Plan 9 System Calls
"All of 'em (excluding obsolete ones)."
772 karma · joined January 6, 2010
"All of 'em (excluding obsolete ones)."
Barry Kauler, the fellow behind Puppy Linux and EasyOS, has used it to create utilities: https://forum.puppylinux.com/viewtopic.php?p=64923
KnightOS will run on any upgradable Texas Instruments calculator based on the z80 CPU. This includes the TI-73, TI-83+, TI-83+ Silver Edition, TI-84+, TI-84+ Silver Edition, and TI-84+ Color Silver Edition. You can also run it on the French variations of these calculators, or in an emulator.
The Four-Way Test of what we think, say or do
1. Is it the TRUTH?
2. Is it FAIR to all concerned?
3. Will it build GOODWILL and BETTER FRIENDSHIPS?
4. Will it be BENEFICIAL to all concerned?Is a Framework or HP Dev One (or other Linux laptop) not an option?
Why do people insist on smearing OpenBSD like this? My 2011 ThinkPads run Firefox and LibreOffice just fine. It's not as polished as Fedora, sure, but I never have to reinstall after upgrading trashes grub, which happened to me earlier this year.
Also, it's an awesome hack! C'mon, man, this is Hacker News!
With respect, werc may "suck less" than Crew, as it's a shell script, not a Go application.
They still can. I think approval voting eliminates the need for tactical voting because each persons' vote has equal weight. A vote for DeSantis only improves his chance of winning in your case, it doesn't harm Trump, because in the end, the candidate with the most votes wins. There's no algorithm that throws away votes in a particular round, as we see in RCV.
No, but I don't know how that would affect outcomes given a mass of voters. My sense is that it would all "even out" because no one would be forced to choose a single candidate, or to rank their favorites.
https://electionscience.org/commentary-analysis/rcv-fools-pa...
Note that's it's from a group promoting approval voting as an alternative to ranked-choice voting, so it may be biased, but the details look correct at first glance.
My impression of RCV is not good, beginning with Jean Quan's poor turn as mayor of Oakland some years back. I'm sympathetic to those who'd like an alternative to first-past-the-post, but any system that allows no one's first choice to win seems broken.
I'm interested in approval voting because it's simpler—no algorithmic folderol—and it seems even more fair to third parties than RCV: vote for whichever candidates you find acceptable, regardless of party, and whoever gets the greatest number of votes wins, period.
A Republican who doesn't like Trump could vote for, say, Ron DeSantis, Marco Rubio and Tom Cotton, while a progressive Democrat might mark down Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren and Jill Stein (assuming an open primary). I see this as a way for independents and moderates, too, to make a bigger impact, as they could pick moderates from multiple parties.
I don't see any obvious downsides. Thoughts?
EDIT: A link to "The Center for Election Science," advocating for approval voting:
>Since I decided to base my startup on Microsoft, that is, write the software using .NET to run on Windows
If you have any interest in Linux or cross-platform development, Microsoft and Canonical announced first-class support for .NET for Ubuntu:
https://devblogs.microsoft.com/dotnet/dotnet-6-is-now-in-ubu...