knaq

It wouldn't have to be slow.

Print on the inside of a spinning drum. That way, you don't have to reverse direction. Print from a whole row of nozzles or lasers or whatever. That way, yet another dimension doesn't require reversing movement. That leaves just one axis if laying something down like an inkjet printer. If curing with a laser, the final axis can be handled by the laser simply crossing the needed distance.

If we really wanted to stop it early, we could have. It's about the right size for a nuke.

(and no, an iceberg is NOT anything like a hurricane, which is a heat engine phenomena -- you can definitely shatter an iceberg)

1. new rifles with selective fire

2. lawn darts

3. scanners that can receive 824 to 849 MHz and 869 to 894 MHz

4. acetic anhydride

5. phosphorus

6. Moon rocks

7. good pesticides: DDT, diazinon, endosulfan, chlorpyrifos, etc.

8. gasoline cans that work properly (old-style ones)

Two key quotes from the article:

1. "Race had no statistically significant effect on any group. Both conservatives and liberals, however, changed their views based on how they would vote. Only conservatives were affected by whether the refugees were said to be high-skilled and therefore presumably beneficial to the economy, or low-skilled and likely to rely on government assistance. Figure 1 below shows how partisanship, but not necessarily race, matters. The gap between the groups “very liberal” and “very conservative” in support for immigration is cut by around two-thirds when refugees are said to support Republicans instead of Democrats!"

2. "Notice: Not only do very liberal respondents like white migrants more than the very conservative do; very liberal respondents like Republican migrants more than very conservative ones do! To my mind this is strong evidence that Republicans’ core prejudice is not racism but xenophobia. They’re even relatively hostile to immigrants on their own side of the aisle."

Pigs also have 62 troublesome viruses embedded right in their germline DNA. Some other company fixed that with CRISPR... would they cooperate?

Fixing the PERV genes in pigs:

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/08/crispr-slices-virus-...

The article's most important quote:

"All this is denied me in this stale marriage to an elderly, sickly, complaining, nagging wife. Let's get rid of her, start life all over again with another woman."

Even if a person doesn't consciously have the thought, there is a biological drive to reproduce. Even if a person expresses the desire to be childless, that biological urge may be pushing for a younger mate who might be fertile.

That leads to the anxiety. Trying to do impressive things and to display wealth, no matter how useless, is a biological urge. It becomes time to buy the fast car or take up hang gliding. When sanity and resource limits pull back on that, the emotions don't go so well.

At my house, Trane lost a sale because of that incompatible proprietary protocol. I really wanted to super modern heat pump with fully variable compressor. I refuse to be stuck with one vendor. I'm also not putting my system on the internet, though of course IP protocol within my own home could be nice.

Maybe the answer is to look at systems sold for business use.

I hope that's just how you believe the majority of the electorate to be uninformed. Some is opinion, but some is just wrong.

Calling the wall a "repair" is far from reality. It is different in size and structure. The new wall is 18 or 30 feet high, cuttable more as a stunt than a practical bypass. It extends at least 10 feet underground as a 2-foot-thick concrete wall to prevent easy tunneling. In some places the wall is both sizes, doubled up with a road down the middle. Much of the old barrier was only I-beam steel in the ground, intended to stop cars and trucks. You could ride through on a horse or motorcycle. Other parts were just 8 to 12 feet high, without any underground protection from tunnels. Instead of being a major operation, a tunnel just required 1 person with a trowel and an hour to spare.

To say it "accomplishes practically nothing" is strange. About half of the illegal aliens present in the United States came via illegal crossings. Those are the ones who matter the most, because they obviously were denied a visa. In other words, they probably have a history that caused them to fail the background check. Illegal crossings also bring drugs to the USA, guns to Mexico (see "Operation Fast and Furious" for when we even allowed it), dehydration in the desert, drowning in the All-American Canal, and migrants getting rapped by their smugglers.

The trade war started half a century ago. It's still a war when we aren't fighting back. We can't opt out. We can fight, or we can accept certain loss. The farm sector provides far fewer jobs than the manufacturing that is lost to China.

