Volts are not a unit of power. Watts are a unit of power.
Volts are not a unit of power. Watts are a unit of power.
Although there is a common adjective order, it’s not always clear which category a word belongs in. People insisting that the words “modular” and “versatile” fit into whatever category they chose are presenting a lot more certainty than is warranted. I am a native speaker, and either order sounds fine in this case.
People know what it is. That’s why they’re down voting it. These don’t build communities.
We all have access to RSS and can create our own sets of feeds. Posts are for the things that are worth talking about. Spamming a community makes it harder to find the interesting things.
If I were to create an assignment, I would make a learning goal the purpose. Learning critical thinking is a good goal, but I wouldn’t peg it to Lemmy. If the point is thinking critically about social media sites, then you could offer suggestions of places to look, including Lemmy.
I have no evidence of her motives. Campaign donations are public record, and she receives funding from oil companies. The idea that politicians are not swayed by finance is absurdly naive. They don’t need to accept that money. And, regardless whether convincing swing voters is a part of the campaign’s consideration, it should be clear that influence from corporations is not an influence. Then we could sit here an take them at their word. As it is, it’s impossible to think that millions of dollars from oil companies is not affecting the decision to make a complete u turn on supporting fracking.
They do according to the US supreme court. The court ruled in Citizens United that restricting donations from corporations was a violation of corporations’ first amendment rights.
It corporations weren’t given the same rights as people, then we’d need to wonder less about what politicians’ real motives were.
That does sound better doesn’t it? If I were a presidential candidate, I would definitely say “We support fracking because we need Pennsylvania” instead of “We support fracking because our campaign has accepted millions of dollars from the oil industry”.
Without evidence I will say it’s more likely that she has significant funding from the fracking industry and is under the thumb of rich executives. The difference is that they likely understand that supporting fracking could cost them the election, but they know that by not supporting it they lose a huge source of funding. They have weighed the costs, benefits and risks, and decided it’s a risk worth taking.
A good solution is to get corporate money out of politics. There are narrow ways to achieve that, but a broad solution that fixes a lot of problems is to end corporate personhood. This organization has made steady progress toward that and I think is worth supporting. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Move_to_Amend. Considered signing up for their email list.
Another solution is more wisely voting. People don’t vote in primary elections, but they’re more important than the general elections. They determine what the field of candidates looks like. Vote in primary elections. You don’t necessarily want to vote in primary of the party you most align with though. An obvious example where you’d vote in a different party is if you live in a gerrymandered district. There’s a near 100% chance the gerrymandered party candidate will win. It doesn’t matter who the other candidates are. Vote for the least bad candidate in the other party. You won’t get everything you want, but you’ll get more than you would otherwise. It will also force the party to change.
That’s not the only time you’d vote in a party you don’t align best with. Maybe you’re relatively happy with all of the candidates in a party, so why split hairs if you’d be ok with any of them? There are so many considerations that the only advice is to keep an open mind about party membership, evaluate where you make the most impact (not what looks the most like you) and vote in every damn election, primaries included.
I haven’t used this in a bit so I thought I’d check it. They somewhat recently updated the desktop program and nothing works at all now. It appears to be just Edge pretending to be another program. It’s literally just a browser, so surround sound doesn’t work now.
It’s a weird thing for them to do. Why would anyone download a copy of edge that can only watch Netflix? You’d just use a browser.
I attach a computer to a TV and open streaming Web sites in a browser. There aren’t much benefits of the streaming devices compared to that unless you’re using surround sound. The Netflix desktop program has surround sound, but that’s the only service I know of.
I don’t know that it’s technically harmonization, but sometimes when wolves howl at the same time, they will each choose a different pitch. Presumably it’s so the group sounds like it has as many individuals as possible.
There’s no shortage of well meaning dog owners who don’t know any better.
deleted by creator
I visited for a few days once. If you like the outdoors, the parks in the surrounding area are nice. Camelback in the city is packed and not particularly fun.
Overall, I found that Phoenix was not at all a place I’d like to spend time. You might try Sedona just a little north of Phoenix. I haven’t been there, but I hear it’s not Phoenix, and in general seems more aligned with the things you mentioned you like.
deleted by creator
Rather that individuals setting up or seeking out an instance, I could see institutes whose members produce content using it, but they’d have to really care about avoiding YouTube. Blender foundation is an example, and they have a peer tube instance, but maybe universities, nonprofits, or research institutions.
How does this work with franchises? Are these ones operated directly by Starbucks?
It’s also a lower case k in km.
I could never fully understand the explanation for lift. It turns out it’s not the explanation for lift.