tl;dw: Trump signed an EO directing the government to finish their reclassification of cannabis from Schedule I to Schedule III.

This opens the pathway for federally legal medical use.

The Russian sub from the first attack (not this one) has a few extra holes in it. :)

Article — Picture

The main goals of a live wargame like this are to 1) learn lessons, and to 2) get everyone simulated combat experience. This means you need to run as many scenarios as possible and to make sure every unit gets to participate.

If Red team sinks all the landing ships on round one, does that mean your infantry doesn’t get to war game and learn lessons (after all, the infantry are all ‘in lifeboats’)? Fuck no. You take extensive notes on what red team did, restart the war game, but this time mandate the infantry land. It would be a colossal waste to not learn lessons in your infantry unit or to not allow them to accumulate simulated combat experience simply because their boats sank in the first round.

It’s very weird that Linux is broken up into Ubuntu, Debian, Arch, Linux (non-WSL), Fedora, etc, etc. but none of the other OSes are. Example: Windows isn’t broken into Server 2022, Server 2025, Windows 10 home, Windows 10 iot, Windows 10 S, etc, etc.

It’s very hard to tell what the total numbers are as you can’t just add these together, since an indivdual might use several.

The first head of the CIA was a Nazi

The hell are you talking about? How was Sidney Souers (or Roscoe Hillenkoetter) a Nazi?

After the German invasion of France, Hillenkoetter entered Vichy France and aided the underground movement. As executive officer of the USS West Virginia (BB-48), he was wounded during the attack on Pearl Harbor, and afterwards was officer in charge of intelligence on Chester W. Nimitz’s Pacific Fleet staff until 1943. He briefly served as commander of the destroyer tender USS Dixie before joining the Bureau of Naval Personnel in 1944.

heating bills runs close to $800 a month

You are spending WAY too much per month on heat. Upgrade the insulation in your home and seal air leaks.

Also, do not use resistive heat. It is the most expensive heating solution by a wide margin.

The US has some of the cheapest energy in the civilized world. I’m not sure what to draw from that fact, but it is clear our energy system works pretty well for the end-user.

For a counterpoint, check out Germany’s expensive as fuck energy.

‘This is my hole’

Yeah, forwarding a port to a server with SFTP allows you both to have two-way links. Have done this with some of my friends as well.

Sneakernet via a HDD is also damn helpful for initial bulk transfers.

The comment was UP TO 40%.

And that comment is incorrect. Unless we are going with Comcast’s ‘up to 1000mbps’ numbers.

Various studies range from 2 to 40%.

No, they don’t range to 40%, and I detailed why. Don’t repeat 40%, it’s demonstrably false.

That is a wild statistic!

It’s a demonstrably inaccurate number. The study was vague enough that yelling at a partner was included, and much more damning they included the officer even if they were the victim in the situation. It literally paints the victims as domestic abusers!

“40% of law enforcement self identify as domestic abusers” is demonstrably false and is not something that should be repeated.

Ok, breaking this into a separate post:

Have a friend who does hiring for his team. He told me a story of an interview for an entry level IT position. Obviously the interviewee is not expected to have strong skills for the job, it being entry-level. However, the interviewee had worked as an assistant studying wildlife issues, so my friend asked him various things about that. Unfortunately, the interviewee was unable to share what he did there in any real detail, as if he didn’t fully grasp it himself. That lost him the job, because it was clear he wasn’t able to pick up and retain information.

I ask a bunch of questions about the company, working environment, etc and essentially make them pitch the job to me instead of me pitching myself as an employee.

This is a pretty big deal. It’s a sign you are taking it seriously and intend to stay longer than a year when you find out x thing isn’t what you wanted, because you never bothered to ask.

There is also a social side of this, the other participant feels better about you the more they talk. That isn’t an interview-specific thing, simply a ‘how humans work’ thing. But it’s quite pronounced in interviews because very often the interviewer is doing very little talking.

I have also had good experience asking the interviewer at the very end what I could have done better. I don’t think they get asked that question often as they are normally taken aback a bit, and tend to give very solid feedback, which is critical to improving.

One change I made: I put a skill on my resume I’m only somewhat knowledgeable in, a skill that was only tangential to the job. However, the interviewer happened to be knowledgeable on that and naturally focused on it. When it quickly became obvious I wasn’t terribly knowledgeable on that side thing, it resulted in that lack of knowledge being generalized to everything else. I took that side skill off my resume, and only mention it in passing during the interview to make it more clear that everything on the resume is something I’m solid on, but also I have some side skills which are helpful.

At no point didn’t anyone ever say that it was “criminally worse” it has the same sentence

The article very explicitly says exactly that. Murdering someone due to their sex is very explicitly treated differently now, depending on the sex of the victim.

If someone murdered a male due to their sex, would you treat that any differently than someone murdering a female due to their sex?

Then we wrap back around to the start.

Correct. Murdering a male should be just as illegal as murdering a female.

How is it sexist?

Murdering someone due to their sex is not illegal under this law, if the victim is a male. Murdering a male due to their sex should be no less illegal.

If someone murdered a male due to their sex, would you treat that any differently than someone murdering a female due to their sex?

If perpetrators happen to be of one sex more often, then it means the rates of being charged with the relevant crime will be higher for that sex.

A crime must be treated equally, regardless of sex. The law treating one differently based on their sex is itself sexist. As I stated before, this should have been something that applies to all: ‘murdering someone due to their sex is now a hate crime’.

Exactly. This should have been something that applies to all: ‘murdering someone due to their sex is now a hate crime’.

Having the law give more consideration to one sex over another, particularly with something like murder, is quite sexist.

Jesus fuck, even 3-strikes would be absurd for this…