I can’t imagine doing it as a parent. My kids drowning is a pretty big, realistic fear. Maybe for a teenager? Even then though…

That isn’t an outcome.

What’s the other outcome of the US election?

There are the words straight out of Trump’s mouth. If you believe that Democrats will kill more people than Republicans, that’s a completely different conversation. Though it still mostly boils down to: genocide or worse genocide, pick one, and if you don’t pick, you’re likely to get worse genocide.

More people than the Republicans would. And then I would vote Republican. Because that’s the choice on election day.

Edit: if all you’re doing is not voting, you do nothing to help anyone. If you are actually helping in meaningful ways, then voting to pick the easier opponent does not undermine your work.

It’s a stupid question. But that’s the reality. So genocide or worse genocide? If you say neither, it’s probably going to be worse genocide.

With reasonable, actionable steps. If you don’t have those, then they kind of have a point, don’t they? It’s like the Newton’s flaming laser sword of politics.

That’s a valid opinion. That they’re using it to mean “figuratively” is not.

I didn’t say your statement was pedantic. Just that you specifically called out your use of literally as not used in a figurative sense and that this thread in general is about pedantry. Those two things together made it seem not totally insufferable to point out that literal was actually being applied to figurative language.

Just because you called it out and this is a thread about pedantry: road rage is an idiomatic phrase, which is a type of figurative language. So, you were using literally to emphasize figurative language rather than try to clarify you weren’t using the idiomatic meaning of the phrase but rather a literal.

Yeah. Dictionaries reflect popular usage. And I think literally has probably been in use in that sense nearly as long as it’s been used to mean something really did happen that way.

People who think anyone uses literally to mean figuratively are annoying and too caught up in their crusade to realize their take is idiotic. No one uses it to mean figuratively. People use it to emphasize regardless of the figurative nature of language. It’s semantic drift that happens to most words that mean something similar to “in actuality” (e.g. really, actually). Even in other languages.

I’m used to IT doing a lot of their work on the weekends as to not impact operations.

Or the 7 day week if you’re in IT.

No, because CrowdStrike didn’t bork the drivers for those systems. They could have, though.

Why is it bad to do on a Friday? Based on your last paragraph, I would have thought Friday is probably the best week day to do it.

I would definitely save it under a new name at the start because I’d totally accidentally save it without renaming at some point if I didn’t.

You’ve driven on public roads with other people, and you want to add a third dimension to that?

Most consumers don’t buy their own routers. The only time I’ve helped people buy routers in the last decade is to get one you could install a vpn on. Looking at the wireless standards never crossed our minds.

I think we have a different understanding of ranked choice.

In your example, you have 3 candidates, and candidate 3 isn’t very popular. He isn’t many people’s first choice. At the end of round 1, candidate 1 has 45% of the first choice votes, candidate 2 has 46% of the first choice votes, and candidate 3 has 9% of the first choice votes. Candidate 3 is then eliminated, and those who voted for him have their votes go to their second choice candidate. That should leave either candidate 1 or 2 winning. The only way he wins is if he had more first choice votes than one of the other candidates.

If someone who is everyone’s second choice but no one’s first choice wins, that sounds like approval voting or something similar, not ranked choice.

Edit: Looking at the referenced election, it looks like he was the most popular among the people who didn’t want the 2 popular candidates. The first round was 8 candidates and a simple ballot. The second round was a runoff election with the 3 most popular candidates and a ranked choice ballot. He won the first round of that. No one had 50%, so instant runoff, but he also won the second round of that.

To avoid that situation, you would have had to change the run-off rules to only allow the 2 top people instead of the 3 top people. But it still was an in person run off that gave you the result you dislike.