Assassinating a high-ranking official is not attempting to start a war. The USA can get away with that, so it does. It's notable that CNN had a few days of loving Trump when he did that; they want war.

It's a matter of opinion about judges, but for certain the top 3 are not unqualified ideologues in comparison to Sotomayor.

Relief for student debt would be horribly unfair to both non-borrowers (like a plumber, car salesman, or marine) and responsible borrowers. The economics term for the problems caused is called "moral hazard". We would be subsidizing expensive low-value incomplete degrees, and thus encouraging more of this waste.

The effect of those racist employer-mandated hate sessions has been studied. It turns out that they cause the exact opposite effect from the supposed intent. When you put a bunch of employees in a room and lecture them about race, they start thinking of each other by race. It brings out the latent racism, raises suspicion, and creates resentment. Race relations were doing better under Trump until the BLM fundraising riots started stirring up anger. Sometimes you have to forgive and forget, but that isn't good fundraising.

People like climate policy when detached from any mention of job losses and taxes. The same goes for healthcare and many other things. Who wouldn't want something if there isn't a price tag? Mention the price, and opinions suddenly change. You won't find 70% in favor of the Paris Accord when you mention the price.

Automation may have eliminated far more jobs than foreign bogeymen, but that only increases the urgency for pulling jobs back from China and elsewhere. If the USA loses 1 job to a Chinese worker and 5 jobs to automation, that means that 6 jobs need to be transferred from China to the USA.

The virus crisis was mostly self-imposed by the states and by the people. The actual virus harms very few. The fact that rioters were allowed to form huge groups while businesses were shut down tells us the truth: the motive was to prevent Trump from having his record-breaking economy. In any case, basic hygiene is a personal choice, not a presidential choice.

There was a republican platform. For a rather democratic reason, it was the same as in 2016. The virus had prevented gathering everybody together, and it wouldn't be proper to choose a new platform without everybody there. No normal person reads the platform anyway, and elected officials aren't bound to it.

You missed the point if you thought Trump was about a personality cult. Lots of Americans tolerated his personality because they like the policy and the results:

He built over 500 miles of crime-stopping wall, raised tariffs on China, didn't attack a new country, appointed decent judges, appointed a wonderful person for the Department of Education, put an end to racist anti-American hate sessions at federal employers, improved the H1B visa situation, ditched the Paris Accord, cut our taxes, got that pipeline approved, stopped China from using NAFTA via Mexico, got several peace treaties signed, and cut lots of economy-choking regulations. Just before that virus hit, he got us to the lowest unemployment numbers in recorded history (half a century) for black people and he got income inequality to go down a bit for the first time in ages. He even signed the First Step Act, fixing the overly harsh sentences imposed on crack users by another Biden-sponsored law.

That's all policy that people wanted, not personality. I don't know if that is more reassuring or more terrifying for you.

You can buy the car for the car, or as a display of wealth. This is independent of having wealth to spare.

If you do have plenty of wealth to spare, maybe you don't worry about dents. Just tell your people that you spotted a dent, and they'll get the car fixed or replaced.

Being nervous about dents isn't great for displaying wealth. It's better to park on a busy street in San Francisco, right next to a tent city where people have set up shop selling car parts. That shows everybody you don't worry about the money.

It's not just the VP.

In 1983 Biden introduced the Comprehensive Forfeiture Act, which became law in 1984. That's the main piece of law that enabled civil asset forfeiture. That's how cops take property, alleging it to be drug money without any evidence. It's legalized theft, turning cops into gangs that prey on the people. Note that "defund the cops" will make them rely more on this source of revenue!

He didn't just vote for it. He introduced it.

At this point in time, it's too late. Step 1 of the steal was the intentional security reduction. It prevented most evidence from being collected, and this made it easier and less scary to commit the crime. (we did get a horrifying Georgia video and then some absurd excuses, plus the Minnesota ballot purchase video, plus the Texas Judge with the pile of fake ID, plus the Texas door-to-door coercion, etc.)

