Mail out ballots then require an ID when you turn it in. Make it easier to get an ID if that's a problem. It seems pretty simple to me. Not sure why anyone would be against this.
Issuing ID is a fixable problem and you can fight about ID issuance without upsetting anyone. It's not acceptable to respond to perceived inefficiency in ID issuance by letting people vote without ID. Realistically, it is impossible to live a normal life without ID as it is. The only people I expect to have trouble getting ID are the very elderly and disabled who have no transportation at all. That too can be fixed.
Fix issuance first, then we can talk about making it a requirement. What isn't acceptable is to deny even a single person their right to vote because they couldn't get a valid ID.
>Fix issuance first, then we can talk about making it a requirement. What isn't acceptable is to deny even a single person their right to vote because they couldn't get a valid ID.
Here's a list of things that require government ID right now, off the top of my head:
* Getting a job
* Accepting free food from a food drive
* Getting a bank account or loan
* Buying alcohol or cigarettes
* Buying a gun
* Getting a tattoo
* Picking up a package
* Driving a car
* Buying a plane or train ticket
* Viewing an apartment or house to lease/buy
* Forwarding your mail or setting up a PO box
* Joining a gym
* Setting up your gas/electricity/cable/internet
* Getting a phone with service
* Entering a nightclub
I'm all about giving people their rights, but making ID a requirement needs to be done. If the feds want to push it, then they can insist on criteria for acceptable issuance of ID. But I don't agree with waiting to do this anywhere it is possible to do it sooner. No other country (that I know of) is stupid enough to allow voting without ID. Perhaps the irrationality of this policy is an indictment of our government's dysfunction.
Due to previous rulings on poll taxes, any place where ID is required to vote, ID is also required to be obtainable for free.
The people repeating this myth are smart enough to know better so one must assume they intend to have people who can't obtain ID via legal means, voting.
Technically you do not have to present ID in Texas[1], but the requirements to not present an ID are so onerous you would easily be able to afford an ID before you could meet them. Because not only do you have to provide one of these documents, you also have to prove you cannot reasonably obtain an id... But the requirements are such that if you have the ability to provide one of these documents, you almost certainly have the ability to obtain an id. So the state will say "Well, you're able to obtain this document, why can't you get an ID?" and invalidate your vote. So the de-facto result is that you need an ID.
And this argument handwaves away, as the above links demonstrate, the significant amount of hurdles required to get an ID in Texas, which is not only paying a fee.
Citation needed for all your assumptions after your correct statement: "Technically you do not have to present ID in Texas"
From your link:
Here is a list of the supporting forms of ID that can be presented if the voter does not possess one of the forms of acceptable photo ID and cannot reasonably obtain one:
copy or original of a government document that shows the voter’s name and an address, including the voter’s voter registration certificate;
copy of or original current utility bill;
copy of or original bank statement;
copy of or original government check;
copy of or original paycheck; or
copy of or original of (a) a certified domestic (from a U.S. state or territory) birth certificate or (b) a document confirming birth admissible in a court of law which establishes the voter’s identity (which may include a foreign birth document).
Find a state where you have to pay for ID and you require ID to vote if it's such a problem.
I'm sorry but if you can't afford $30 every 8 years there is something very wrong with you. I would not be opposed to a poverty exemption for the fee, but the fee is so low that nobody realistically needs it. I don't know of a state with no fees for documents like ID.
There are identication requirements to get an ID, but that goes for any state. You have to have that to prevent identity theft. If you move to a new state you can usually turn in your old ID with like one other thing to get a new one in that state.
You are entitled to your opinion. But if you want to know my perspective: We have numerous obligations as members of society, such as wearing clothes. ID is such a fundamental thing to a government that it must be issued and used for government functions. If someone refuses to get an ID or can't manage to hang on to one, that is unfortunate but not the government's problem. If the issuance process takes too long, I would be OK with trying to fix that. I would not be entirely opposed to making ID free for people in poverty. But I still think even the poorest people can afford to keep an ID.
The only way to reliably ensure one person gets only one vote without requiring ID is to use biometrics or something. I would not be opposed to having that option either, because it would put this debate to rest. So, either provide an ID or verify your fingerprints, your choice.
Those "free" IDs are often only free in the sense that the issuer of the ID does not charge for it. But there may be fees to obtain the documents necessary to get that "free" ID.
Not specifically trying to make it easier, but passing legislation without or in spite of the impact. If they want to require voter ID then getting ID should not be a bureaucratic nightmare and it should be able to be done for free.
