True, but it is an example that I expected most people to be familiar with. See also: Tobacco, Firearms, Gambling, Minimum Wage, etc.

Consider getting your state to join the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact.

Under the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, no voter will have their vote cancelled out at the state-level because their choice differed from plurality sentiment in their state. Instead, every voter’s vote will be added directly -without distortion- into the national count for the candidate of their choice. This will ensure that every voter, in every state, will be politically relevant in every presidential election.

The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact will take effect when enacted by states with a majority of the electoral votes (270 of 538). The candidate receiving the most popular votes in all 50 states and DC will get all the electoral votes from the enacting states. This guarantees that the candidate receiving the most popular votes nationwide will get enough Electoral College votes to become President.

The Compact has been enacted by 18 states and DC (CA, CO, CT, DE, DC, HI, IL, MA, MD, ME, MN, NJ, NM, NY, OR, RI, VA, VT, WA). These places together possess 222 of the 270 electoral votes needed to activate the Compact.

Kalshi spokeswoman Dani Lever said in a statement: "Despite the Ninth Circuit's opinion, we still believe the CFTC regulations as written do not prohibit sports contracts, and in any event, the CFTC is working to clarify those regulations. We will be seeking further review."

There is nothing unusual about states having regulations in addition to federal regulations.

Alcohol is federally regulated. It is also subject to state and local regulation.

The datacenters don't care as much. We need Nvidia to remember which customers made them what they are now, and sell some damn RTX's at a reasonable damn price. In 2020, they released GPUs altered to suck at crypto mining so that there would be some supply for everyone else. I'd like them to think about that again.

But they don't make memory, and that's the real killer right now. And the datacenters have already bought it all.

I have a suspicion that this is an ill-conceived response to China's Mercantilist approach. At least on the surface, it looks to be working for them, so we should do it to? Right?

Well, no. We got where we are by not doing it that way. Plus, our political system doesn't work with it.

This is not a GOP thing, it's a Trump populist thing. The party is not pleased. There are a lot of members in Congress that are screaming at him every day. I also think it's a mistake. I was fine with it when it was a negotiation tactic for updating some realtionships, but he's gone too far with it. There's one nation we need tariffs against, and it's China. The Canadian tariffs, for example, are just plain dumb as far as I can tell. I don't understand why he's doing that, especially given that he already redid NAFTA.

My best guess there is that he saw how Canada did have a number of tariffs in place and didn't like it. But! They were volume-gated well above the trade we actually do, so they've only ever kicked in once. It's like he missed how those were basically for show so Canadian politicians could say they were protecting their industries without actually doing anything.

Conversely, 100% of US debt is the result of spending too much. Congress can fix that but doesn't seem to have the stones to do it.

You don't have to agree with someone 100% to vote for them. I don't support these tariffs. They aren't helping. But if you agree with one candidate on 80% of stuff, and the other on 5%, who to vote for is clear.

No, Socialism is State control of the means of production. Communism collectivizes demand on top of that. Fascism also has State control of production, but indirectly through a system called corporatism (which is different from rule by corporations). In practice, there is little difference between the three. They must all act as oppressive totalitarian dictatorships in order to be maintained.

As the means of production are Land, Labor, and Capital, all three put the State in direct control of everyone's life.

Structurally, China is more fascist than anything else. North Korea and Cuba are, as I recall, the only Communist nations still around.

Well, that does sound like a pretty serious scandal. Biggest bribe I ever recall seeing (looking at the wikipedia page). Didn't look to be procurement related though.

And I'm guessing it wasn't the reference documentation from Zilog, as that was one of the first search results I saw.

I'm glad you brought that up because it reminded me of one of the first things I thought of in the context of rare-but-who-cares books. Somewhere in my house I think I have a copy of a book on how to play videogames. It was published in the early 80's and covers the popular arcade games of the time. The number of people interested in a book that tells you how to get high scores in the original arcade version of Tempest is most assuredly somewhere near zero. I found it to be of some slight historical/nostalgic interest when I grabbed it free somewhere in the early 90's (I think I was 5 when the book was published), but of no use or cultural/aesthetic value.

My dad is a huge bookworm and used to go to libraries that were disposing of books and just take anything that caught his eye. As a result, I have other "rare" books. I have a book on the production of aerosols from sometime in the 40's. Its technically rare, but not exactly valuable. A library was throwing it out. Amazon can have it if they like.

Does the UK have something akin to the Library of Congress? I figure y'all must, it's probably just called the Royal Library or somesuch.
Just for the hell of it, is the book you're talking about on this list: https://search.catalog.loc.gov...
Though, obviously a round-trip ticket to DC would run you more than 50p.

If it is truly out of copyright, that sounds sensible to me. But that may not always be clear. The original work may be a hundred years old, but they may be scanning in a version with a new forward that puts that edition of the book back under copyright. But in those cases, it won't really matter. That'll be a recent print of something there are already many copies of. It may even count as rare if there weren't many copies of that version printed.

For example, Tom Sawyer is out of copyright and widely available. Are they destroying first edition? No, that's rare and valuable. We'll assume Amazon aren't wasteful philistines. But there are hundreds of editions available. Annotated, edited, illustrated, large print, with/without Huck Fin, classroom editions, teacher's editions, editions with different cover art, hardcovers, editions form different publishers... Some of those are going to be rare in that there weren't many printed, or most of them went to schools and kids abused them leaving few useable copies, etc. You could destroy entire runs of them and not put a dent into the number of Tom Sawyers in circulation.

Well, it sounds like we're talking about different kinds of hardware anyhow. I'm talking about firewalls, you're talking about smart grid stuff. What's this Ohio thing you're referring to?

I'm also formally married, in that I have a wife and the documentation to prove it. We were together 10 years before we got married, but we're even closer and happier since we formalized it.

Anyway, what you describe strikes me more as unhappy people trying to turn their unhappiness into a cause in the hopes that they will become happy if their misery has enough company. Rejecting every biological and emotional drive because some unhappy fool misplaced their own problems strikes me as incredibly stupid.

And no, we aren't talking about the world, we're talking about romantic love between two individuals.

As far as I'm concerned, the only meaningful difference between a hyphen and a dash is whether it connects two strings of characters or is surrounded by spaces. I reserve my syntactic ire for things like single spaces after periods. I detest that and won't forgive Slashdot for incorrecting it.

Yes, you're correct. That said, they have to prove you lied and won't be able to. So long as you don't immediately unlock your phone while they can still see you.