I didn't know id Software was still a thing, especially after John Carmack left. What are they even doing now?

Those really, really expensive yachts are a huge wealth transfer to the working class. Do you have any idea how many working class people it takes to build, maintain and operate those things?

And most of the rich don't hoard their wealth because if they did, inflation would make them a lot less rich. Most of the rich have most of their money invested in ventures that make them more money.

But if they did hoard their wealth, that would actually counteract (at least partially) inflation. Taking money out of circulation decreases the money supply which makes the remaining money more valuable.

The issue isn't hoarding wealth, it's investing wealth into non-productive ventures. Which, granted, does include paying hundreds of millions to skilled tradespeople to build yachts that sit underutilized. But it also includes building and operating cruise ships for the less rich, and operating professional sports leagues and the entire entertainment industry.

Can you cite any person, by name, who is not a republican who has said that? A direct quote, written or video, would be helpful. Because I've only ever heard it coming from foaming at the mouth maga types.

US Solicitor General John Sauer disagrees.

In the oral arguments for Trump v Slaughter, on Monday, Sauer said this isn't true when Justice Kagan pushed him on it. She said that the Founders clearly intended to have a separation of powers, to which he basically said "Yeah, but with the caveat that they created the 'unitary executive'", by which he seemed to mean that they intended the president to be able to do pretty much anything.

Kagan responded with a nuanced argument about how we have long allowed Congress to delegate limited legislative and judicial functions to the executive branch in the way we allow Congress to delegate the power to create and evaluate federal rules to executive-branch agencies, but that that strategy rests on a "deal" that both limits the scope of said rulemaking and evaluative functions and isolates them to the designated agency. She said that breaking that isolation by allowing the president detailed control over those functions abrogated and invalidated the deal, unconstitutionally concentrating power in ways that were clearly not intended by the Founders.

Sauer disagreed. I'll stop describing the discussion here and invite you to listen to it. The discussion is both fascinating and very accessible, and the linked clip is less than seven minutes long.

The court seems poised to take Sauer's view, which I think is clearly wrong. If they do, it's going to come back and bite conservatives hard when we get an active liberal president, as we inevitably will someday if the Trump administration fails to end democracy in the US.

What's very sad is that we already went through all of this and learned these lessons 150 years ago. After 100 years of experience with a thoroughly-politicized executive branch, we passed the Pentleton Civil Service Reform act in 1883 specifically to insulate most civil servants from presidential interference. Various other laws have subsequently been passed to create protections for federal workers and to establish high-level positions that are explicitly protected from the president. SCOTUS seems bent on overturning all of that and returning us to the pre-Pendleton era.

Those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it, and it's looking we're gonna repeat a lot of bad history before we re-learn those 19th-century lessons.

>":Roll Eyes: Would they kick their own babies out once they hit ten million?"

Their population is in DECLINE, like almost all Western nations. There is ZERO chance of that happening. They will very likely allow immigration, but with hard caps and based on their own criteria, not just anyone that wants in or crosses their borders without permission. Those criteria will likely be based on things like knowing the language, having valuable/compatible skills/education, already having family there, understanding and likelihood to assimilating to general Swiss values, etc.

>"What this really comes down to, like all immigration debates, is racism. They don't like the color of the skin or the religion of the immigrants."

And you couldn't be more WRONG.

Most people don't give a damn about the "color of the skin." What they care about is *CULTURE* which is a set of beliefs and the way people act. That is NOT "RACISM".

And not liking someone else's religion that wants to push alien values that are incompatible with most of the native citizens is, guess what, ALSO NOT "RACISM".

So do us all a favor and stop using the word "racism", it is so unbelievably overused and abused now, it means almost nothing.

>"Until recently the only way to access the cameras from mobile was through the cloud service, you could access the device over https directly but then it wouldnt let you view video if you were doing so on a mobile device."

No, you could also use a VPN and access it directly as well. Granted, MOST people that want to use the app (and it is certainly not required) will not have a problem with using a cloud login in the app just for notifications and to stream the video. That is very "normal" for most any platform. But the video and settings are still coming directly from your own physical box. Unifi's cloud is just directing and connecting you to your box own box. And that communication is all encrypted.

