No I'm suggesting the states still have exactly the same number of electoral votes as they do now.

But votes are calculated by multiplying each vote by the number of electoral votes for the state divided by the actual number of votes in the state.

I feel this might pass the constitutional requirements and the result won't be too far from the popular vote.

The winner-take-all aspect of electoral votes is MUCH more damaging than the fact that they don't match the population.

I believe "approval" voting (where a voter can approve as many/few candidates as they want) will work. However it seems like everybody is more comfortable with being able to rank all their choices from best to worse.

The release notes claim the new version has higher accuracy, meaning it returns different (better) answers for some input strings. It seems to me that it's training can't be limited to the old code in order to achieve this. Still agree that if they fed the code to a program and told it "write a better version" then the copyright of the original code still applies. They may also have just generated a lot of strings and in some (many) cases fed them to the old program and told the AI to make a program that produces the same output for these strings. That would probably be allowed under clean-room rules.

According to you EVs have some kind of "special mass" that causes much more tire particulates than the larger mass of an SUV or truck. And brake particulates are totally harmless so regenerative braking does not help.

The failure you describe was ST everywhere. What is generally being proposed is DST everywhere. And I see no problem with dawn being at 8am. It is well before most people have to go to work which usually starts at 9.

A reasonable solution is to change to Standard Time everywhere, but also allow regions to decide what time zone they are in. If they prefer Daylight Savings Time all the time, they switch one time zone to the East. Maybe make some rules that the resulting time zones must be contiguous.

I suspect the vast majority of them will switch, so it may be useful to rename the timezones so the words Pacific, Mountain, Central, Eastern still correspond mostly to the area they were before.

It's really unclear why Trump does not do this. It would be immensely popular and would fit with his other actions.

I think it is possible that it is because he said at one point that he would "get rid of Daylight Savings Time". When in fact he almost certainly wanted to "have Daylight Savings Time all the time". He does not want to be told he said the wrong thing. However I think this could instead be done as "move the time zones" so everybody is on Standard Time but they are in a different time zone than before. Rename the time zones so the name of the zone you are in does not change, this appears to be what BC did.

I'm pretty certain that if in the 60's they did not require it to be a secret and that a fighter jet could be used, Castro would have been quickly assassinated. Also quite a few heads of state have been killed by individuals or terrorists who are not directly following government orders, JFK is not that unusual.

I believe if the electoral college votes were allocated to match the popular vote in each state it would be fine. Sure somebody in Wyoming has 4x the voting power as somebody in Texas, but this may not matter much, particularly because the population of Wyoming is not that high. There is no election in history where such allocation of electoral votes produces a different result than the popular vote.

Weighing everybody's vote by multiplying it by their state's electoral college size and dividing by the number of votes in that state would also work. This would allow RCV and approval and other multiple-choice voting systems to work.

It can be called "The War Department", which has historical precedent and you won't sound like a moron.

Unfortunately the aliens refused to rename themselves "Trump". He tried "Aliens of America" too.

You are basically saying "there is no such thing as a Nazi or a Communist". That is false.

YOU follow your link, find the list of primary sources, select it, type Ctrl+C, then go back here, make a response and type Ctrl+V.

No I am not going to search for whatever you think is the primary source.

If you read the article, actually it is 'software that turns off charging when below 41 degrees and cold that don't mix well'. But don't let facts interfere with your rant.

I think it will be pretty hard to charge an EV in a location "where there's no electricity to run a block heater". So an electric block heater will work if the purpose is to make charging work.

That is for warming the cabin when the vehicle is on the road.
If it is charging, there is an electric cord right there that can much more cheaply provide the energy to heat it.