I know it isn’t “always”, but it has been proven that the “overcharging” is a way to launder money into black budget projects and operations. They aren’t always “bad”, the Manhattan Project was a black budget, as was the development of the stealth bomber.

I am also less concerned about a 5k pair of socks and more worried $90 million/plane F-35 that is widely regarded by pilots as a worse plane than the jets being replaced. You know, the one we spent $2 Trillion developing. I’m sure there were some $25k hammers in there, but overall it was so much other waste. Let’s cut some of that type of spending.

Not that I know of. In the end you are editing the browser rendering parameters. Anyone can inspect the page and see that the opacity on the page is being turned down. Finding where it is happening is the only thing you can really make hard. Have a couple of the pass through scripts be machine generated and you can have it use nonsensical variable names and a bunch of dummies that lead on wild goose chases. It could all be fixable, but you can make it a pain in the ass. Add a redundancy or two and it will make debugging a nightmare because even if one is fixed, the others will make it look as though it has not.

The real answer is to have NEVER do freelance web development inside the client’s firewall. Never. If they try to require it, walk away. If it is inside their firewall then they can just take the source code and stiff you. If they try to spout some BS about security, say that is precisely what you are concerned about and point blank ask them what safeguards they are willing to allow you to put in place for developing in their system. If the answer is none, walk. If they are willing to let you VPN in, run the code from a local copy over the VPN and node lock it so if someone attempts to serve it from another machine it fails.

Apologies. I’m tired and hate businesses taking advantage of “Independent Contractors”.

Bury it six JavaScript and 2 php scripts deep so it is a pain in the ass to find.

I’m all for cutting military spending, but this is not the spot to cut. Stop ordering Jets nobody wants, Armored Personnel Carriers that don’t safely meet the role, and bullshit other places that spend when they are unneeded. Soldier benefits are necessary.

That is because I don’t know to what you are referring. I was simply turning the statement around.

“When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle.” ~ Burke, “Thoughts on the Cause of the Present Discontents” (1770)

‘They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.’ ~Franklin

I will not be the one to cast the first stone, but I will also not sit silently by as the safety of my family is threatened. I have studied our history, I have studied our present, and I will not let another Crystal Noct occur without absolute retribution. This citizen will take the second amendment and its intended purpose of allowing the people to protect themselves from despots, tyrants, and autocrats who attempt to sunder the fabric of this democracy. I will meet force with overwhelming retaliation, if possible, so much that they think twice before attempting again.

“Knocking him down was the first fight, I wanted to win all the others, so they’d leave me alone.” ~ Ender, Ender’s Game (2013)

No, it is not. It really is not. Because Charlie is smart enough to fill the glass bottle and use it while Mac sleeps.

Wow, so many down votes. Either people don’t understand or they are against historically useful anarchic ordinance. Seriously people, if we have any hope of dealing with these problems we need to take some cues from some Ukrainian grandmothers circa 2 to 3 years ago regarding the proper and artful application of glass.

It is astonishing how few people know how to correctly deal damage with a glass bottle. It is not about the glass, it is about what it is filled with. Now I am smarter than to explicitly state anything in an open forum online that could constituted unprotected speech, not that that holds much water. Speaking of, the bottles are not filled with water.

I don’t own guns. I own glass bottles. They are far more effective weapons when wielded correctly. A single glass bottle can do more damage than a thousand bullets.

Just going to point out that the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, and 5th Amendments to the constitution are all specificying that the citizenship are the final check to keep the government in balance.

They will just turn to DeSantis or whomever. If you can be sure of anything, be sure that Project 2025 has a list of contingency candidates.

Yeah, but then we could have it copyrighted so if he does lose they can’t just change the me to 2029. Attack everything.

Because eating poisonous animals is dangerous and we all know that Thomas and Kavanaugh have the most toxic blood possible while being able to pass as human from a medical point of view.

