There's no reason in principle that you couldn't do this. Just stick a bunch of RAM on a PCIe bus and provide a driver that exposes it as a memory-mapped device under /dev/disk. I'm just not sure how to enable swap on a different device file. I think it used to be possible by replacing /var/vm with a symlink somewhere else, but with the way macOS is locked down these days, it might not be anymore.

I wonder if recompiling the FreeBSD swapctl command would make it possible to just add a huge swap file on such a device. Depends on whether they've kept the same syscall hooks under the hood, I guess.

Boeing: The sound your flying car makes when it unexpectedly lands on the roof of your neighbor's house.

I would argue that Israel also elected a hard-line government (Netanyahu) that has repeatedly acted towards the Palestinians in a manner intended to subjugate them, limit their right to self-governance, limit their freedom of movement, etc., and that Hamas becoming the government of Gaza more than a decade later was the entirely predictable effect. From the moment he was first elected, I predicted that he would end up radicalizing the Palestinians.

None of what's happening now should be a surprise to anyone. Some Israeli settler gets murdered, and Israel launches missiles. The disproportionality of Israel's response then radicalizes more Palestinians, who commit more atrocious attacks, and the cycle of hate is perpetuated, with both sides believing that they are justified. And that's what happens when you put hard-line right-wing leaders in charge.

IMO, there really are no clear good guys in this war, and plenty of bad guys on both sides. At this point, I think nothing short of the U.N. sending in peacekeeping troops and insisting that both sides disarm completely for the next hundred years is going to fix it, because both the Israelis and the Palestinians have consistently shown unwillingness to stop fighting, and have consistently elected leaders who spew anti-other-side rhetoric and foment war. And until everyone disarms and is under the protection of a neutral organization like the U.N., I don't see that changing.

Never attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by total incompetence just as well.

Of course, if it was incompetence, I'd also expect high-level military leaders to be fired, new training programs instituted, etc. to ensure that it never happens again. If that didn't happen, then the problem is systemic at the leadership level, and whether it was intentional or not stops being interesting at that point.

So as someone who hasn't followed any of this, the first question I would asked is who got fired for that incident.

Or elect not to enforce it at all, e.g. the free passage of people within the EU and the lack of physical impediments to doing so.

To be pedantic, ultimately, what makes a country is a defined border and a government that rules over the people within that defined border. Nothing inherently prevents a country from having only a police force and no military, so long as their neighbors aren't war mongers. But millennia of history shows that eventually one of them will become war mongers, so pretty much every country has a military so that it will *stay* a country. :-)

No, not necessarily. When a protest interferes with the rights of another person by physically attacking someone, that's an assault. Someone blocking a street for a protest parade, with police lines shutting down the street, etc., might be an inconvenience, but it clearly isn't an assault. Everything in between is shades of grey.

To be fair, it is private property owned by a company that employed at least some of the protesters, in a building that the protesters presumably worked in, so it's not quite as clear-cut as occupying someone else's yard. More like your teenage kid occupying your yard.

Now that I realize how they use terminology, suddenly Amazon's search results make sense. If I really want a Bluetooth keyboard and not some wireless USB keyboard, I should search for FireWire keyboard, and if I really want a wireless USB keyboard, I should search for PS/2 keyboard.

It's hard to know whether this is something harmless or a sign of a serious design flaw in Discord without more information.

If this company is just assuming that Dumbledore32168 is the same user on server A and server B, then either:

• users chose to use the same name on every server with the expectation that people from other servers would recognize them, in which case there's really no problem at all, or
• some servers don't allow you to set your username, in which case that's a real problem, and a good reason to use something other than Discord,

and I have no idea which of these is the case.

If, however, they are doing something more clever and matching people even when they have different usernames, then this suggests a *major* design flaw.

It should not be possible for anyone other than the actual owner of the server to obtain any identifier for a user that is shared across multiple servers. Other people should be able to see your local (per-server) username, period. There are reasons for a signed-in user to pass uniquely identifying values *to* the server, and there are legitimate reasons for the server to store that mapping, but there are no reasons for there to be any web-facing API for converting from a username back to that identifier, period, under any circumstances. Even things like private messaging should be sending the local username or a local user identifier, not any sort of global identifier.

