Arch w/KDE Plasma desktop, of course.
“Smart” TVs should be kept off the internet and only used as video output for actual computers.
Arch w/KDE Plasma desktop, of course.
“Smart” TVs should be kept off the internet and only used as video output for actual computers.


IMO (and IANAL especially not of constitutional law) the executive branch has to prove to the courts that it has a compelling interest to keep such registries and that its need is such that less invasive recordkeeping would not serve that justifiable purpose. E.G., it needs a registry of voters to determine if someone is eligible to vote and in which jurisdiction, because without it the pollworkers would have no way to tell.
Under Strict Scrutiny, laws enabling such registries must be “narrowly tailored” (E.G., voter registration doesn’t need to know how much taxes you pay and your tax record doesn’t need to know which party you’re registered to) and employs the “least restrictive means” necessary to satisfy its compelling interest (E.G., they can’t charge you a fee to update your voter registration and there will always be a free option for filing your tax paperwork).
Keeping lists of trans folks serves no compelling interest, is not narrowly tailored to the interests it supposedly serves, and there isn’t even a civil means of determining whether or not one is on the list (to say nothing of correcting it for the folks that have undoubtedly been added to it in error). As such, it is prima facie unconstitutional.
Even the lowest bar of constitutional scrutiny, “Rational Basis”, would require that the law allowing the list be “rationally related” to a “legitimate goverent interest”, and I can’t think of anything less legitimate or rational than a government’s claimed need to get into everyone’s pants.


4th Amendment, the right against unreasonable searches.


I got hired as a Linux Technical Analyst by a company that was re-writing all their old mainframe code for modern servers, three weeks later they told me they were moving me to Site Reliability Engineering.
I do not have the attention span for reliability engineering. They fired me six months ago for not being good at a job my ADHD makes it impossible for me to be good at.


What I don’t get not knowing much about the details is how LLM generation is faster than actual 3D modeling with more details?
It’s not, DLSS5 takes a frame as rendered normally by your GPU and feeds it into a second $3k GPU to run the AI image transformer.
There is no performance benefit, in fact it adds a bit of latency to the process.


And no legal firm will waste their reputation on suits like that, so you’re stuck filing individually, spending hundreds of dollars just to waste a few seconds of an intern’s time.
For the amount of money it’d take to make that effective, we could just buy whatever legislation we wanted at the statehouse.


Better to save the time, money, and energy for getting folks out of Kansas and providing support for the ones still stuck there.
The bounty system goes through the civil courts and they can throw out frivolous suits as they please, so trying to gum it up with frivolous suits would be a lot more expensive than the benefits such a tactic would confer.


The bounty system goes through the civil courts, so there’s no efficient way to gum it up with reports. Anything frivolous would get thrown out immediately.


Oh hey, that’s almost exactly the kind of cyberpunk dystopia that I grew up reading fiction about:


I mean, the Flipper Zero is just a computer with a few radios built-in.
I think the only one they share with most smart glasses is Bluetooth which might potentially have some vulnerabilities which could be exploited, but there are also expansion cards for the Flipper Zero that add everything from wifi and ethernet ports to high-powered IR blasters, so the real question is how vulnerable smart glasses are.
And the truth is, they’re vulnerable by default because they rely on corpo servers to operate like any other “smart” device. Any flaw in the security of the glasses themselves barely holds a candle to the fact that they forward everything to Facebook or some other big tech brand name with a financial interest in monetizing your data.


I get so many compliments on my fancy moustache, but nobody notices my tits unless I wear a push-up bra. XD


Can confirm, letting the girls free after a long day is a special kind of relief that doesn’t have a direct equivalent for guys.
Take the feeling of stripping out of a suit where the slacks are tight enough to flatten your junk and the tie makes it hard to breathe, then bump up the sense of relief by 20% or so for a well-fitting sports bra, a full 50% for a push-up with underwire, and straight-up triple it to compare to a corset.


That does sound amazing, I’m envious. =3


It’s not just that though, the relief from compression is an added bonus on top.
The truth is that breasts are just more enjoyably sensitive than ballsacks. Even when I shave them smooth, the feeling of a soft fabric against them is still less than half as enjoyable as on my tits.
Granted, I’m sure that my experience isn’t necessarily universal and there are ways in which balls are more sensitive. I’d rather get kicked in the chest than in the crotch, for example.
Hard agree on the stigma against free titties, though. I’m lucky enough to live in a state where bare chests are legal and I’m looking forward to going hiking topless this spring.


Nope.
I’m an enby, so I can confirm that sleeping with a bare chest is better when you have tits than without them.
For the nut-havers out there, sleeping bare-tittied is kinda like having your balls shaved hairless and tucked into a perfectly-fitted silk bag before bed. It really does feel that much nicer.


Enby here with the rare perspective which can confirm that men will never understand this peak.
Sorry guys, but as awesome as it feels to go to bed free-balling, that satisfaction really doesn’t compare to having a warm, soft blanket tucked up around your bare tits (especially after they’ve been bound up in a bra all day).
Sleeping in clothing is just weird to me to begin with, but if I had to wear one article of underwear to bed then I’d take briefs or even nut-hugging boyshorts before I wore anything tighter around my tits than a loose nightgown.


Save everything you want to keep


Now that “Anti-woke” ideology has been revealed as a psyop by the Epstein files, I’m very curious to see if Trey Stone and Matt Parker will choose to reckon with their own contributions or if they’ll double-down.


I don’t like South Park because of that smug, sanctimonious tone either, but my housemates love it and regularly leave re-runs playing for background noise as they go about their day, so allow me to offer that same criticism from someone that has seen every episode multiple times and can offer something “real” to back it up:
The long arc of the South Park plot follows Trey and Parker’s political development from bitter, unknown California Republicans with sarcastic, nihilist tendencies to disillusioned Big Hollywood Conservatives with sarcastic, nihilistic tendencies being forced to reckon with the fact that their past attempts at satire have either had no impact or have actually reinforced the perceived social ills they pretend to mock.
Al Gore’s portrayal in S22E06 “Time to get Cereal” exemplifies this, even after he is proven to have been right about ManBearPig all along, this later appearance shows him as still being a huge weenie that cares more about being acknowledged as having been right than wanting to actually solve the problem. Having belatedly acknowledged the existential threat, Trey and Parker still can’t bring themselves to issue a call to action, and everything goes back to normal after they kick the can a little further down the road.
Thus, the smug, sanctimonious tone has been a constant throughout, as if they still imagine that the greatest sin is caring about things. They’re so heavy-handed about it that they lampoon this aspect of their own show in Kyle’s “Don’t you see,” and “Y’know, I’ve learned something today” closing monologues. Even when he’s telling a real political truth, like in the banned S16E06 where the text of the monologue is an admission that terrorism works and the subtext is a refusal to acknowledge their own contributions to post-9/11 anti-muslim discrimination in America, Jesus (representing mainstream American Christianity) gives falsely-sincere advice to the gingers (who represent all minority groups facing irrational discrimination) that they just need to get as violent as the most aggressive extremists so that people will respect them. Which is itself a smug, sanctimonious, and sarcastic way of suggesting that they can never be respected as people, only either seen as lesser or feared as an enemy.
Only if you’re using the Chrome extension, maybe. This is just Google trying to kill even the memory of Google Reader by fucking with the biggest competitor to social media in Chrome.