouldn’t, of course. Hearing, the way we hear, in such an environment would be useless. We wouldn’t have evolved that. This is like saying “ultraviolet radiation from the sun would be everywhere, all the time, can you imagine?” It is everywhere all the time, but as such it isn’t a useful sense to possess, so we don’t.

This also makes some very weird assumptions about what the sound would be like. If space were a medium sound could travel through then it would–like all mediums capable of carrying a sound wave–alter the wave in many ways. Intensity, frequency, etc. But since we don’t know what kind of medium that would be, and since the comment doesn’t posit any particular medium, we don’t know what the sound would sound like or even how loud it would be.

Brain damage is progressive. Once it reaches a certain point, it will keep getting worse even with no further trauma.

Well they’ve had a kind, down-to-earth president for a while. Time to bring in an absolute shithead for a change.

This is what I came here to say. The clarification on the post is not about humans eating plant food, it’s about idiot fucking pets eating plant food. They eat grass, why wouldn’t they chow down on something that smells like blood.

So, the article doesn’t say.

What the hell did the dot mean?

Blowing vape smoke directly into the sensor to try to get the high score

Oregon too. There’s also a service where you just give it your voting registration details and an email address and it emails you:

• when your ballot is mailed to you
• when it is received back from you

Two words: media illiteracy. They don’t understand the themes in what they are watching; moreover, they can’t connect any themes they do recognize to their own beliefs because they are disconnected from reality in the first place.

Modern conservatism has noticed that reality rarely agrees with its values, so its response has been to reject reality. That has a lot of side effects, and the inability to hear the message in the media is one of those side effects.