Because of all the edge cases. Some people do not have ID. Some have ID but it doesn't match their current address. Some people have ID but the same name+address as a dead person (not uncommon when people inherit houses from dead parents). Most people would be fine with ID requirements if they could trust that these edge cases will not be leveraged by some local volunteer with an agenda. In the never-ending 50-50 split of US politics, edge cases are too often the decider. See Florida 2000, where those who couldn't properly punch a hole in a piece of paper ended up deciding the presidency.
We're against it because allowing ten thousand unelected petty bureaucrats to adjudicate whether a voter is or is not allowed to cast their ballot on election day isn't a good system.
>Mail out ballots then require an ID when you turn it in. Make it easier to get an ID if that's a problem. It seems pretty simple to me. Not sure why anyone would be against this.
There needs to be accountability when it comes to voting. Mail is not acceptable for voting, especially if you make it as inconvenient as voting in person.
What I would like is to make voting day a holiday. Then we can put all these absurd arguments about how people can't get to the polls with valid ID to rest. Let the people who must work on election day vote early. Vote on paper, none of this unaccountable and glitchy electronic garbage. We have more tech than ever and our elections take longer to count than those in countries that use paper.
It's the most annoying thing I felt when I using software too. So in my own project, I tend to just keep the message open and wait for user to decide what do to with it, but then that's not a toast anymore.
I don't think designers should put anything interactive in an arbitrarily timed interface aside from "Dismiss". A toast is the best when it's displaying what is currently going on, not as a pop up dialog box.
The best design for Undo I think is to make it a dedicated button, like the one in the text editors. When user clicked "Archive", a Toast pop up and displays message "Archiving N entries, please wait" and then change it to "N entries archived. You can press Control+C or click [Undo Icon] to undo if that was a mistake" then the Undo button lights up.
Also, IMO the message format "Archiving N entries, please wait" should be a standard, it tells the user in a clear way 1) what the software is doing, and 2) what should I the user do. On the other hand, the message "Conversation archived" don't really provide the same value, since user already saw it happened.
That's not how that works. It's 50 degrees hotter not 50 degrees as the temperature. Celsius goes up at a rate of 5/9 what fahrenheit does so it's about 28 degrees Celsius.
In fairness, this app supports snapshotting your home directory as well, and that's not solvable with Nix alone. In fact, I'm running NixOS and I've been meaning to set up Timeshift or Snapper for my homedir, but alas, I haven't found the time.
Is there something about your home directory that you'd want to back up that is not covered by invoking home manager as a nix module as part if nixos-rebuild?
To me, it's better than a filesystem-backup because the things that make it into home manager tend to be exactly the things that I want to back up. The rest of it (e.g. screenshots, downloads) aren't something I'd want in a backup scheme anyhow.
I want to keep snapshots of my work. I run nightly backups which have come in handy numerous times, but accessing the cloud storage is always slow, and sometimes I've even paid a few cents in bandwidth to download my own files. It would be a lot smoother if everything was local and I could grep through /.snapshots/<date>/<project>.
Data (documents, pictures, source code, etc.) is not handled by home-manager. Backing up home.nix saves your config, but the data is just as if not more important.
Hmm, different strokes I guess. Maybe it's just that too much kubernetes has gone to my head, but I see files as ephemeral.
Code and docs are in source control. My phone syncs images to PCloud when I take them. Anything I download is backed up... wherever I downloaded it from.
Cloud sync != backup. Cloud sync won't help if you accidentally delete the file, backups will. Cloud sync won't help if you make an undesired edit, backups will.
But I can just rebuild the file, or restore it from a previous commit (or if I'm having a particularly bad day, restore its inputs from a previous commit and _then_ rebuild it).
The problem, unfortunately, is that Nix often finds itself in a chicken and egg scenario where nixpkgs fails to provide a lot of important packages or has versions that are old(er). But for there to be more investment in adding more packages, etc. you need more people using the ecosystem.
That's definitely true, but maybe I've just been lucky, pretty much every proprietary program I've wanted to install in NixOS has been in Nixpkgs.
Skype, Steam, and Lightworks are all directly available in the repos and seem to work fine as far as I can tell. I'm sure there are proprietary packages that don't work or aren't in the repo, but I haven't really encountered them.
I've unfortunately encountered a few. TotalPhase's Data Center software for their USB protocol analyzers is my current annoyance, someday I'll figure out how to get it to work but thus far it's been easier to just dedicate a second laptop to it.
