Karzyn

Except that I did learn about that in high school.

It doesn't feel misleading, it is misleading. We understand that use of the term "recall" in reference to cars happens to include over the air software updates in its legal definition. However many people likely do not. I'd also wager that many people who do know occasionally forget when they first see the headline. So while the use of the word "recall" here is technically correct it leads people to assume that they are physically recalling the cars.

Oh, I won't dispute that at all. I'm more concerned about a comment making a completely false claim. 5% matters but so does telling the truth in your comments.

most people have to work two or three jobs

That number is 5.1% of all employed Americans, a far cry from "most". Here's the source.

They are trying to eliminate Gaza. They have openly said that. They are purposely trying to kill every single civilian.

That's a biiiiig claim. Big claims like that need big evidence to back them up. Unfortunately, I'm unable to find what quote you're referring to. There's a lot going on and most generic searches return fairly basic news sources. Care to specify exactly what you are referring to?

It's the official name of the country.

In early 2021 I, like so many people, wanted to build my first gaming pc. As I'm sure you can guess, I had a hell of a time trying to get my hands on a decent graphics card. In the end I purchased a prebuilt pc. The whole gpu buying attempt was so stressful and giving up was so disappointing. Should I never try to build a pc in the future? Of course not! Mostly I learned to be patient and accept that I might not get exactly what I want. The large PS5s are currently readily available, just get one of those.

The US supporting a country fighting a defensive war against an aggressive invader isn't equivalent to it invading another country and attempting regime change.

I think that the concern was not that the articles like the ones you link to do not exist. Instead the complaint is that the posted piece did not itself link to them to back up the claim. These were likely quite easy for you to find and it's poor journalism that the author did not put in the same effort.

I wasn't interested in it at all but then my partner (who has played it a ton) and I started a co-op game. Stardew is way easier and plain more fun if you're playing it with someone else.

Real estate is a terrible example of where to use a blockchain. Someone gains access to your private key and you just... don't own your house anymore? There's not really a recourse here since it's controlled by the distributed system. On the other hand, the government which is entrusted with the authority to enforce laws can hold onto the this information in a more secure way than the average person. And if something does happen they have the ability to fix problems without issue. I read all these stories online about wallets getting compromised and contents stolen with very little recourse and am confused why I would want the largest purchase that I will ever make in my life tied up in that. Doubly so because that purchase is explicitly tied into the central authority of your government. It's not like cryptocurrency where it can exist externally to the current legal system. Real estate MUST be tied to government in some way.

Your point about how building a secure, central database will have so many technical hurdles to overcome is... odd. I mean, sure it's tough to make a secure database. Your answer is that some blockchain framework has certain security characteristics while ignoring that literally every secure data store that currently exists is running on a central database and just fine at that. Like, what do you think that your bank is using at this very moment? There are multiple companies with well-audited solutions selling and running secure databases RIGHT NOW. You just hand wave away the ability to make secure databases while ignoring that they already exist while expecting us to buy into the promises of some new, unproven framework like Hyperledger. The only thing that blockchain adds is immutability, which is something that I think would be a poor idea anyway.

Lastly, blockchains only work by having users with a financial stake and incentive. With proof-of-work you're staking the cost of the electricity you're spending, with proof-of-stake the crypto you're staking. The point is, they have this whole weird financial structure to keep people running this distributed ledger. How would that even work for real estate? Do you want people with perverse financial incentives muddling with the system that controls your ownership OF YOUR HOUSE? Or the government which is empowered by the people to serve them. And if it fails those leaders face expulsion? I know where my answer is.

would automatically be less secure than a centralized system where you have to build the same features yourself

I just want to hammer this point home one more time. This is a false comparison. You do not have to build these features yourself. Like, have you heard of this tiny company called "Oracle"? Or maybe this really obscure one "Microsoft"? They both make exactly this product.

Many comments here are complaining about Manchin without taking the time to consider the political acrobatics necessary to win a statewide office in West Virginia as a Democrat. Yes, he's been a pain in the ass but a Republican in that seat would be much, much worse. If nothing else, he's a point towards control of the chamber. Sinema is a different story because she ran as being more progressive than she ended up being and because Kelly is proof positive that an actual Democrat could have won on Arizona. Manchin has never shied away from what he stands for and is probably the only person who could keep the seat blue. So yeah, hate his politics all you want but recognize that him leaving the party would be a terrible thing.