That list shows President Trump won in 2024 with 77,302,169 - which is second, behind Biden in 2020. Which I would call a record, especially when you take into account the strange spike in turn-out in 2020 that never reoccurred in any other election.

You've never used public infrastructure, have you? These are going to be built and forgotten. They will never be upgraded. Like you point out, the connector will be broken eventually and then the station will be useless. This already happens with publicly built charging stations.

It's a waste of money, it was always a waste of money, and it should be stopped.

Due process isn't being ignored. What are you even talking about?

The President has complete control over what the executive branch does. Read the Constitution. It's Article II. Everything President Trump is doing are things that the Constitution allows the President to do.

That is literally how democracy works. The American people elected President Donald J. Trump in record numbers. They voted for him and his policies (exit polls confirm this). That's democracy.

Just because you personally don't like what the people voted for doesn't mean it isn't what the people voted for. The people want DOGE, they want Elon Musk's budget cuts, they voted for it and opinion polls continue to show that the majority of Americans support what Trump is doing.

There's a huge irony in watching the same people who spent the past two years saying President Donald J. Trump would be a "threat to democracy" now telling us we should throw out democracy because they don't like the results.

The US is heading towards a fiscal cliff. This isn't unknown. We flat-out can't be spending this kind of money on worthless projects.

And make no mistake, this EV charger program was always worthless. EV charging is currently undergoing a change from an older standard to a new one. Ever been in a building and see that they installed all sorts of USB A 2.0 style chargers? The ones that max out at 2A? It's like that - they're building old chargers as the industry moves to USB-PD. But the transition hasn't happened yet.

One of the major things that's only just being standardized is billing. Right now, in order to use a charger, you generally have to be a "member" of the charging network whose charger it is. They don't accept credit cards directly, they tend to require you to pay via a custom app. It's pretty terrible. The new system will allow the car itself to transmit account and billing information to the charger, so you won't need to download a new app, everything will be done via a standard protocol.

But currently, we're in that transition period. Chargers as they exist right now are effectively the "old" USB A charging bricks, about to be made obsolete as everything moves over to the newer USB-PD via USB C standard. And, yes, that includes the plug. Newer cars won't be able to use these chargers without an adapter.

They shouldn't be built. They're going to be useless. It was always a stupid plan intended to boost an unpopular president's popularity with the "green" crowd. It certainly wasn't intended to help EV drivers.

But all of that doesn't really matter, because of another simple truth: the US must cut spending, drastically, right now, or it will run out of money in a decade. We already know this. We're heading towards a catastrophe. Anyone accepting government contracts already knows that US government is in the process of financially collapsing. The question isn't if it will happen, the question is now how long can it be delayed.

PAX was huge about a decade ago. They used to announce attendance figures and it was nearing 100,000 over a weekend.

Then they went all DEI, released some "anti-booth-babe" thing, and suddenly stopped announcing attendance figures. That was about the same time the major publishers and console makers stopped attending.

These days it's just a sad little thing where a few indie publishers show up and you get a bunch of people waving rainbow flags and talking about pronouns.

That won't help, though. Considering the following: you have a candidate you agree with entirely, but they're new. They'd arrive in Congress with no committee assignments. They would spend their first term accomplishing next to nothing as they'd have to "earn their spot" at the table. Or, you have the incumbent. You don't agree with them on everything. However, they're on several prime committee seats, and they have the political clout to get things done.

Which are you going to rank higher? The candidate you agree with but who doesn't have the ability to do anything? Or the candidate you partially agree with and has the ability to accomplish things? Be honest.

That's the problem with our seniority-based system. Incumbents have more power because they're incumbents. Period. Throwing out an incumbent means accepting that the replacement will be less effective simply because they're new. Even if you like their policies better, their views and policies don't mean much if they can't do anything with them.

Part of what makes safe seats "safe" are a lack of term limits. You get a scenario where the worse candidate is better, because they have the cabinet positions and know how to get things done, leading to an entrenched political class. Term limits are necessary to forcibly "clean house" every once and a while and ensure that you don't wind up having to vote for the worse choice because the better choice won't be able to get anything done.

And on that note, also worth pointing out that Kamala Harris was born in 1964, and is currently 60. Had she won, she would have been the most-recently born president, but by far not the youngest.