As I wrote above, for future elections:

"Ink the fingers, since we're 3rd-world now. Have ID, just like India and Mexico do. All votes must be cast in person. Take extra pictures when voting (face, fingerprints, iris, retina), to better enable prosecution of misbehavior. No machine goes on a network. Every machine is observed by multiple unrelated people (don't know each other) for the entire time, starting from verification that it is empty and continuing until all recounts are completed. No excuses."

There was no legitimate excuse for destroying what little election security we had. You wouldn't have done that if you wanted to hold a valid election, but you wanted to "win" at any cost.

Some ominous words slipped out of Biden's mouth when speaking to voters in Michigan: "I don't need you to get me elected!"

Causation goes the other way. Nobody thought felons should vote until democrats realized that it would tip elections.

Oh, my mistake on the law and order. I should go Burn Loot Murder, rioting every night. Seriously? Portland is not a republican stronghold. The most crime-ridden places vote democrat.

I'll grant that Kamala Harris loved to prosecute crack users with a law that Joe Biden introduced, and that Donald Trump reduced the penalty. I'm not sure you want to take credit for the law that locked up lots of black people, but you may.

Nobody sane would waste money on a lawsuit in a state that doesn't matter.

It's just plain racist to suggest that black citizens don't have ID. It is required for guns, which are actually a constitutional right unlike voting for president. It is required to buy beer, rent an apartment, use most government benefits, or get a job. It's even required to enter many campaign events for democrats! So, that doesn't sound like good faith at all.

Funding the ID is fine. Some bullshit election ID card is no good. It needs to meet the normal standard, as specified by the Real ID Act of 2005. The US passport would be acceptable; let's make those free. The military ID would be acceptable.

Say, want to bias it against republicans who never travel to foreign countries? Make a US passport the only valid identification. I'm fine with that.

Overall, yes, but not for all seats. New Hampshire was untrustworthy in 2016, both for the presidential electors and for the senator. Some of the house seats, particularly in California, were untrustworthy. Florida was nearly stolen via Broward County, and then again for governor/senator in 2018. Numerous seats were stolen in 2018 and 2020, though I do believe that overall control of the House could be legitimate.

I think you're implying that fraud could reasonably go both directions. I call your attention to the fact that felons are 5 to 7 times more likely to vote for democrats than republicans. Election workers who are willing to commit crime are clearly going to favor democrats. That just isn't the law-and-order party.

In any case, if you had an issue with the 2016 results, you should have cooperated to secure the elections. You didn't, because you know that you benefit from insecure elections.

The situation with fraud evidence is like a cop found with a dozen dead people, all shot between the eyes, and his body camera turned off. He says they all attacked him, and he was just a really lucky man. There is no evidence otherwise, because he disabled the camera. Didn't do anything bad? Sure...

Likewise, a lot of us are hoping that a significant number of Democrat voters know the truth and are just playing hardball politics, not that it is much better.

You didn't want this result?

You should have thought about that when you supported weakening election security. Republicans aren't buying your excuses about the virus, or about black people being unable to get an ID card, or about anything else. You broke security on purpose. Any lack of evidence is because you purposely make it impossible to collect the evidence. (like a cop turning off his camera before doing evil) The result has been expected for months: a fraudulent Biden victory.

Next time, maybe cooperate on election security? Is that too much to ask?

Ink the fingers, since we're 3rd-world now. Have ID, just like India and Mexico do. All votes must be cast in person. Take extra pictures when voting (face, fingerprints, iris, retina), to better enable prosecution of misbehavior. No machine goes on a network. Every machine is observed by multiple unrelated people (don't know each other) for the entire time, starting from verification that it is empty and continuing until all recounts are completed. No excuses.

You asked for the current situation when you dismantled what little security we had. Expecting opponents to trust the result is absurd. You broke security because you knew that fraud in your favor would happen if people didn't have to worry about getting caught.

Sure. Many millions of Americans are satisfied by the evidence presented, and the arguments against it have been weighted. They believe that an illegitimately elected person is about to seize power. They believe that you are gleefully dancing on the grave of democracy. They are wondering "How will we continue as a nation if this comes to pass?" right now. They'd like a fix for this nation-destroying injustice.

