Pipoca

joined 1 year ago
[–] Pipoca@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago

Schulze is great, but good luck explaining how it works to my mother.

Schulze is good for elections at STEM organizations. For the general public, something like approval voting or STAR are better.

[–] Pipoca@lemmy.world 36 points 6 months ago (2 children)

If you're rigging an election, it can be better politically to give yourself 65% of the vote than 97% of the vote.

97% is obviously fake. 65% is easier to make people beleive in.

[–] Pipoca@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago

The last three third party candidates who won more than one state were Strom Thurmond, George Wallace and Theodore Roosevelt.

The first two won the south on account of regional anger at the civil rights movement.

Roosevelt split the vote. 50.6% of the country voted for the Republican candidate or a former Republican, but the Democrat won a landslide with only 41% of the popular vote and 81% of the electoral college vote.

The closest a third party candidate has ever come to winning is Breckenridge, who got 18% of the popular vote and 23.8% of the EC vote running as a Southern Democrat because the south didn't like Stephen Douglas (who got 29.5% of the popular vote but only won a single state).

Voting third party basically doesn't work. Any time its been significant, it's just caused a spoiler effect.

[–] Pipoca@lemmy.world 5 points 6 months ago (34 children)

According to the UN

In the context of the coordinated attack by Hamas and others of 7 October, the UN mission team found that there are reasonable grounds to believe that conflict-related sexual violence occurred in multiple locations, including rape and gang rape in at least three locations in southern Israel.

The team also found a pattern of victims - mostly women - found fully or partially naked, bound and shot across multiple locations which “may be indicative of some forms of sexual violence”.

In some locations the mission said it could not verify reported incidents of rape.

Or is the UN an Israeli propaganda machine, now?

[–] Pipoca@lemmy.world 2 points 6 months ago

Yeah, it doesn't really belong in the 'no' column. It's not an appropriate cat food because it's not nutritionally complete.

So it's rather like how just eating bread or cornmeal that don't have added vitamins will give you scurvy or pellagra. But obviously they're not poisonous or anything and most of the world eats them without a problem.

[–] Pipoca@lemmy.world 3 points 6 months ago

I mean, this is mostly about treats, so...

Cats being obligate carnivores means most of their calories must come from meat because they e.g. can't synthesize taurine like a human or dog can. But eating a bit of cat grass isn't gonna kill them.

[–] Pipoca@lemmy.world 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Depends on how the product is described and what the warranty covers.

Like, if these are sold as decorative art pieces, swinging them around probably voids the warranty.

[–] Pipoca@lemmy.world 2 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

The only problem is that the functional replica anime sword section is probably going to be entirely empty. They're basically all decorative wall hangers.

They'll differ in build quality, though. Some might break if you swing them hard, others might break if you hit something with them.

[–] Pipoca@lemmy.world 6 points 6 months ago

Yes.

In particular, you ask questions like "what type of steel is this made out of" and "what kind of tang does it have".

[–] Pipoca@lemmy.world 16 points 6 months ago

Yeah. Power plants are nowhere near 90% efficient.

It's worth emphasizing, though, that they're still way, way more efficient than car engines are.

Also, regenerative breaking saves a lot of energy. Basically, instead of using the motor to increase the cars speed, you use it as a generator to recharge the battery.

[–] Pipoca@lemmy.world 6 points 6 months ago (2 children)

Many of these swordlike objects aren't made to be swung, and are liable to break if you try it.

view more: next ›