• 4 Posts
  • 20 Comments
Joined 3 years ago
cake
Cake day: July 4th, 2023

help-circle
  • Interesting, that makes sense. I thought I’d heard about individual ballots being challenged in all the 2020 bs, but I just looked it up and it looks like ballots can only be challenged before they’re counted, which matches with what you just said. So probably what I’d heard is either challenges that came in before that point, or it was republican nonsense that was presumably shot down.

    But yeah, verifying -> anonymizing -> counting and they can’t go backwards makes a lot of sense, and that would fundamentally prevent removing dead people. Thanks for explaining


  • Ignore me, sounds like he’s probably right

    ~~I really don’t think this is true, ballots get pulled out all the time if they’re found to be invalid. If there’s an issue with how it’s filled out, like bubbling multiple entries or signature issues, stuff like that, if there’s an issue with their registration or the incredibly rare instances of actual voter fraud, all those ballots get pulled out unless they get corrected.

    I guess I can kinda see your point about how if an individual ballot gets challenged and removed, and you see the overall vote count change by one you’d obviously know who that ballot was cast for. But in order for that to happen it would have to be an invalid ballot, so I’m not sure it’s really that important to keep a vote that didn’t count secret. Also in this particular case the person’s dead.

    I’m certainly not advocating a law like this be passed, and maybe there’s some federal policy that would prevent it from being enforced, but logistically speaking I don’t see the problem.~~



  • According to that article, this only covers donations to other organizations who then distribute the donated food. It doesn’t cover anyone directly donating food to individuals.

    So for a restaurant, they would need to donate food to a food bank or something, and that would mean food that isn’t immediately going bad. And if that’s the case they’re probably just going to keep it and try to use it later. If they want to donate the leftover food at the end of the day they can’t use anymore, there probably isn’t any time left other than to just give it to some homeless people outside the restaurant, which this act doesn’t protect against.

    Which then just raises the question for me, why isn’t this also protected against? The act already states that the food has to be seemingly good condition, so you can’t just serve mold and say it was a gift. What’s the harm in feeding homeless people?


  • This is not an American invention, nor is it interchangeable with a roundabout.

    The main priority of roundabouts is safe traffic flow for cars, but they can (sometimes) still be very hostile to pedestrians. This type of intersection is meant to prioritize pedestrians as much as possible. The narrow street slows vehicles, and the sidewalk bump outs make people trying to cross the street extra visible and minimize the time they need to be vulnerable in the middle of the road.

    Which isn’t to say that roundabouts are necessarily bad, they just serve different purposes









  • I want to preface this by saying that while I have done some undergraduate work in this area, I am by no means an expert on this topic. If I’m wrong or missing some context, hopefully someone with more knowledge than me can comment and correct me.

    This doesn’t really seem like much to me. The major quantum threat is Shor’s algorithm, which gives an attacker with access to a sufficiently powerful quantum computer the ability to easily solve the discrete log problem. This new protocol still relies on the discrete log problem, and is therefore still vulnerable to the same threat. I don’t understand everything in the paper, but from what I can tell I think they just made DH a little more robust in general, rather than actually providing a long-term quantum solution.







  • Facebook did the same thing years ago, it’s part of the enshittification cycle. When you post a link to another site, you’re directing traffic away from twitter and it’s advertisers, so Elon would much prefer that you be forced to post the entire article so that no one ever has to leave twitter and give their ad revenue to anyone else.

    Obviously no one would agree to this if it was happening from the start, but once your platform has a stranglehold on everyone, you can start tightening the noose like this. Everyone hates it, but people feel like they have nowhere else to go, so they put up with it. Or at least that’s what twitter’s betting on





  • My strategy on Reddit, which worked very well there but I’ve been too lazy so far to recreate here, was to create separate accounts. I had one account that just followed f1 stuff, and another one that followed all my general content and had all the f1 subs explicitly blocked. That way I have to actively choose to switch over to my f1 account if I want to see f1 content, which I just wouldn’t do until I’d seen the race.

    A lot of the lemmy apps, like voyager and Memmy, already have good support for account switching, so I highly recommend this strategy if watching the race later is a regular occurrence for you. I’m sure eventually I’ll bother to do this myself.

    Alternatively, whenever the analogous multireddit feature gets implemented in lemmy, that could allow you to do effectively the same thing with one account. But not yet, unfortunately.