Liz

joined 1 year ago
[–] Liz@midwest.social 2 points 8 months ago (2 children)

How much slower is s CPU without this functionality built in?

[–] Liz@midwest.social 1 points 8 months ago

Yes and no. It's a crime committed across international borders. The US can't go into the other country to go get the perpetrator, but if they step foot inside the US the feds can arrest and charge them. If their home country is decent the perpetrator will get charged at home or extradited to the US, but some countries don't do either, for a variety of reasons.

[–] Liz@midwest.social 1 points 8 months ago (2 children)

"Perpetrated," not prepared.

You can become a gang leader and decide the fuz are getting too close to your trail, then move to Honduras and keep advising your gang members back home. You could also just scam people out of their money over the internet and the country in which the victims live is going to be interested prosecuting you, regardless of where you are.

[–] Liz@midwest.social 1 points 8 months ago

Agreed. I only said "don't let them leave. "

[–] Liz@midwest.social 2 points 8 months ago (6 children)

There's plenty of crimes that affect people inside your country and can be perpetrated by people outside your country. If the criminal happens to be inside your country, don't let them leave.

[–] Liz@midwest.social 2 points 8 months ago

Cop City is trying to change that.

[–] Liz@midwest.social 13 points 8 months ago (6 children)

Can't you just have a "no leaving the county" list instead? If you can enforce one, you can enforce the other.

[–] Liz@midwest.social 3 points 8 months ago

So.... Magic? I mean, sure, if we had perfect magic that knew who could and could not be trusted to use your gun, fine. In a practical sense, all you need to prevent other people from using your guns is a lock. I put a lock on my closet. If the aren't under my supervision, they're behind at least one lock.

[–] Liz@midwest.social 3 points 8 months ago

This, but unironically. The right to personal weapons for self-defense should not be limited to firearms. There's a bunch of reasons, including disability, why someone might need a weapon but can't or shouldn't use a firearm.

[–] Liz@midwest.social 6 points 8 months ago (3 children)

How do those guns work? I haven't played the game.

[–] Liz@midwest.social 2 points 8 months ago

It would depend on how you set up your proportional system. There's a million ways to do it. Under my favorite system, 5-member proportional districts, yes, Harvey would have been elected. The legislator is cut into districts, each district has five members, who are elected using some proportional or semi-proportional method (again, I like harmonic approval). Harvey likely would have won one of the seats in his local district.

I'd have to look up the previous method San Francisco used in order to understand how the council used to work. The proportional method might have been pretty terrible.

[–] Liz@midwest.social 4 points 8 months ago (2 children)

I prefer Approval Voting, but no voting system by itself will solve the two party system. We need to move to proportional representation. Something like 5 member districts using Sequential Proportional Approval Voting would be ideal.

But really, anything is leagues ahead of single-winner "choose one."

view more: ‹ prev next ›