The article doesn’t mention if they controlled for income, and a lot of these studies don’t. This was famously what debunked the “one to two glasses of wine a week improves your health” since people who drink zero are possibly either too poor to afford wine or alcoholics who are sober, and people who are either poor or who drink more than three per night will have worse health outcomes in general. The people who drink 1-2 have disposable income and are generally otherwise healthy. I wonder if they controlled for caffeine in a similar way, as I could see people who can afford the time and money for 2-3 cups per day are just generally healthier anyway because they might tend to have more disposable income.

Aurora is also a good substitute store if you don’t want to use sandboxed Google Play, but anything that uses Google Play Services will likely be borked

There are no bad plants, only bad locations

Generally a mistake to blame individuals (lawyers) or people who trade their labor for money (working class) for systemic problems (capitalism corrupting a judicial system)

They say they want to, but when the time comes, the legislation they pass (if any) will either be so hopelessly complex or so devoid of enforcement that they might as well have done nothing

If I can’t have a fish thrown directly into my car’s window, I don’t even know what this country is even about anymore

Napoleon already did it

Could have a single picture of it that isn’t a render, to start

Most people don’t know this, but Weekend at Bernies was inspired by the Reagan presidency.

High speed rail… mmmmm…

Being a cop is less dangerous than being a pregnant woman (in the US)

I do civil engineering work, mostly related to soils etc. I have a computer for work but that’s about as far as it gets for me professionally.

Engineer here, but my technical expertise is about as far away from computing and technology as you can get and still be an engineer.

I was a kid in the 90s and the first album I bought was Metallica’s black album. I spent over $18 in like 1999 so with inflation that’s like $300 or something now. Then the drummer of what was then my favorite band says hey, if you’re downloading our music on Napster, then we don’t want you as a fan. That hit teenage me pretty hard and basically radicalized me to find “alternative methods” for every piece of digital media I could, if that’s how the people I looked up to were going to treat me for not having as much money as them. Everything I host now started at that inflection point, from picking up Linux as a hobby to learning about networking and security. Turned out to be a pretty good path to follow though seeing how Microsoft, Netflix, Spotify et. al. turned out in the end.

I still download and share all of Metallica’s discography out of spite, but haven’t listened to them since.

Don’t forget the Southern Strategy where Nixon found his path to victory by peeling racist southerners off the Democratic party to form the modern Republican party

Pieces of paper can’t actually do things

That’s not specifically for taking bribes, though. That could be for literally anything including things that aren’t crimes or aren’t forbidden in the constitution. It’s a political action, not a legal one.

Something more concrete would be if, during the Biden presidency, Congress passed a law saying that any foreign gift to a federal official including the president goes into a trust or is forcibly confiscated by the federal government and/or sold off to pay the country’s debt or something like that. They did basically nothing instead, even knowing that they’d never get that much of a majority in the Senate to actually remove a president for violating the constitution or that hypothetical new law. So there’s effectively no actual rule against emoluments despite what that piece of paper says.

OK so he broke that rule. What does the constitution say is the punishment? That’s the problem: it doesn’t. It just says things that are “illegal” and it’s up to human beings to decide what to do after that. Congress never passed a law saying what would happen if that clause was broken. They can’t enforce laws anyway, that’s up to the executive. So if all the humans don’t come up with some plan, it doesn’t matter what the paper says. I’d say you could wipe your ass with it but you’re better off with a bidet

but what comic is?

Have you never laughed at a comic before?

Some non-polotical reasons:

If you live in the US there’s a better chance than not that your ISP is selling your personal data. Outside US idk, maybe still though. Either way you’re putting a lot of trust in a telecom company.

Since net neutrality was removed your traffic can be throttled based on what type of traffic it is, so having it all encrypted for the first hop at least has it treated all the same.

Two political ones I haven’t seen mentioned yet:

You don’t actually know you don’t have anything to hide. Again, assuming US, the amount of federal laws there are couldn’t fit in a pickup truck if they were all printed out. And if someone’s looking to make an example of you then you shouldn’t make it easy for them to find a reason. My favorite example is that throwing out mail that isn’t addressed to you (like junk mail for a previous tenant etc) is a felony.

You also could be falsely accused of a crime. For example, your phone gave out it’s location info near a place where coincidentally an actual crime had taken place. Best to not give that information freely to everyone and have to pony up $10k for a lawyer for nothing.

Because the imoluments clause can’t jump off the page and enforce itself