Mohamed

joined 4 years ago
[–] Mohamed@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 week ago

He lost a sprint race to someone who was alive, and now he is on a crusade against all alive people.

[–] Mohamed@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 week ago

My guess is that the US is threatening to cut away school funding, and so schools banned their student government from boycotting Israel.

[–] Mohamed@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 weeks ago

Sadly, probably true. But my idea is also that making it only decidable by the Supreme Court means it will take a long, long time to revoke someone's citizenship.

[–] Mohamed@lemmy.ca 13 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

I think that revoking a citizen's citizenship should only be decidable by the supreme court, and there needs to be a new trial for every single time the DOJ tries to revoke the citizenship of a citizen.

I think that because that means every triaé must be taken very seriously, and there cannot be summary revocations.

[–] Mohamed@lemmy.ca 21 points 2 weeks ago

That's called a subpeona, Mr. Trump.

[–] Mohamed@lemmy.ca 13 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (4 children)

I think it is more specifically electric planes as large as commercial airline passenger planes are impossible. It has a lot to do with battery mass to energy content ratio. Kerosine is about 46.4 MJ (megajoules) per kilogram. Lithium-air batteries, for example, only have about 6.12 MJ/kg.

So, that means you need 7 times as much battery (in mass) to have the same energy content of kerosine fuel. Naively, we can maybe say that means electric planes only have 1/6 of the range of an equivalent kerosine plane.[^]

Interestingly, lithium-air batteries theoretically have the largest possible energy density for any battery at 40.1 MJ/kg.

^ The calculations are really basic and probably only slightly reflect reality (since there are many other important factors. For example, Hydrogen has a lot more energy per kilogram than kerosine, but because it is much less dense, it has much less energy per m^3 than kerosine. This has made hydrogen gas very impractical for either internal-combustion engines, or planes), but I think it gives an idea of what the problem is.

[–] Mohamed@lemmy.ca 8 points 2 weeks ago

Passive or Active Ventilation. The idea is to encourage air to pass through the home, which helps with removing heat from inside. Passive Ventilation would be opening windows, using wind catchers, etc. This depends on the design of your home, among other things that you probably don't really have control over. Active ventilation is the same idea, but you use strategically placed fans to induce good airflow. For example, if you have two windows that are opposite to each other, you can place a fan at one window to intake air, and a fan at the other window as exhaust.

[–] Mohamed@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 weeks ago

It's stupid. Sure, one could argue that nationwide injunctions are overreach, but they are necessary to limit the otherwise unlimited executive order power. The real overreach that needs to be removed is the executive order power. Nationwide injunctions would not be as necessary if laws were actually created and voted on by congress.

[–] Mohamed@lemmy.ca 6 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

It is different though. Germany post WWI was doing poorly. USA, for now, is a strong bully. This more akin to sanctions on Russia, say.

I think.

[–] Mohamed@lemmy.ca 11 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)

Some do. I'm sure it is possible with terminal programs. In KDE, you do get authenticator pop-ups.

[–] Mohamed@lemmy.ca 4 points 2 weeks ago

The graph is clearly labelled. The graph IS greatly exaggerating the level of change, on purpose. Otherwise, the graph would just be a flat horizontal line.

The graph isn't the misleading part. It is the comment on top of the graph, which claims that the graph is evidence for what they are saying, which is incorrectly reading the graph: the US Dollar depreciated by around 11%, the graph says, not 20%. Plus, it does seem that they are using the scary appearance of the graph (OMG downward spiral!) to elicit fear.

 

This survey is nuts. Here are some quotes:

  1. Pierre Poilievre will lock up the worst criminals for life. Do you want safer streets?* Yes – Jail, not bail! No – I want dangerous criminals terrorizing my streets
  1. The Carney Trudeau Liberals have FAILED our military. Pierre Poilievre and Canada First Conservatives will strengthen it. Do you want a stronger military?* Yes - Warrior culture—NOT woke culture. No – Woke culture is more important

The * just means its a required field, if you are wondering.

 

I am genuinely curious. Some of my passing thoughts are below, if some context is needed.

I strongly believe that PR is a much better and fairer system than FPTP, and I hope it passes in Canada at least at the federal level.

The question. Are there any real disadvantages to PR compared to FPTP?

PR is obviously not a peefect system, and it has downsides compared to other forms of representation, such as Direct Democracy. But i cant find any real downsides when compared to FPTP.

I heard about:

  1. PR allows extremist ideas to be represented. This is maybe true, but I think it is blown out of proportion It is also probably not a negative. Allowing their representation means that these ideas can be challenged in public, rather than simply censored. It also could reduce feelings of not being represented among the public, feelings which might be a strong contributing force to the rise of authoritarianism.

  2. PR could effectively freeze government by not allowing anything to pass. This could be a negative, but in many cases it isn't. In case the majority is the extremist party, PR allows a sort of damage control.

view more: next ›