My understanding of a patent (in the US) is that it’s only for new, novel concepts, often difficult to design or conceive.

Prior art, in this context, are just examples of this concept already in use or demonstrated. If there are already examples of the idea in use by others, then your idea isn’t new (and therefore not patentable).

If people want this to be acted on, then Dems need to win.

Oh, absolutely.

Both to campaign on and to act on, unfortunately.

I think there’s a big difference between them making the small (but good) progress with legislation they’ve done this term compared to making climate a part of their campaign and bringing it up all the time. Idiots on the right will attack opponents on anything, but currently, I imagine most of the population is put off by the “she’s gonna ban ur meat and stove!!1” weirdos. Sometimes not engaging is the most effective way to keep bad arguments out of the public sphere.

Plus, there’s so much disinformation from the other side that you’re apt to lose voters that consume any amount of that crap.

If something doesn’t energize your base and it makes you lose votes from outside your base, it’s a net loss to campaign on. It seems that climate change is currently one of those issues.

I’m convinced our media is hell-bent on promoting Trump at any opportunity.

I feel like Trump could do anything on that stage and the story pushed out by the media will be some weird criticism about how disappointing Harris’ performance was.

Like, Trump could answer every single question with a rant about how cheeseburgers just aren’t as good as they used to be and no-one would bat an eye. Then the story for weeks will be about how “Harris just wasn’t detailed enough about how her economic policies. She didn’t even mention how the Distiller’s Dried Grains with Solubles (DDGS)/cash corn ratio would change per week over the next decade or two. Harris clearly is too light on the policy front.”

I hope I’m wrong, but I’ve come to expect the worst from our media lately.

I have no idea either. I’m guessing it’s only an “issue” because Trump (and therefore Fox) won’t stop talking about it.

I guess?

I’m all for voting reform, promoting easy access to voting for everyone, breaking the grip of the 2 party system, and dismantling junk like the electoral college.

But we’re a little more than 2 months from a major election. It’s unlikely that these ideas are going to be picked up and championed as campaign promise. So it makes me wonder why they’re being parroted now. I suspect it’s to highlight that our system isn’t always great and discourage people from voting.

They’re not saying “my vote doesn’t matter”, but that’s kind of the vibe it gives off, while suggesting an unrealistic, idealistic solution. 🤷‍♂️

Weird. You’d think that’s show up in her voting record when she was a US Senator.

Based on her votes, she was one of the most progressive in the Senate.

As bad as it is now, if Trump returns to power, he would make the Palestinian and Ukraine situations so much worse. Beyond that, we could see genocide here.

Because the situation is polarizing in American politics and unlikely to resolve any time soon, it seems unwise to push potentially unpopular policy with short-term gains that lose you an election to someone who would probably celebrate the end of Palestine and their people.

It’s like complaining that the roof is leaking and wondering why no-one cares while the house is on fire.

Another one of his attorneys turned to testify against him in the election fraud case.

Are you talking about the fairly recent news about Jenna Ellis? Unless I’m mistaken, she’s cooperating with a different set of fake electors cases that’s based out of Arizona.

Even as someone who follows this stuff fairly regularly, it’s impossible to keep track of all of Trump’s criminal cases… and that’s just the stuff we know about that prosecutors have picked up.

The documents case could absolutely lead to jail time if Smith can push for another judge. Cannon can’t postpone indefinitely without repercussions.

If he loses the election and if the Supreme Court stays out of it, I’d agree.

He also has sentencing scheduled in September for his felony convictions, though I don’t have a clue what that will be or what appeal timeline and whatnot looks like.

It’s frustrating to see all of this move so slowly. I know these things take time, but it feels like there was no urgency in 2021 when he left office to deal with the election interference and numerous, publicly known, criminal acts.

Let me know when the keel fails and the whole thing breaks in two.

It’s clearly not a hoax.

You want to put Trump back in…? Did you forget how he ran things 2016-2020, plus Jan 6th, a literal (but horribly executed) coup attempt?

Given the rulings from the recent rulings from the Supreme Court, Trump will be emboldened to do whatever he wants “with immunity”. I just can’t wrap my head around how anyone thinks this is a good idea.

Add an extra column to the right side of the board.

I’m one that finds the GNU/Linux naming annoying. I think calling it that is mostly silly, and am mostly annoyed at people who militantly argue it’s the only way to describe a Linux OS (which aren’t as common as they used to be).

To me, it’s just overly verbose and pointless. For the most part, the GNU part has been implied for pretty much any mainstream form of Linux for decades. And even if it wasn’t, who cares? Like, you wouldn’t say that you run KDE/X11/wpasupplicant/neovim/docker/pacman/paru/systemd/GNU/Linux… Just saying KDE on Arch Linux is simpler and far more informative.

You know fascism has a definition, right? It doesn’t mean “I don’t like it”.

I think it makes more sense to read that it’s a “Windows Subsystem for (running) Linux (applications/programs)”.

Pretty sure this isn’t real guys. There’s no “Do not thaw pizza” clause.

MOBAs are not traditional RTS games.

Our butter stick wrappers have volume measurements on them. I’ve never melted butter to measure it.

He often presents populist ideas, even when they aren’t in line with his normal rhetoric.

I think he does it to grab attention or appeal to people with that idea. He then spews a ton of well-polished half-truths and straight lies to make whatever point he was after in the first place.

It’s not uncommon for anyone to agree with a sentence or two from him out of context, but in context, it’s all garbage.