tkwj

Safety is often the first reason given when removing freedoms. It would be a fallacy to compare a poisonous coolaid or more precisely, Flavor-Aid, to speech even when yelling fire.

Well said. This is a point being missed by many here. I feel it too!

I agree. I find slack/zoom to be a terrible replacement for the old casual/impromptu/hallway conversations. Sometimes the best information is learned in those formats.

It can be legally acquired through a Visual Studio (formerly MSDN) subscription.

Some conservative votes could be had if this this were seen as a state's rights issue. Libertarians should be all in too, except for this bill includes a tax. Most likely though the problem is getting enough "law and order" centrists of either party to think outside their box.

This facility does exist but it also requires a repayment schedule to be set up. Even this assumes the system and people behind tsp.gov are actively processing loans.

https://www.tsp.gov/PlanningTools/Calculators/loanPayments.h...

Relevant Twitter conversation https://twitter.com/deadprogrammer/status/806150295290052608

Different models. OP was talking about the new 9365 (2 in 1), not the 9360.

The fairness is intended at the state level. How your state decides on electors is their law. It doesn't even have to poll each individual, historically state legislatures even did it themselves.

In either case, two components that could be separated: a service plan (preventative care) and catastrophic coverage.

Perhaps they should indicate "shared private" more clearly in the droplet settings. Their usage of private network seems to be just referring to RFC 1918 addresses an not much else but many people will infer more than that.