More and more, I realize that I've been fed a warped view of the past. Here in the USA, history book authors and history instructors are almost exclusively on one side of the political spectrum. The people that they glorify and vilify are chosen with extreme partisan bias.

Joe McCarthy wasn't the terrible person he is made out to be. Information discovered later, long after his censure, proves that he was correct in many of the cases where he was thought wrong.

Today's lies and censorship will become the supposed "facts" that are taught to future generations. All sorts of falsehoods will be used to created graded test questions.

Uh, well, I don't know that. Let me turn it around for you:

How will we continue as a nation if this comes to pass? How will you, knowing in good conscience that fraud changed the results, claim to represent the people when you have discarded the votes of 80 million people?

You are presuming that your opponents knowingly commit evil. They feel exactly the same about you.

This happening, right now, is a consequence of the US election.

In a matter of months, Taiwan might go down like Crimea.

Sure, it's easy. Count how many lines of code they write per day. Likewise, aeronautical engineering productivity can be measured by counting kilograms of mass added per day.

The real underperformers go negative.

"more walkable and friendly to the elderly" are very separate things, usually in conflict. The elderly face disability like arthritis, poor body temperature control, uncertainty about lower leg position or pavement contact, bad vision, bad hearing, confusion, and numerous other troubles. No normal or reasonable amount of "more walkable" is going to work.

They need family members who care. The family members need parking spaces. The fewer steps from bedroom to car, the better. A nice goal would be to have less than 50 feet from bedroom to car.

I think at this point, you can say he is not conservative by the typical meaning. What happened? By mid-2017 every American should have loved Trump. (understandable to have doubt before then) Was your dad just following the anti-Trump news sources like Fox, Drudge Report, and Facebook? (nothing like Breitbart, OANN, RSBN, or thedonald.win) Did he have a personal conflict of interest, such as a job outsourcing American jobs?

The pro-America types want tariffs and less immigration. The business types disagree strongly.

The religious types have had complaints about LGBT. Again, the business types disagree strongly.

So there you have the business types being almost libertarian, fighting against the rest of the party. They won't get tossed out because they bring most of the money.

Sometimes the religious and pro-America types are at odds over immigration. Mormons and Catholics are particularly fond of immigration.

Supporting Trump or not is partly a matter of priority. The business types more concerned with regulations will support Trump. The ones trying to run factories in America will support Trump, but the ones trying to outsource production won't. Mormons see that Trump made the first openly gay appointment (ambassador to Germany) and built over 500 miles of wall, so they aren't too happy despite liking the supreme court appointments.

And yes, there is style. Some people like the smooth-talking political dishonesty that we've had for decades. There is the idea that that is somehow proper. Trump fans hate that stuff.

By definition, a conservative is a slow-motion progressive. Ignoring that technicality, there are 3 types of republican:

1. religious

2. business (likes outsourcing and unlimited immigration to drive down wages)

3. pro-America

They often hate each other. The first two groups are usually unwilling to admit that Trump has been the best president ever.

It's a great insight that "You cannot defend a system by destroying its foundation."

Continuing along that line of thinking: the "good side" can't possibly be the one participating in a cover-up, trying to brush aside all the evidence of fraud.

The people who want to retain our republic have to defend it.

I see that nobody here (currently: czep, froasty, throwaway0b1, chaganated, core-questions) has any contact info in their Hacker News profile. Usually for political stuff that means a conservative working in the Bay Area, hiding in fear, though czep claims to be liberal.

Plain old phone numbers might be best for this.

It could be too scary with all the hostility. Given how the tech industry is, not many conservatives will be willing to reveal themselves. Performance reviews could suddenly turn sour for no apparent reason, and lots of conservatives have family to support.

Meat is hypo-allergic and free of prions if you cook it enough. It should be black in the middle, white on the outside.

It got used for school computer labs.

Four of each: student, keyboard, mouse, screen, chair

Just one: table, computer

The case the right cares about is Roger Stone. He's an old man, no threat to anybody, who was involved in normal legal proceedings. Somebody decided to make an example out of him. He got a heavily-armed pre-dawn raid, and CNN was right there to watch.