And that people live in cities.

Right next to Trump’s policy ideas.

That followed an announcement for their battery business if I’m not mistaken. Which isn’t what Musk was trying to pump.

I think that was a big reason why the stock took a hit. He keeps getting caught faking it, and even his fakes are decades behind Boston Dynamics.

He rolls out the same BS every time the stock needs to be pumped up. The good thing is, it didn’t work this time. This unveil actually made the stock drop because they’re so far behind.

It is an appstore for Flatpaks. Flatpaks are a universal app package for Linux that runs in a sort of containerized environment. They’re very prolific in the immutable linux world.

Orbits and their height are determined by the speed the object is moving at. Getting into orbit isn’t about getting something very high, it’s about getting it moving very fast. Geostationary height is the height that the object is moving at the same rotational speed as the body it’s orbiting. Any lower or higher and it won’t be geostationary anymore.

It’s closer to Slack, but Rocket Chat is another option.

It sounds like those pig butchering scams.

They didn’t care. They got to live through the benefits and not have to worry about the consequences. As far as the climate is concerned, they were the party generation, and we’re the hangover generation.

No, even better. They could have learned from our (the US) mistakes the way Biden urged them to. Why go through what you just witnessed did not work?

That’s what I’m asking. What are you talking about?

Screaming? I thought I was typing…

as if somehow the popular vote has ever won a presidency

Uhh, that’s exactly how it works per state. The most popular vote in that state gets the electoral votes for that state.

Is it really that hard to conceptualize 90,000 > 550? Or that green party voters back then were much closer to democratic voters than republican? You have to ignore the most obvious fact in order to contrive others.

I mean if you’re ignoring the context of the election and 2000, then maybe you can make that leap.

I did read the link. And it still seems like a ton of mental gymnastics to ignore the vote totals.

Lol, no. Why would you even think that?

I don’t understand that conclusion. According to their table there, Gore lost by ~550 votes and Nader had over 90,000 votes. Do you really think those votes would have been evenly split?

Apparently a lot of people were thinking the same way you were if judged by the votes.

Chill? I’m not heated. Clearly it was a misunderstanding, that’s why I explained it. I didn’t mean any disrespect.