hackyhacky

7 ms·

91.
by hackyhacky 14d ago
> Yes, but a driver's license can be accepted as ID So what would that accomplish? The Trump playbook asserts that there is a massive conspiracy involving noncitizen voting. Their proposals involve proving citizenship to vote. And n
92.
by hackyhacky 14d ago
I'm assuming that your question is not offered in good faith, but just in case I'm wrong: no, you could just see where they live.
93.
by hackyhacky 14d ago
> It’s extremely uncommon. 34 million people [1] or about 10 percent of the US population lack a form of ID that would be required under a voter ID law. The fact that you assert otherwise, without evide, shows that you live in a privileg
94.
by hackyhacky 14d ago
> imagine if in The Netherlands you can waltz in and say you are this person or that person That's not at all how it works. Typically, you do need to present ID to register. You also need to verify your address on the day of votin
95.
by hackyhacky 14d ago
My brother in Christ, you are projecting so hard it hurts. The comment that I responded to simply said "Survivorship bias" in response to a question about only Republicans getting caught doing voter fraud. Your attempt to theorize
96.
by hackyhacky 14d ago
> why would you invoke planes? I already told you why planes are relevant. It sounds like you really don't know what survivorship bias is at all. Please read the article [1]. Why are you in such a hurry to a discuss a topic that you
97.
by hackyhacky 14d ago
> Trump supporters used to speak up on this site. Surely they still exist but all I hear is crickets They are here. But their contributions are, let's say, not motivated by fact-based reasoning. Not surprising: it's very hard t
98.
by hackyhacky 14d ago
> then you should look up what survivorship bias is. I know what survivorship bias is. The classic example of survivorship bias is analyzing damage patterns of planes returning from war. Clearly, some planes were shot down and did not re
99.
by hackyhacky 14d ago
No, they do not. Getting an ID card in most places requires a fee, as well a trip to the DMV or equivalent, and providing documentation such as a birth certificate, which also requires a fee. You take this process for granted because you li
100.
by hackyhacky 14d ago
> Our elections are beyond broken and untrustworthy. You assert this without evidence. People have spent years looking for evidence of widespread voter fraud without success [1]. > voting should have a barrier to entry. Your freedoms
101.
by hackyhacky 14d ago
Most of Europe and Asia have mandatory, free national ID cards.
102.
by hackyhacky 14d ago
> he is implying that the focus on the republican cases (the survivors) is a red herring because the system is presumably such that an actual conspiracy cannot be detected. Maybe GP is implying that, but that's not what they said, b
103.
by hackyhacky 14d ago
> Survivorship bias Huh? Survival of what? Are you claiming that Democrat fraud was not found only because the perpetrators are all dead?
104.
by hackyhacky 14d ago
> Which "side" has been fighting tooth and nail for unverifiable mail-in ballots Mail-in ballots are currently accepted in 23 states [1], including Utah, Kansas, and Florida. Which "side" is that? Please note Donald T
105.
by hackyhacky 14d ago
Depends where you are. Parts that were too cold are greener. Parts that were green are now brown [1]. That's how global warming works. That might be fine with you if you currently live in a colder climate, but it's going to result
106.
by hackyhacky 14d ago
> If I take a look, through a security lens, of the existing mail in process from registration to recording votes, it’s quite shocking. What about it is "shocking"? Please be specific. Please note that the alleged justification
107.
by hackyhacky 14d ago
> I don’t find that article to be particularly worrying. The issue is not the article, but the president's own words. Do you find it concerning that the president has expressed a desire to cancel elections? Or do you think he was jo
108.
by hackyhacky 14d ago
> politicians opposing the will of the people are justifying the need for a fix, right? That's a funny way of saying that they support the status quo, which has never been provably linked to large-scale voter fraud. If you want vote
109.
by hackyhacky 14d ago
> Postal Service mail ballot system has catastrophic problems Yes. That's the point. The administration doesn't care about fixing whatever hypothetical mail ballot fraud may or may not exist; they are doing this to inject chaos
110.
by hackyhacky 18d ago
> or Apple's extraordinary investment in engineering for privacy It's easy for a company to build privacy-related features, if those features help sell products. But you are kidding yourself if you think Apple is willing to sac
111.
by hackyhacky 18d ago
"Can be spun" is doing a lot of work in your argument. In fact, corporate officers are routinely sued (or even criminally prosecuted) for failing to advance specifically the company's interests. Trying to "spin" gen
112.
by hackyhacky 18d ago
> What is that based on? It's based on the (US) law. Corporate officers failing to advance the interests of the company can be prosecuted civilly or criminally. There is no analogous legal obligation to act morally or in the interes
113.
by hackyhacky 18d ago
Investors are motivated by short term gains.
114.
by hackyhacky 18d ago
> The board of a company must act in the interests of shareholders I think you don't understand what this phrase means. In a publicly-traded company, "the interest of the shareholders" does not mean "whatever the shar
115.
by hackyhacky 18d ago
> human responsibility Not sure what this means. I think you meant to write "fiduciary duty": the company's board have an affirmative legal obligation to act in the interest of stockholders, regardless of moral impact.
116.
by hackyhacky 18d ago
> The thing is nobody has to comply with 1509 summons, DHS has to go to court to enforce it. You're not wrong, but companies such as Google make business decisions, not moral decisions. It's far easier and cheaper for them to c
117.
by hackyhacky 20d ago
Why not just run it in an emulator or VM? Is there tangible benefit to reimplementing everything, or is it just an intellectual exercise?
118.
by hackyhacky 22d ago
> JS is a lot less weird than Python. I challenge you to find Python behaviors as weird and off-putting as anything here: https://wtfjs.com/
119.
by hackyhacky 25d ago
> Laws passed by the elected civilian government. You seem to think the US government is a single monolithic entity. It isn't. Laws are passed by Congress. The Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces does not create laws. The issue u
120.
by hackyhacky 25d ago
Obeying the law is a legal requirement. Following illegal orders is not (usually) a defense.

More ›