And even during the sign-in/sign-up process, the identifier sent from the authentication server to the content server need not be shared across servers. There's nothing inherently preventing discord from providing a different per-user unique identifier to each server, and if privacy were a serious consideration in the design, they would be doing this. So again, if they are successfully tracking users across servers when usernames don't match, then Discord's entire security architecture needs a major overhaul, because that would mean that Discord as a platform is severely flawed architecturally, and that privacy was not a serious consideration in its design.

So could someone from Discord please clarify what is happening here?

These actually likely served a purpose. If some other company made an exact copy of their mask, they could go to court and immediately prove that it was a copy. It's the chip design equivalent of the "Stolen from Apple" art hidden inside the Mac ROM code so that if someone tried to sell a clone similar to what happened with the Franklin Ace, they would potentially have an easy way to prove in court that the code was copied.

Limits on transferring tickets creates the potential for people to be stuck with tickets and forced to go back to TicketMaster to resell them, where they make additional profit, which gives them a perverse incentive to allow bots to buy tickets, because they get to profit on the same sale more than once, raising the price each time the tickets get resold.

Without those limitations, you'd be able to legitimately resell tickets anywhere, and companies wouldn't be afraid of allowing resale. As a result, almost nobody would go through TicketMaster and pay their high fees, so TM would have more incentive to truly fix the problem.

Combine that with an exception to the transferability mandate if and only if the seller offers a 100% refund policy (with no fees), with tickets becoming transferrable after refunds become unavailable.

If you pass a law written like that, TM will have a strong incentive to lock things down a lot — specifically, they could:

• Require all tickets to be transferred to an app on one or more specific people's phones.
• For people who don't have smartphones, allow them to pick up physical tickets in person with a photo ID, but only within one week of the event.
• Allow people to return tickets up to a week before the show for a refund.
• Allow people to transfer tickets within the last week, either by converting an electronic ticket to a physical ticket in person or through their app.

That sort of policy should (I think) make scalping largely impractical, because most scalpers aren't going to want to risk buying tickets months ahead of time if they can't sell them anywhere until a few days before the show.

Here's the lyrics to a fairly typical, average kinda tune:

We used to swim the same moonlight waters
Oceans away from the wakeful day

My fall will be for you - My fall will be for you My love will be in you If you be the one to cut me I will bleed forever
Scent of the sea before the waking of the world
Brings me to thee
Into the blue memory

My fall will be for you - My fall will be for you My love will be in you If you be the one to cut me I will bleed forever
Into the blue memory

A siren from the deep came to me
Sang my name my longing
Still I write my songs about that dream of mine
Worth everything I may ever be

The Child will be born again
That siren carried him to me
First of them true loves
Singing on the shoulders of an angel
Without care for love ‘n loss

Bring me home or leave me be
My love in the dark heart of the night
I have lost the path before me
The one behind will lead me

Take me
Cure me
Kill me
Bring me home
Every way
Every day
Just another loop in the hangman’s noose

Take me, cure me, kill me, bring me home
Every way, every day
I keep on watching us sleep

Relive the old sin of Adam and Eve
Of you and me
Forgive the adoring beast

Redeem me into childhood
Show me myself without the shell
Like the advent of May
I’ll be there when you say
Time to never hold our love
-------

But there's next to no repetition in it.

What you're saying is that you consider living in a manner consistent with being above the poverty line to be a luxury, and people should be taxed on it. And that attitude justifies, at least in your mind, raising taxes on the middle class — even the lower middle class who often struggle to get by.

And because your tax proposal applies only to things that normal people buy, while mostly ignoring true luxuries, such as yachts bought overseas, and completely ignoring securities, butlers, maids, personal drivers, personal pilots, and other things that the wealthy tend to spend their money on, it shifting most of the tax burden from the wealthy to the middle class, which is what pretty much every economist who has ever looked at this plan has concluded it will do, but you're okay with that, because apparently in your mind, not being dirt poor is a luxury that should only be allowed for those who can afford it.

Start by passing a law that makes it unlawful to make anything non-transferrable, whether it is a concert ticket or a software license. That one law would do more to fix this problem than anything else.

One of my friends once pointed out to me that 10 Things I Hate About You is basically Taming of the Shrew in a different setting, and my perspective on movies has never been the same since. So how many of those 7% were still retellings of existing stories, but with enough changes to make them not be flagrantly "based on existing IP"?