SkavarSharraddas

Because not enough people laughed at his bullshit, so now too many people take him seriously (which is true for a lot of the banana republicans).

The Banana Republicans up to a good start.

Make sure to disable Windows hybrid sleep. If your system isn’t shutdown properly and you access the Windows partition from another system that can destroy data.

If you just want to keep the data on the Windows partition and usually don’t need to run Windows, I’d remove the Windows drive and keep it somewhere safe, and get another SSD for Linux. That way, the two systems are completely separate and can do nothing to each other.

Swap is mostly a crutch for too little RAM, if the system doesn’t have enough the best solution would be an upgrade. If that’s not possible, consider zram-swap, or if you have to, swap to an SSD (that will reduce its lifespan, though maybe not in a relevant manner). If you swap to an old HDD you won’t have much fun using the system.

Disgusting.

Proud enough to show their faces?

Already showing us how he wants to protect women.

Canceling votes is a good start, but they shouldn’t limit it to people they know, and even if all votes are cancelled, you still need more to actually win.

I’m advocating for the outcome where the candidate that doesn’t want to jail their opponents and use the military against protestors wins, so that you can continue to make your disagreement with parts of their policy known.

I’m glad to see that you’re doing more than just voting, which I was advocating for in the first post you answered.

You agreed that either Trump or Harris will win. Your vote can only threaten one of them, by voting for the other or an alternative candidate. Same with not voting, the winner won’t care about your missing vote.

That means no action you take in the election will harm both candidates, ergo there is no way to vote against both of them.

The current system (or voter inertia) doesn’t allow you to vote against both. One of them will win, your only decision is which one you want (or despise less). If your vote doesn’t threaten their win, then when you vote for neither you’re voting for the winner.

Modern cheats for multiplayer games don’t modify local files (or attribute values in memory), since the server validates everything anyway. They’re about giving you information that’s available but not shown in the game (like see-through walls, or exact skill ranges), or manipulate input (dodge enemy damage, easy combos). Those cheat can run in kernel mode (or at least evade detection from user mode), so the anti-cheat needs kernel mode to be more effective.

“If I can’t have zero genocide then I don’t care to vote against the candidate that is very likely to be even worse.”

Especially with only two candidates with a chance of winning, a vote doesn’t mean unconditional support for everything that candidate wants. Sucks, but if you want to make your wishes known more specifically, you have to do more than just vote (if even that) and complain on the internet.

It’s usually pretty easy to tell which new theories can be discarded because they don’t explain all the observations that lead us to the dark matter theory in the first place (like e.g. the Bullet Cluster). Or it would be easy if media wasn’t full of uncritical clickbait fluff pieces like this that rather make sensationalist claims than contextualizing how a new study fits into the existing science.

“Free speech” just means “I want to spout garbage without pushback (like fact checking) or consequences.”