I am reasonably, but not entirely, confident that Wikipedia is reliable in this. It's not always correct.

True. But at least when it is incorrect, it's authoritatively incorrect.

"...and then they found out that they couldn't come for me."

The most obviously applicable of those are the eligibility rules for SSI, which changed the definition of "public assistance households".

And what makes you think I'm on SSI? I've said repeatedly that I'm retired and am on Social Security, which is completely different. To be a tad more specific, I'm 76 years old and will be 77 by the end of the year. My VA compensation has nothing to do with that, as none of my disabilities made me stop working and all of them were declared Service Connected after I retired.

They're a warehouse filled with equipment racks and when something fails a person is sent out to swap parts. They employ at handful of people.

I'm long retired, and the only job I had that included a data center, it was right across the street from where I worked, so I have to ask this: when something fails in the typical data center, how long does it take on the average for somebody to get to it and swap in a new box? And, do they have some spare boxes up and running so that somebody can just switch things over to it in a few minutes and worry about replacing the bad box later or is that service just down until the box gets replaced?

The UK mostly doesn't do voter suppression. However, they did for the Referendum. Basically, anyone who might not be racist was not permitted to vote.

Even then, 48% still insisted on staying in the EU.

One of the reasons the UK doesn't do voter suppression the way the US does is because (until very recently) the House of Lords had a lot of people in it who owed no favours at all to the political elite but did have a huge responsibility to making sure that things functioned in the long term. This has since been corrupted, so the HoL is no longer anything like as independent and politically neutral as it once was. Rather, the two main parties have stuffed it full of sycophants, which makes it useless. Which, of course, was the intended effect.

Because those in the HoL were partly hereditary (and therefore not under anyone's thumb and impossible to manipulate) and partly chosen on actual merit (they'd done stuff that was actually impressive and good for the country), the HoL were the true guardians of the Constitution and the nation. The House of Commons has always been corrupt and degenerate, so a parallel system that politicians couldn't control meant their worst excesses would always be curbed. The HoL has defended the common person FAR FAR more often than anyone in the Commons ever has.

This didn't make the HoL perfect, or even advisable to retain in its historic form, but it made it immune to the corruption that we were seeing in the rest of the system. What we needed was a replacement system that retained that immunity and improved on it.

Although there is a right join, no far right join has ever been defined and there's no signs that it would in fact be possible.

And what would you say if there was a heavy rain storm or dense fog? Would you still say that he should be driving at 55 mph even though that would be outrunning his headlights? Just to remind you of how dangerous that can be, I'd like to point out that that was what caused Titanic to ram an iceberg back in 1912.

Is that missing an end sarcasm tag? (IE: DOGE comes to mind)

No. Social Security is so ingrained in our culture that even if some politician were foolish to try to abolish it, Congress would never pass such a bill. There are just too many senior citizens dependent on it, and we tend to vote, especially when our livelihood is at stake. And, now that we don't have a draft, people have stopped hating the Armed Forces and started thanking us for our service (even if we served in a campagn they hated at the time) making things like the VA and its compensation to those of us who didn't quite come home completely healthy are heading for rhe same status. It probably helps that most of our disabilities don't show unlike the many WWII vets with missing limbs because those would make it a bit too clear what our sacrifices were. And in case you're wondering, none of my disabilities are obvious, but they all affect my day to day living.

Yeeees and no. It matters in terms of loans he can get from banks. A trillionaire gets an awful lot better deal than anyone else.

So although he cannot liquidate a trillion dollars, there's a decent chance he can borrow at exceptionally low interest rates enough to do pretty much whatever he wants because he has the moniker.

It's not hard to be morally superior to a childish self-righteous socipoath.

He's not bright, he's not clever, he IS abusive, and he is exceptionally rich. However, only an idiot equates "rich" with "better".

I would say more than half of Slashdot can match or exceed his intelligence. And that's despite the fact that Slashdot has attracted pet rocks as users in recent years. Actually, truth be told, it's because of that. Back in the younger days of Slashdot, I'd say 95% of the regulars were smarter than Musk.

All Musk has is money. And I can understand you envying that. But here's the thing. Smart people don't talk their company's value down. Smart people invest their money. Musk throws it around, such as buying Twitter and destroying the userbase.

Musk is not your friend.

If for example any of us was even the slightest inconvenience to Elon Musk he could just phone up whoever is employing Us and order them to fire us and they would and then we would be blacklisted and become completely unemployable.

I'm retired. My income consists of Social Security and Disability compensation from the VA. Who could he call that could fire me?

When my mother was a child, any child who was displayed left-handed traits was considered possessed and had their left hands restrained.

My mother started school a little over 100 years ago, and was left handed. As was normal in those days, the teachers tried to break that "habit" and make her right handed like the rest of the class. When her mother heard that, she went to the school and told them that if they didn't cease and desist that barbaric practice RIGHT NOW she'd take Mom out of school and teach her at home, with the result that she was the only left handed student in her class. As the desks in those days had only a small writing surface on the right side, she had to learn how to write in a rather unusual way, but learn she did, with a very clear hand. I've heard that a similar "education" is part of what caused George VI's speech issues, but that's just speculation.

I don't know about empty rooms, but it's very normal in Britain, if you're walking through a field, to turn left and walk clockwise around the edge of the field. But the problem there is potential for bias because of the area.

When rambling through the British countryside, the standard protocol is to turn left immediately on entry but then walk clockwise around the field. So turning left seems to be fixed, but the direction of preference is determined by when.