im_fine_sandy

LOL. You do you but this sounds like a nightmare to me.

edit: it’s not just “becoming tech support person”, but becoming the default person to blame for everything.

The original comment:

I would put a urinal in as well. […] I’ve seen what other savages do to the toilet seat when they have to hit a stationary target from a couple feet away.

This guy:

Piss-soaked floors smell worse, but that’s not a urinal problem per se.

My comment:

Are you really suggesting that the addition of a urinal to a non-gender specific toilet would make it smell better ?

Your comment:

[toilets and urinals] will stack one on top of another, not cancel with each other.

In this context:

• my comment is not a straw man but responds to both the piss-soaked floor guy and the original comment
• you seem to agree with me. Added urinal means worse smell.

If only there was a single device that could act as a receptacle and disposal for both pee and poo.

Are you really suggesting that the addition of a urinal to a non-gender specific toilet would make it smell better ?

That’s not my observed experience.

Do urinals tend to stink more?

I feel like people flush less because after the pee drains out you can’t see it any more, despite it still being there in the trap.

Some autoflush periodically or when you open the door.

I don’t think that’s true.

I think they know the future is bleak, and they just want to have the best bio dome or whatever the case may be.

As in, they know they’re making things worse, but if they don’t do it someone else will. So in a bleak and shit future, do you want to live like a king, or choke to death like the rest of us.

Sure but if we are building out renewable capability as quick as we can, but it’s being outstripped by demand, then maybe demand is part of the problem.

They know that things are going to be shit. They just wasn’t the nicest yacht to live on when it does.

I guess we would be 30 years from stable scalable fusion reactions?

Looking at the article, he pretty much thought ICE would only detain people crossing the border from mexico.

Sure, but at some point popular & unpopular becomes concensus & objection.

My point is really that no one bothers to speak in support of these measures because they’re so obviously sensible and everyone’s happy to implement them.

As in, people don’t walk around espousing the virtues of speed limits on highways because it’s just naturally appropriate. However, there’s a few 18 year olds that cry about nanny states and the removal of restrictions because reasons. There’s a vocal opposition, but that doesn’t imply that there’s a democratically significant opposition.

One Nation is the notable exception - they will of course use any opportunity to gather up dissenters.

You’re correct that restrictions only effect law-abiding people.

I think there’s a few things going on.

Firstly, every gun has the potential to cause harm, so less guns is less potential. Halving the number of guns does not halve the risk of harm, but there’s some reduction.

Secondly, I value living in a country where there just aren’t that many guns around. We don’t really have any kind of “gun culture” here. Sure some people feel the need to have a firearm to feel safe but they’re a small minority.

Also, and this is related to both points, without buy backs the number of guns in the system will always increase, as old weapons are more likely to be stored rather than destroyed.

Finally, it reduces the opposition to the new laws. Suppose a decade ago you purchased a weapon that you use for legitimate vermin control but is now illegal. You’re not particularly concerned about that but you still need a weapon for that purpose. At least this way you’re given a chunk of the cost of a replacement.

I’ve found myself using this a whole lot. It really is great for finding foss and / or non-US alternatives.

tsst

This is the type of issue which has a small minority in vocal opposition, but broad support from everyone else.

Your have to be daft to buy them in another state and have the same problem

I haven’t read the article but, couldn’t sometime just read the submission and look for the bit that says “forget all previous instructions…” and so on.

Pretty much this… although I usually have at least a few moments of paranoia thinking about what I might be about to lose.

Sorry to be a debbie downer but I have grave concerns about the long term viability of firefox.

Sites obviously don’t test against ff anymore with more and more bugs appearing in more and more sites.

I have to daily drive both ungoogled-chromium and librewolf and sadly, the number of things I need to do in chromium is increasing week by week.

It’s not a conspiracy. It’s been a very well published and discussed process.

There are exceptions but browsers are either reconfigurations of firefox, like librewolf, or reconfigurations of google chrome, like vivaldi.

Some dweeb will be along in a moment to tell us all how vivaldi is not merely a reconfiguration, but the point is …

google changed the manner in which plugins can interact with the web page you see. In recent months you could re-enable the old plugin interface by recompiling with a different configuration, but once google makes a change that breaks that old interface then you can’t just re-enable it.