I absolutely agree with that. Either the total number of respondents or the absolute number of voters on each side.
It's still self reported information which can very easily misrepresent what actually happened, but at least there would be some weight to the figures in any way, shape, or form.
I agree, the chart is meaningless. Votes are anonymous, they don't have your name on them or anything. So the only way they can get this info is by people self reporting it, or something seriously fraudulent happening.
IMO, the chart amounts to "we asked registered Republicans to tell us who they voted for and 94% of respondents said they voted Republican" ..... And?
The information is without merit or value.
That may be the better mantra, but sometimes, you just gotta.... Viva la revolution! ...to get anything fucking fixed.
The average death age of any empire is 250 years.
Tick tock America. You're proving that figure to be correct.
How dare you encourage my wife to be an independent person and have her own thoughts!
The people that voted for this shit have the biggest blinders on right now. I'm sure they're trying to ignore that anything has gone wrong.
I hope someone with enough money to make this a problem for the policy makers gets after this in court soon. The USA needs to either pass a federal law stating that abortion is legal, or they need a new roe v. Wade judgement on the books. Until one of those things happens, this continual and unnecessary loss of life will continue; it is inevitable.
For people who call themselves "pro-life" they sure don't give any shits about people continuing to live.
Anyone who is anti abortion, this is for you: 🖕
Sincerely,
I'm not going to defend Ubisoft here.
I will make a comment about NFCs. Basically, if you're trying to validate a set number of items in a digital market, NFTs are not the worst way to do it. In the context of a video game, it would be that you have the NFT for, let's say, a limited character skin, associated to your game profile/account/whatever. As long as that token is attached to your account, you get access to that skin. If you trade it out, you lose access to that skin in the game... As an example.
NFTs would accomplish that goal, while being (at least in theory) decentralized, and in theory it's immune to errors and exploitation.
All of that being said: there are much better ways to accomplish the same with less. Any blockchain, by its very nature, will eventually become a slow, unmanageable mess because anything written to the ledger is immutable. So the ledger will continue to grow and grow and grow until it's so large that it's unmanageable, slow as shit, and just garbage to try to use/work with.
For shit like digital art or whatever, NFTs make even less sense. All you're actually buying is essentially a receipt that you paid money to someone for the receipt. It's a lot like going to a store to buy air. You pay for it, get your receipt and now you "own" some air. The only thing that proves you "own" air, is the receipt. If you lose the receipt, oh well, you can't prove you "own" the air anymore, but you're still 100% able to use the air, to fill your lungs, and breathe for another day, whether you "own" it or not.
The only difference with a "web3" game is that owning the NFT may give you access to stuff inside the game that you otherwise wouldn't have.
Great in concept, horrible in practice.
My take is that regardless of what system of government you use, there will be the affluent/aristocrats that run everything, get all the nicest shit, etc, and the unwashed masses who get whatever is left over.
This is a people problem, not a system of government problem.
The only way to balance everything is to basically make everyone in the country responsible for voting on all policy, which is impractical at best; the only alternative is to have a very altruistic leader in charge of making the final decisions.
If the leader can't consistently make decisions that benefit the people at the cost of his own happiness, affluence, wealth, etc, then what is demonstrated by this meme, is always going to be inevitable.
IMO, someone that altruistic will not hold power since those that are supposed to implement their orders, will quickly turn against them, resulting in a coup, and the leader being ousted for someone more selfish, who will reward the those with power unfairly by taking the rewards away from the "lower class" to give to them.
Everything is doomed to failure. Move to the forest and start from scratch.
Auto carrot strikes again
Fucking up other people's lives is basically the status quo for capitalists.
If other people get benefits you don't, either because you don't need them, or you don't want them, then they see it as a hand out, giving their money to the filthy poors to unjustly elevate them potentially above those that they are taking from.
Aggressive capitalists see everything as a race/ladder. Being in a better position than someone else because you're more wealthy/powerful/whatever, is the most important factor, and any kind of charity regarding providing basic needs to those who fall upon hard times is seen as a sin.
It's a demented and selfish mentality that's unnecessarily cruel to those less fortunate, simply because they can be. Anyone "below" them on the ladder (or "behind" them in the race), is less than them. So they idolize anyone who they view as "successful" or "wealthy" because they see them as "winning" the race. Something they desperately want to achieve.