It wasn’t a joke from me. Democracy dies when the good man does nothing. I am a good man and I will fight for this democracy, as fucked up as it is. The right believes the left to be weak pacifists because we choose compromise, tolerance, and acceptance over bigotry, hate, and subjugation. They will need to learn the hard way that we choose that because we know that mutually beneficial social contracts make living better and provide a safe, prosperous world. They obviously do not want to be party to these social contracts with me, so I will not allow them any of the safety or benefits.

1. Yes please.

2. The way you framed this is dangerous as conservatives already want to eliminate retirement so everyone who is not rich has to be a wage slave until death. This just gives them incentive.

3. You will just create a shell game. Their spouses or children or cousins will just suddenly become amazing at trading. Or that weird company that incorporated in the Maldives with Fred Flintstone and Betty Boop as the board of directors will be doing weirdly well, but be out of the reach of the DoJ.

4. • Ranked Choice voting, fixed that for ya.

5. This one I have mixed feelings on. The spirit of the filibuster is good. Its purpose is to allow a minority, or even a single legislator, who feels so strongly about a proposed law to actually fight it. This purpose has been perverted, obviously, but that purpose is important for a truely functioning democracy. The ability for someone who actually sees something nobody else does to pump the brakes is vital. That said, I do believe there need to be severe consequences to doing what is effectively trying to break the legislative process over your knee. Personally, I believe that it should be the nuclear option. If you break that glass, you nuke your whole career in the process. No person who utilizes the filibuster is allowed to hold ANY public office for the rest of their life. Anyone who signs on as a supporter is allowed to hold federal office. Period. If you feel SO strongly that the passing of a law is either abhorrent to your beliefs or is fundamentally flawed in a way that will forever scar our way of life that you feel it is necessary to pull the emergency cord, then you need to have that cord available.

6. Yeah, and voting is mandatory. I’m not sure if I would allow abstention, but your ass has to mark something down for sure.

7. I hate that this has to be listed as well. 😮‍💨

Liberal politicians do not need to be the ones to make sure #1 happens. The second amendment literally exists so the citizens have the capacity to do that ourselves.

Unconscionable, yes. Necessary, most likely. There are times when someone must wear the mantle of villain in order to be the hero who can actually do what is needed.

Also, the unconscionability of the act does squarely depend on one’s philosophical definition of “justice”. The conscionability of any decision is predicated on how one values the world around them. Personally, I lean towards a form of altruistic utilitarianism. As long as an act does not genuinely do harm, and it is for the benefit of the majority of people, it is good. If an act is harmful to some, but benefits the whole, it is justifiable. If an act harms many, but benefits few, it is unconscionable.

As for what OP said, I believe he mispoke or misunderstood the ramifications of the word “dissolve” in this context. What he described is not a dissolution of SCOTUS, but a forced full reset. Dissolution would be to eliminate it as one of the 3 federal houses of government, leaving only the Presidency and Congress to govern. Removing all members and pursuing filling the seats as the constitution dictates would not dissolve SCOTUS. It would be the same resultant event sequence if something happened and all of the justices died simultaneously. All sitting justicesl being replaced by the Democratic process of the country would be fine, and indeed, would be a good thing. As much as I love Sotomayor and Kagen, removing them would be necessary for it to not be a political action, but one which recognizes that the body is no longer able to do its sworn duty in its current state and it needs replaced.

The whole process could be foreshortened by rapidly shrinking the count of filled seats on SCOTUS. Make it dangerous to be a conservative on the bench and see how many fuckwits still decide it is a career move they see as valid.

Someone needs to do Project 2029 figuring out all the most effective ways to abuse all of this bullshit. We need to detail how to define fascists as enemies of the state under their own rules. Figure out how to use their rules to place the nuts of every landleech in a vice and spin the wheel like we are on the Price is Right. We need to put every religious tenent on the walls of every school, starting with the Satanic Temple. Just point for point find the abuses in their entire plan, then we all make sure to kick as many of them out of congress and state and local governments as possible and start going ham on flipping every abuse like we are Jesus chasing lenders from the temple.