>"Their IPv6 support is also very poor, and there are a lot of networks using CGNAT for legacy service so inbound legacy traffic is not possible."

They have made lots of improvements in IPV6 in 2025. If you haven't seen their stuff in a year, you would be pretty amazed at how quickly things have advanced.

>"There is no option to configure IPv6 through the web interface"

Yes there is. But I can't speak on the details, since I don't use it. But I see the settings.

>"There's also no built in dynamic dns support which is needed if the ISP keeps changing your prefix."

Yes there is. I am using it now. That has been available in the web user interface for years, I think. When last did you last use/look at Unifi's gateway???

Or, more concisely: Countries should aim to be poor.

To be fair to the nutballs, their proposal will actually slow it down as compared to not limiting immigration. That is, from their nutball perspective the proposal is an improvement, just not a total solution. For a total solution, they need to go full right-wing nutball and also ban women from working so they'll stay home and have proper Swiss babies.

Except that they aren't blocking sideloading. With the planned changes you can still install apps via:

1. Other app stores. The apps will have to be signed by a registered developer account.
2. By one-click installation from a web site. The apps will have to be signed by a registered developer account.
3. By ADB. No registered developer account required.

And for the cases that require a registered developer account, that account can be anonymous and free as long as the number of installs is small.

That would be fun, actually. I'd have to give them slashdot and substack. They'd have no idea what either of them are.

Well, it would be fun until they denied me entry.

FTFY

This is a gaslighting that he'll probably largely get away with, since most Americans -- especially his voter base -- have little contact with tourism or people from other countries.

His ongoing attempts to gaslight them over grocery prices, though, that one's going to be tougher. I'm surprised he's trying that. I mean, he's dumb, sure, and insulated from truth, but surely someone around him is smart enough and clueful enough to tell him that it would be better to sell it as a period of unfortunate but necessary pain on the way to long-lasting economic revival and stability. His base would eat that up, but even his diehard supporters are having a hard time reconciling "grocery prices are down!" with their own grocery bills, and he just keeps repeating it. He can cherry-pick specific item prices or gush about the lower-price of a (conveniently scaled-back) Thanksgiving dinner basket all he wants but people who actually buy groceries (such an old-timey word! <eyeroll/>) can see the truth during every weekly trip to the store.

>"any women "injected" by her husband is indistinguishable from a random woman with donated sperm."

Actually, that isn't quite true. There are subtle processes at work in couples choosing each other in unconscious ways. Some are based on smell, some on visual health cues. Interestingly, they tend to help make sure that they are genetically more "compatible" with each other. I don't know how effective it is, but I do remember reading about it more than once. One was really strange, it had to do with having women smell different men's worn shirts and describe what they feel, then compare to what various blood tests show.

>"The main limitation is that it requires you to use their NVR products"

It is true that Unifi cameras can't be used without running Unifi Protect. And there are many low-cost options for that. But Protect also fully supports RTSP, so you can send the video to something else and never even touch Protect (other than for setup), if you wish. For example, at work we send the video from all the Access door readers to our large Synology system where we store/archive/access the video with their NVR (Synology Surveillance Station).

And you can connect 3rd party ONVIF cameras to Protect, too, which is nice.

>"The unifi stuff leans heavily towards cloud, you can force it to do direct connections but its not the default"

That is not accurate. There is zero dependency on the "Cloud", other than if you want to install updates. Or if you optionally choose to use their cloud tools to gain remote access more easily. The login, the settings, the processing, the web server, the data, and all the video are all local.

Ubiquiti's signature feature is having everything local. It is one of several reasons they have become increasingly more and more popular.

It's true, seifs are for ease of reading ... but so is Calibri. However, I believe Calibri was created for ease of reading on screens, while this article talks about documents on letterhead. So it's possible the choice of Calibri was misguided to begin with. Furthermore, according to the article, the number of “accessibility-based document remediation cases” – which I take to mean instances where somebody requests a document be reformatted for accessibility reasons – has not declined. So he's saying that, while this is a purely subjective aesthetic choice, the original change to Calibri never helped anything anyway.