grue

The only thing "conservatives" ever conserve, ever have conserved, or ever even intended to conserve, is hierarchical power. Conservatism only happens to line up with "preserving that which currently exists" in the sense that, when conservatism was initially developed, the system that currently existed was monarchy.

Make no mistake: under any system but monarchy/dictatorship, "conservatives'" single purpose will always be to transform it into monarchy/dictatorship as switftly, radically, and even recklessly as they can possibly manage.

Edmund Burke was English. Joseph de Maistre was Sardinian. Conservatism isn't just a US thing.

On the contrary: MAGA is the truest expression of conservatism the US has ever had.

Craving to be subjugated and ruled by a dictator is and always was what conservatism has been about, all the way back to literal monarchists Burke and de Maistre. Any other definitions about "conserving" or whatever are just lies they tell to bullshit their marks.

Locally, I’ve not been able to find anything that is certified food safe, only various epoxy fillers and primers for boats.

Call the manufacturer of the locally-available epoxies and ask them what they recommend.

I went looking for contact info for one common brand as an example, but found instead this product support article that suggests, to me at least, that their "limited food contact"-rated epoxies would be good enough for your use-case.

(I never did find a phone number or email for product support, but they do at least have a chat widget, so... 🤷)

I doubt many people would've been trying to use PC-DOS or MS-DOS as a server in 1996. More likely Novell NetWare, OS/2 Warp, or maybe Windows NT.

It's not.

And now you see the real motivation behind the bill: killing Free Software (and empowerment of individuals to own their means of production in general).

I've got a BIOS ROM chip sitting here on my desk waiting to be flashed with Libreboot as we speak.

How sad that you're so desperately grasping at straws in order to simp for corporations.

Weird omission of Firefox.

It has to do with EVs in the sense that (practically speaking) every single one of them is new enough to be infested with surveillance, so (unlike with ICE) there's no option to avoid it by going with an old vehicle.

Also, nobody gives a shit about new ICE cars, so there's no point in mentioning them when they weren't within the realm of consideration to begin with.

The criticism is of all new cars, not just EVs, but EVs are the only new cars that would've otherwise been worth considering.

Or in other words, what you wrote is a lie because old ICE cars without surveillance exist, but there is practically* no such equivalent for EVs.

Man, I wish he had that much self-awareness of his lack of faculties!