I am hoping that Flakes will work to fix this problem somewhat; at least in theory it can be a situation of "get it to work once then it'll work forever", and then trivially distributed later (even without a blessing from Nixpkgs).
For managing your configuration.nix file itself you can just use whichever VCS you want, it's a text file that describes one system configuration and managing multiple versions and snapshots within that configuration file is out of scope.
For the system itself, each time you run "nixos-rebuild switch" it builds a system out of your configuration.nix, including an activation script which sets environment variables and symlinks and stops and starts services and so on, adds this new system to the grub menu, and runs the activation script. It specifically doesn't delete any of your old stuff from the nix store or grub menu, including all your older versions of packages, and your old activation scripts. So if your new system is borked you can just boot into a previous one.
Imagine installing an entirely new window manager without issue, and then undoing it without issue.
NixOS does that. And I'm pretty sure that no other flavor of Linux does. First time I realized I could just blithely "shop around window managers" simply by changing a couple of configuration lines, I was absolutely floored.
NixOS is the first Linux distro that made me actually feel like I was free to enjoy and tinker with ALL of Linux at virtually no risk.
There is nothing else like it. (Except Guix. But I digress.)
Completely agree; being able to transparently know what the system is going to do by just looking at a few lines of text is sort of game-changing. It's trivial to add and remove services, and you can be assured that you actually added and removed them, instead of just being "pretty sure" about it.
Obviously this is just opinion (no need for someone to supply nuance) but from my perspective the NixOS model is so obviously the "correct" way of doing an OS that it really annoys me that it's not the standard for every operating system. Nix itself is an annoying configuration language, and there are some more arcane parts of config that could be smoothed over, but the model is so obviously great that I'm willing to put up with it. If nothing else, being able to trivially "temporarily" install a program with nix-shell is a game-changer to me; it changes the entire way of how I think about how to use a computer and I love it.
Flakes mostly solve my biggest complaint with NixOS, which was that it was kind of hard to add programs that weren't merged directly into the core nixpkgs repo.
> but from my perspective the NixOS model is so obviously the "correct" way of doing an OS that it really annoys me that it's not the standard for every operating system
- Literally every person who's read the Nix paper and drank the kool-aid thinks this lol.
I STILL don't completely understand every element of my nix config but it's still quite usable. Adding software requires adding it to the large-ish config file, largely because I created overlay namespaces of "master.programname", "unstable.programname" and "stable.programname" (with the default being "unstable" in my case) but those would all ideally be moved out into 2 text files, 1 for system level (maybe called system_packages.txt) and one for a named user (perhaps called <username>_packages.txt) and if those could be imported somehow into the configuration.nix, I think that would make things a bit easier for end-users, at least initially.
The commandline UI (even the newer `nix` one) could still use an overhaul IMHO. The original CL utils were CLEARLY aimed directly at Nix developers, and not so much at end-users...
I've been working on my own wrapper to encapsulate the most common use-cases I need the underlying TUI for https://github.com/pmarreck/ixnay < and that's it so far.
What's adds to that annoyance is that the only way to navigate the games is a "prev" link. There's no way to jump directly to a game or go to the next game. This means every day it becomes more time consuming to get to the first game. And if you accidentally refresh the page, have fun!
This has to be the dumbest idea I've ever seen any social media company make and that says a lot.
First, I can't find any documentation explaining the rate limits. Just his tweet. Is this a rolling limit? Where do I see how many posts I've allegedly read? Do replies count as posts? Also, you can't go back and re-read the tweets that counted toward your limit.
His tweets are getting over 20,000 replies. That means that if posts count, even if you paid for your account you still can't read all the replies for a single tweet.
This also worsens the experience for existing paid users because the whole point of posting something is so that your followers see it. And if he's trying to get new paid users, why would anyone pay to get a far worse experience than they were just getting for free yesterday?
To add to the absurdity, the error you get is "Something went wrong. Try reloading." And once you hit the rate limit you can't even view the Twitter Support account or your own profile. You can however still see Tweets in your notifications.
On top of that, this isn't how you handle bots/AI. That's not the purpose of rate limiting. Wrong tool for the job. This is incompetence no matter how you look at it. None of this makes any sense.
I can confirm that scrolling through replies does count. So reading the replies to Elon's tweets to figure out what's happening makes you hit the rate limit.
They might not be able to find someone to pay that rent. In which case they might be forced to sell. Ideally someone who doesn't own a home will purchase it and won't have to pay the tax that caused the original owner to sell.
The prison industrial complex has lobbyists who do influence those decisions. They could start focusing on making the penalties harsher for minor crimes.
