If it was worth stressing about, it was worth discussing with me when I was on the clock. The entire premise of a job is that I work in direct exchange for money. No money? No work. Pay me or wait until next shift.

And 100 out of 100 times, we build emulators that run on PC. They can take years to make with the complexity of newer systems, but they’ll get there.

Dude this all started because top comment knew this post was gonna be full of people discouraging voting for Harris, and then you jumped in and accused people of being pro-genocide for it. This is what I mean when I said you walk a similar walk. Anyone who disagrees with your perfect view of the world MUST be an enemy who directly wants genocide.

None of us like genocide. We’re just tired of it being used to trash the candidate who’s objectively better on the topic, shitty as that may be. I, at least, don’t care if some posts about her are negative, but I’m real fucking tired of people trying to pretend that her failings here mean getting the objectively worse Trump elected on purpose or on accident is somehow a coherent idea, much less a good one.

I’ll admit I was mistaken given your comment was sandwiched between two people suggesting otherwise and given your suggestion that anyone tired of listening to those people try to discourage voting for Harris is pro-genocide. You may not be one of them, but you walk a very similar walk here, so I wouldn’t be so surprised by the confusion.

Maybe they just have a tendency to confuse the painfully obvious consequences of not voting or voting against Harris for your actual intended goals. Trump is clearly going to be worse for Palestinians since he outright said Netanyahu should just finish the job, so if you’re on a clear and obvious path to getting someone even worse elected, we can’t help but wonder if you don’t actually care about the Palestinians because for all the bitching and moaning about Harris’s stance, you’re on your way to making the situation objectively worse.

We can be upset with her decisions and policies and still very easily acknowledge that one of the candidates is clearly worse. Trump has outright said Netanyahu should just finish the job. He wouldn’t just not resist, he’d actively encourage it. It’s like choosing between getting shot with a .22 or a .45 bullet to your leg. Both fucking suck, nobody wants to choose either, but if you’re knowledgeable about all the consequences and paying attention, it’s not a difficult choice.

So it seems like if you’re using Office on desktop, not SaaS, but they do offer it in a browser, so would that count? Technically, if it’s in JavaScript or something like that, computing is handled locally, but it still feels close enough to count.

These apps aren’t SaaS, but their alternatives are in at least some cases. LibreOffice competes with Microsoft Office, for example, and Microsoft wants people to pay a subscription for it, although I think you can still buy it outright. Pretty sure I’ve heard similar for Adobe products. Not super familiar with all the options, so can’t say if it’s true for all of them.

That’s assuming they’re treated properly and not subjected to unreasonable expectations just because management knows they can hold the worker’s visa over his head.

Somehow, I doubt it’ll be the same

A bunch of racist assholes made that claim while Obama was in office, but they notably never produced even the tiniest shred of evidence that it was even a possibility.

So no. He wasn’t born in Kenya.

I dunno, they ignored Crimea because it didn’t impact them. Nuclear fallout sprinkling all over Europe impacts Europe. It also shows Putin is way too reckless to tolerate as a neighbor. If he nukes so much as a cornfield, one of those sword missiles is gonna shred him mid meeting at his long ass table in the middle of the Kremlin.

QuakeWorld and old school Doom for FPS, Beyond All Reason for RTS, Dungeon Crawl: Stone Soup for roguelikes, Hedgewars for a Worms-like.

Running a server is very doable. There are packages to deploy and configure almost everything for you and removing a ton of headache.

Getting your email recognized as not spam by the major providers is pretty much impossible. You need all sorts of stuff to help verify integrity including special DNS records and public identity keys, but even if you do everything right, your mail can very easily get black holed before it even reaches a user’s inbox because of stupid shit like someone abused your rented server’s IP years ago, and you can’t seem to get it off everyone’s lists.

Email as a decentralized tool has effectively been ruined by spam and anti-spam measures. You’re effectively forced to use a provider because it’s near impossible to make your outgoing mail work as an individual. I think some of those anti-spam measures are anticompetitive, but I do think some are just desperate attempts to reduce the massive flow of spam.

To get a job that pays more than under the table work because most legit employers will demand it.

I’m not disputing that they want to use AI. I’m disputing the idea that the military doesn’t care about climate change. Climate change will cause instability and greatly increase the odds of them having to actually fight. As much as the military enjoys a good flex now and then, they generally prefer to win without fighting.

I’m pretty sure the military cares, at least to the extent that it will cause instability. I’m 99% sure there’s something from the Pentagon to support that. I wanna say Pentagon wants us to address it before it starts making them do their job a whole lot more.

The problem is they lose their email address, which is tied to just about every digital account they have. Losing your email can royally fuck you. Many sites send an email to the old email of you try to change it, so you’ll have to get in touch with support to get it changed, and then support will want proof it’s your account somehow, and the whole process is gonna take days or weeks to fix all your accounts. God help you if you forgot any passwords because now you can’t login or even reset the password since that goes through email.

I don’t see that as a viable path forward. If lack of voters decide the election in favor of the opposition (from your perspective), the party most aligned with you will move away from you to stay competitive. If sufficient votes for third party decide in favor of the opposition, you might get some decent movement towards the third party. If there are so many third party votes that your favored main party loses and the third party rises, the dying party may want to enact change, but they’re out of power, and the newly entrenched party won’t want to do it because it’s now helping them.

Note that none of these result in voting reform. We know because it’s happened. It wasn’t always the Democrats and the Republicans, but it has pretty much always been a two party system once we got through a few elections.

If you want voting reform, unfortunately, the only way to make that a serious possibility is by making it a serious campaign issue and by fighting to enact it locally and work our way up to the federal level. It’ll be hard to go straight for the top, but some areas are starting to experiment and prove it’s viable. Next step is to go a little bigger or expand into new areas.

Unfortunately, a first past the post voting system always eventually results in a two party system. Rarely, a third party can rise, but always ushering the demise of one of the previous two. The only way we can escape a two party system is by reforming our voting systems to something like ranked choice or approval voting.