That’s not at all how piracy works. They don’t lose any money by me not buying their product, the money was never theirs to lose. They can earn money if I buy it, but if I don’t, then nothing changed. It’s not like every company is entitled to my money.
Pirating or using Gimp or Krita instead, has the exact same effect on them, ie me not buying their product.
Not without login, probably
This looks like a weird version of a cold world era map, blue being US and allies, red USSR and allies and yellow non aligned countries. A little bit weird in Africa and south America, but we’re mostly there
There was once a term used for this, first world (US and allies) second world (USSR and allies) and third world (neutral-ish nations)
The original company was never Italian. The founder was Italian, but the company was incorporated in German Alsace, which then became French Alsace after the Great War. There was a brief attempt at a revival in Italy in the late 80s, early 90s, but it didn’t really go anywhere. Today’s company is French and is mostly controlled by the Croat Rimac (and partially by Porsche, which owns VW, which owns Porsche)
In the US coffee = filter coffee, espresso = espresso
In Italy coffee = espresso, dirty water = filter coffee
even though every restaurant has an espresso machine it doesn’t mean they clean it, and doesn’t mean their staff knows how to use it properly. Water temps too high, too much coffee grounds, over compressed, lowest quality beans. Fucking everywhere. It’s awful.
And this is why, as an Italian, I can’t drink espresso anywhere in the world. 9/10 is just awful
Coffee made with a Moka pot
What you call mocha should actually be called Mocaccino, although it’s more similar to what we call Marocchino in Italy. They’re both derived from the “Bicerin”, a drink typical of Turin.
Marocchino is like a Cappuccino with powdered cocoa (mix the espresso and cocoa before pouring the milk).
Mocaccino is instead made up of three layers, a layer of melted chocolate, then a layer of espresso, then a layer of frothy milk.
Afaik they’re not massively popular in Italy, but here in the north I see Marocchino more often than Mocaccino.
PS: if you want to pronounce them correctly, “chi” and “che” are pronounced “ki” and “ke”, while “ci” and “ce” are pronounced “chi” and “che”.
Those terms are an American invention. As for Italy
welp to buy some real estate real quick before this interstellar tourism boom shoots up the prices
It’s not about the distro. Most distros out right now are pretty good. What you need is hardware that lots of people want to buy with Linux installed on it as the default choice. Normal people don’t want to install any OS, be it Linux, Windows, MacOS or BSD. Whatever comes by default, it’s good.
I’m pretty sure that right now the most popular Linux distros are ChromeOS and SteamOS. I wonder why
Like the time Elon Musk called the diver who saved the kids trapped in a flooded cave a pedo just because he managed to do so before he could build his"robot" idea?
You could extract their flavor, fill it with added sugars, saturated fats, preservatives and food coloring
So a dangerous drug addict stealing media by consuming it workout compensating the original author? How terrible! /s
If you want you can go first class you know. It’s more or less as much as it was in the 50s and you get possibly even more luxury. Just be ready to pay 5k instead of a hundred bucks
Ok, let’s try again. Those who like the left usually don’t vote for the GOP, agree?
Then, for them, the options are three, either vote Dems, vote third party or don’t vote. Now, if, like in the example of before, these people are that 5%, do you agree that not voting or voting a third party will result in the GOP winning, while voting for the Dems will result in the Dems winning?
If you think that the Dems and the GOP are one and the same, then fine. If instead you’d rather the Dems win, then do you agree that these people should vote Dems rather than do nothing or vote for a third party, which would lead to a GOP win?
Btw, this is why there’s no third party in a fptp system and there can never be one. Your votes are better spent on the candidate you dislike less rather than on the one you actually like, because voting for the one you like will inevitably result in the one you really dislike going to power.
Edit:btw watch that cgp grey video, it’s really good. He’s really good in general tbh, great guy, very good at explaining.
You don’t understand the basics of a First Past The Post system.
Let’s say, for example’s sake, that 52% of the people voting tend left, while 48% tend right, and let’s also remove all the state, gerrymandering and grand elector bullshit for a moment (I know, so much bullshit)
If everyone were to only vote for either the Democratic Party or the Republican Party, come November, the Democratic Party would win with 52% of the votes and secure the presidency. Now let’s assume that there’s a third party, let’s call it “The True Left Party” and let’s say they can have a very successful campaign and secure 5% of the votes, which would come from the left leaning side of the voting pool, aka from those who would have otherwise voted for the Democratic Party. Now come November the results would look like this: Republicans still at 48%, Democrats now at 47% and True Left at 5%, so now the Republican Party wins and Trump becomes president.
This is how voting for a third party only helps your enemy. If I were the Republicans, I’d be turbo donating to any left party right now. Divide et Impera as the Romans said.
my point is that disaffected leftists voting for third parties […] does not mean support for Trump
With the current American Electoral law, it kind of does. Let’s say that 5% of the votes instead of going to the Democrats go to some other third party. In an election this close, where both parties are likely to get between 48 and 52% of the votes, this would mean ensuring the victory of the Republicans.
This is a huge problem with the FPTP system, but that’s the law for this election. It would be great to change it, but that’s talk for the next one. Voting for a third party ensures that the party you like the least will win in a FPTP system. CGP explains it best: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7tWHJfhiyo
Not quite accurate. Voting third party signals that third party platforms are more popular, and can shift the larger parties.
Maybe, but you are still conceding these elections.
Organizing and mass protesting can get meaningful change, same as striking. Forcing concessions is the way true change has occured historically, not simply at the ballot box.
You can definitely do this as well as voting for the party that best represents you. If you don’t vote, it means you leave the choice of who will rule the country to the others. At least vote for the candidate that you think is more likely to listen to your protests, rather than forfeiting the elections in favor of the candidate that you know for sure will never listen to you.
If you don’t vote, it means you are ok with either one and don’t care enough either way to go to the ballot.
Not voting it’s not a third option, it’s a statement that you don’t care about either of the two options. Voting a third candidate is instead simply useless and in practice amounts to the same thing as not voting or voting with a blank ballot.
So in practice the options are: voting for the Democrats, voting for the Republicans, doing nothing and being ok with either one winning or leaving the fucking country.
More like
Multi-millionaire tries to pass off marketing as a tax write-off