I’m not sure I follow your reasoning. You are not arguing against voting, but are arguing that voting doesn’t work for the benefit of the working class.

Can you clarify what you mean in the first part of that statement? What are you saying you aren’t arguing against with respect to voting? Most people would assume you are arguing against voting when you say that voting never works to the benefit of the working class.

Okay but if you are advocating for overthrowing the system, you don’t need to dissuade people from voting during an election cycle. You can organize a revolution AND you can participate in the current system in a manner that leads to the best (suboptimal) outcome.

I think it’s unrealistic to think a new party would have been successful in 2020 and 2024, however, I think if he did choose to build a new party in 2016, the US would have had a third option for the 2028 presidential election. These things take time and we are now seeing what “could have been” from decisions ten years ago.

Qgis has a great plugin for turning DEMs into 3d printable STL objects! If you play around with the vertical exaggeration, depending on how much elevation change the terrain has, you can print some AMAZING things!

If you can get yourself a cheap 3d printer this is an excellent add-on to your hobby :)

Primary care physicians need to know what conditions you might be susceptible to in the future, and some of these conditions are based on your sex.

I’m far from an expert on these things, but I have a tough time believing that latency won’t be a critical issue for many consumer applications.

That’s incorrect. Evaporative cooling may reduce the temperature beyond room temp, depending on how much moisture is available on the food.

“Mercedes claims they have a total addressable market of $30 trillion by demonstrating that everyone has sold their vehicles and switched to driving a Mercedes on the new $20/month leasing program. Mercedes has not provided a response when asked how much their cars actually cost to own.”

Someone sets it into a prompt loop.

I think this is a good example of risk through the lens of policy versus risk through the lens of personal choices.

There is no safe amount of alcohol when it comes to a government recommending the use of a substance. The decision to say “one glass a day” by the government has been shown to lead to adverse health outcomes in the population.

You are speaking to the chance that a single individual will experience adverse health outcomes from choosing for themselves to have a glass a day. You are probably right that on an individual basis it is a reasonable risk to take (though I don’t know what the exact numbers suggest).

People often confuse policy level risk assessments with individual risk assessments, without considering the law of large numbers, and how a policy maker must make decisions for the population, not an individual.