Some states are not allowing RealID that has an address outside the voting precinct. This is why Student IDs are needed. Certainly when I was at school my driver's license indicated I lived in a different state.

ReadID does not include an indication of citizenship and non-citizens can get them.

It is unfortunate that some of the items that can be used to get a RealID are also proof of citizenship and thus they could have added this information to the card at that time. I'm not sure what to do if somebody thinks they are a citizen but lack any of the acceptable proofs, they may have to get the RealID without the citizenship indicator if they need it soon, and there will have to have another option than a RealID to register to vote.

None of this has anything to do with using RealID or any other license or card at the polling station. That is ONLY to prove you are using the right name, you have to be registered in order to vote.

You need ID to register to vote. Stop lying.

Do you carry your birth certificate with you because you needed it to get your passport?

The ID at voting is supposed to confirm that the person is a particular registered voter. If they are not allowed to vote then they would not be registered.

I do agree that people would feel more comfortable about the voting system if voters produced a physical object rather than the current scheme of saying a name that is registered and they can assume nobody else will say. If they allowed a few obvious things like Student ID's or utility bills the number of disenfranchised voters would be small enough that it would not effect the voting results (it would not be zero though so there will always be sob stories for opponents of ID). Crossing names off in a register is still going to be done since that is the real prevention of fraud (including stolen IDs), but public comfort even if it can be proven that the IDs do nothing can be considered a useful goal.

The Republican attacks on the ability to register to vote are pretty serious. IMHO anything done by the government that happens to know if you are eligible to vote should automatically register you, in particular getting a RealID drivers license, and quite a few methods of applying for benefits. The attacks on mail-in voting are also blatant, mail-in votes are a good deal more secure than any non-biometric ID since they require the voter to have access to the mailbox that the numbered ballot is delivered to. I also personally know I will be out of the country on Election Day so I am personally disenfranchised by this. The continuous claim that the only thing in that bill is ID at voting is a LIE, stop doing it.

Actually the companies generated quite a bit of greenhouse gases directly from mining, refining, and delivering the product. They are directly responsible for the vast majority of methane being emitted. People who buy methane tend to make sure it gets burned.

But I think the big deal is that they knew what the gases would do and did not tell anybody, and actively denied when others made the same conclusion. This is going to be difficult to prove without a lot of paper evidence that they did such research, however.

Correct. The people pushing for this law are admitting that climate change is real.

For the last many years (before the pandemic at least) my "jury duty" has amounted to checking online each evening for a week to see if I need to go to the courthouse the next day. I have not had to ever go in, and I have to go to work like normal.

This is LA County, maybe it is different in other places?

No, it's just that "defund the police" is a really stupid misleading slogan.

Even the most radical leftist ideas of what it would mean would raise the budget. All proposals require more personnel to be hired and to put more people in the field and fewer at desks. The only way it could lower the police budget is to make up some other department and say a lot of these new people are employees of that new department. I believe some proposals do try that subterfuge to try to hide the increased budget. There is also a claim that they should spend less on weapons and military equipment, but unfortunately the cost of that is small compared to the salaries.

If you don't like how things are now, why do you think they will be more agreeable to you 20 years in the future???

Yes that is a good idea.

He could also declare that exporting oil is illegal.

It's doing this on purpose. If you switch the navigation to the native language it starts pronouncing the words correctly. I think they assume it would be better to pronounce things as they think an American who does not know the language would pronounce them.

The editing would be embedded into the web site which is republishing the video, not by applications.

I agree that a signature that is produced by the camera could be used to authenticate a video.

Adding an "advisory link" is NOT CENSORSHIP. No matter how much you cry about it.

You are right about their algorithms making it shitty. Everything should be required to show most-recent first with NO items that you have not somehow "subscribed" to, and this should be the default behavior. They can always put a button on there saying "things you may like" that will show their algorithm, but you can't read/view the contents unless you click on them, and the result is that you are temporarily subscribed to this source and the main view scrolls to the point where you are looking at that item, with things still in chronological order. There can be a button that says "subscribe to this" to make the subscription permanent.

The video should be modified to include the label. If somebody crops or removes the label and tries to post the result, this editing will be detectable and will cause the label to reappear, or whatever triggered the label will still be there and cause it to reappear.

"Community notes" are just another way to add a comment to a video and are useless. The company's rights to free speech allow it to add any logo to the video it wants, including "this is fake/misleading/a lie". That is NOT censorship no matter how many times you cry that you are being censored.