And she's about the youngest Democrats have left in their party, since their gerontocratic leadership has steadily helped keep young people out of positioned of power, guaranteeing that they had no one to step in when their octogenarian leader started to very visibly have his brain leak out. (The few exceptions, like AOC, prove the rule. Plus, the party hates her and her "squad" and would very much like to kick then out.)

Republicans, on the other hand, have quite a few young people in their ranks. Vice President Vance is only 40, a veritable spring chicken by the standards of the Democrats.

And which were better, the four years with President Trump or the four years with Braindead Biden?

Because I know which were better for me - and everyone I know, for that matter - and it's not even close. Biden can at least claim senility, but anyone paying attention has noticed that things were far, far worse under Biden's sleep than they ever were under President Trump.

Gamers expect constant updates because we live in a world where games can be patched, which leads to two very annoying things: games being released as buggy messes, and games being released incomplete with the promise that the rest of the content will be patched in later.

There's another thing that's forcing games to be in constant development, and that's modern platforms being moving targets. For mobile games especially, if the game isn't constantly being updated, it will probably be unplayable a few years after the last patch. Especially on iOS: any iOS game released before a few years ago is likely unplayable today. And that ignores iOS dropping 32-bit support, which killed a ton of the original iOS games.

But the main thing harming the gaming industry is games being released in buggy, incomplete states. So of course gamers expect post-release updates, these updates add the missing content and fix the bugs making the game unplayable. It's cheaper for the developer to release them in a mostly playable, mostly complete state, gain some money off the game, and then let the players be beta testers to find whatever they didn't find before release. It's just kind of become standard practice. So, too, unfortunately, has become the practice of abandoning a game to be left forever an incomplete buggy mess if an audience doesn't suddenly appear.

Agree on the first part, and disagree on the second. Most review "bombing" happens because games are released with breaking bugs and incomplete content. Bad reviews in that case aren't review "bombing" - they're legitimate bad reviews.

It's also confusing because if you read the article (what? I know), it says Sony's down 5% over the year under a chart showing Sony starting at $17.01 a year ago and ending at $18.46. Huh?

But the overall point behind the article appears to be focusing on Sony's entertainment properties, and it's clear that Sony Pictures and Sony Interactive Entertainment are having major issues. Sony isn't just its entertainment divisions, and it's entirely that those other divisions are what's keeping the company afloat, even as entertainment drops.

All that being said, everything in the entertainment industry is encountering issues, for a couple of obvious reasons. The first is inflation: as prices rise, people drop luxuries, like going to the movies or game consoles, first. The second is the end of the pandemic: during the pandemic, entertainment sales spiked as people had nothing else to do. Now they do.

Which means that, even while Sony definitely had a bad year when it comes to entertainment releases, everyone else has had a bad year too. Microsoft is having issues with Xbox and Nintendo has pushed back the release of its new console. Quite a few game studios have folded entirely. It's not just a Sony issue.

No, it isn't. Don't lie.

You look it up by doing a REST request to plc.directory/[DID].

Which is a centralized service and the master repository for the DID, under the control of Bluesky.

And how exactly does your DID point to it, in a distributed way? How do you map a given DID back to the "personal data server?"

Because it's not distributed in the current implementation. In fact, pretty much every distributed thing is all "we'll figure this out later." Currently, the answer is your DID maps to a server that Bluesky itself runs, and only via this server can you look up the instance a user is on.

And, since the current DID implementation is essentially just a database key, there's no way to replace it with a "real" distributed implementation. It's irrevocably tied to that centralized service.

In the end, like so many "distributed" things, it's "distributed" right up until it isn't. Most of it is, in reality, centralized, and effectively under the control of a single, central company.

And notice that this was the ONLY demographic Democrats improved with. Every single other demographic, including women, they lost voters in. Gee, wonder why that might be. So many of us have never gotten a single helping hand from the Democrats because we can't win "identity bingo." And the Democrats handed out literally billions of dollars to buy votes. Don't think I'm ever voting for a Democrat ever again until ever cent is clawed back.

Democrats are a party that care more about dictating what pronouns you can use than improving the economy or helping businesses thrive. It's that simple.