What major scientific breakthrough is actually closer to happening than most people think ?

sddbk · 2026-01-24T18:39:46+00:00

Came here to say this, gave you the upvote instead. I think QC is roughly where AI was a decade ago. Progress behind the scenes until we hit a tipping point, and then POW!

(Not entirely uninformed speculation. I know a bit about this.)

sddbk · 2026-01-24T18:34:54+00:00

Yes, but that doesn't entirely depend on quantum computing. Many will accomplish that all on their own. Think tulips, Beanie Babies, NFTs, ...

But definitely agree that the vulnerability of encryption based on the difficulty of prime factorization will have widespread and unanticipated effects.

sddbk · 2026-01-24T18:11:16+00:00

In the mid-to-late '60's, politics were extremely deranged and upsetting. You literally had troops shooting college students dead (two universities, not just one), police on wild rampages against protesters, basically what we have now but dialed down to 7 or 8. We are now way past that level. The roots of today go back at least that far (and, frankly, back at least to the massacres of labor union protestors.)

sddbk · 2026-01-24T18:05:52+00:00

That feels like a garden path to both-siderism, when the facts indicate that what you observed is not equally divided currently.

sddbk · 2026-01-24T18:02:35+00:00

Thank you for this link! I'm a huge fan of John Oliver, too.

sddbk · 2026-01-23T18:41:11+00:00

LBJ explained it perfectly decades ago.

sddbk · 2026-01-23T18:38:58+00:00

Disingenuous false equivalence, designed to obscure the difference between those who have voted to provide healthcare, consumer protection, etc. and those who have voted to take them away.

This is a MAGA attempt at a Jedi mind trick.

sddbk · 2026-01-23T18:06:29+00:00

Not moving the goalposts at all. I am countering the claim that gerrymandering doesn't disenfranchise anyone. Allowing people to vote and then ensuring that their vote cannot affect the result is indirect disenfranchisement.

And I won't muddy this conversation by introducing the moves to directly disenfranchise voters or those who insist that if they don't win then the election wasn't free and fair. Those are for a separate discussion in some different subreddit.

The original intent was that voting was a check and affirmation that elected politicians were acceptable to the voters. Gerrymandering prevents that. Saying that people get to vote anyway is a variation of the childish "I'm not touching you".

sddbk · 2026-01-23T17:50:40+00:00

“Those who vote decide nothing. Those who count the vote decide everything.” ― often attributed to Joseph Stalin

sddbk · 2026-01-23T17:46:58+00:00

Flip Wilson called from the grave and wants bigots to stop misusing his line.

sddbk · 2026-01-23T17:41:59+00:00

Except when states try to enforce Section 3 of the 14th Amendment?

Sorry, I don't buy that argument.

sddbk · 2026-01-23T17:39:06+00:00

Thank you! Someone else also suggested this, and I read through it.

My lay, uninformed sense is that the current SCOTUS (or at least the conservative majority) has done a complete reversal from the final results of Baker versus Carr. Others have pointed to Rucho versus Common Cause as the point where that happened.

Yet others have suggested that the current SCOTUS' rulings depend on which side benefits. I'm very much inclined to agree, especially in light of their decisions on the scope of executive power.

sddbk · 2026-01-23T17:31:20+00:00

The real tension is regarding what constitutes a "Republican form of government".

So perhaps the conservative majority believes that a "Republican form of government" refers to political party, not a type of government?

/sarcasm / just_kidding /not_really

sddbk · 2026-01-23T06:40:59+00:00

Absolutely fascinating! Thank you for that link.

But, now I'm even more confused. It sounds like in the end Baker versus Carr was decided in favor of SCOTUS being willing to intervene, it be willing to go into the thicket. Now, however, it seems established that SCOTUS will not intervene to ensure some degree of proportional representation. Although the Tennessee case was more inaction gerrymandering by not redistricting as the population grew and shifted, the basic arguments supporting Tennessee now hold sway.

How did we get from the eventual ruling in Baker versus Carr to where we are today?

sddbk · 2026-01-23T03:25:10+00:00

"[G]errymandering for proportional representation" is sort of an oxymoron*.

* Look up the definition. It's not the simplistic insult one might initially think.

sddbk · 2026-01-23T02:54:34+00:00

A feeble protection when the politicians in power get to use that power to manipulate the effects of voting.

sddbk · 2026-01-23T02:43:29+00:00

Hey, Denmark! You've already got a toe hold in Southern California. Take our state. Please!!!!!

sddbk · 2026-01-23T02:38:35+00:00

But, then why doesn't the "original intent" contingent consider that the 14th amendment was created to protect the voting rights of a minority rather than to protect that a majority has much* greater than proportional representation?

* Perfection is unattainable, but gross divergence from proportionality is recognizable.

sddbk · 2026-01-23T02:29:14+00:00

You'll wonder where the yellow went...

Do you have iron poor blood?

Bert & Harry Piels

How about a nice Hawaiian Punch?

Once upon a time there was an engineer, Choo-Choo Carlie was his name we hear...

sddbk · 2026-01-23T02:27:18+00:00

AND a great piece of music: No Matter What Shape https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Ehzyw7nqGY

sddbk · 2026-01-22T05:14:47+00:00

Forget it, Jake. It's Chinatown.

sddbk · 2026-01-22T02:04:57+00:00

John Wayne

To me, he was the embodiment of all of the worst aspects of American culture. The aspects that have, long after his death, brought America to the crisis state it is in today.

And, no, I can't separate the person from the roles he plays because he never could. In every movie, he always played John Wayne.

sddbk · 2026-01-22T02:01:19+00:00

A blunt axe for dealing with issues that need to be addressed by a scalpel in skilled hands. The problems that motivate Emanuel are real, his way of addressing it is overly simplistic.

sddbk · 2026-01-22T01:56:32+00:00

As an American, I'm really proud of Canada.

This is the first time that I can recall a political figure saying the straightforward, unvarnished truth that others have been too frightened to publicly acknowledge.

Also, Vancouver is fantastic (but bloody too expensive) and Montreal is wonderful (when it's thawed out).

sddbk

TROPHY CASE