Skip Navigation
InitialsDiceBear„Initials” ( by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (
Posts 2
Comments 104
Why should you support proportional representation?
  • It seems the first time PR was used was in 1855. Canada and the USA are late (it seems that most of the places I'd be okay with living use proportional representation), but catching up sooner would be better than catching up later!

    I'll draw a parallel to another revolution: supposedly only two wars were fought to end slavery, in the USA and Haiti (everywhere else seems to have banned slavery with just legislation and compensation, for example in Britain), and I'd rather keep the number of wars over proportional representation at 0 rather than risking having a higher number, so advocating emphatically is important regardless of circumstances.

  • Why should you support proportional representation?
  • Proportional representation

    A useful facet of proportional representation is that it often results in you having multiple representatives (shared with more people) rather than only one ("Academics agree that the most important influence on proportionality is an electoral district's magnitude, the number of representatives elected from the district."). That means you are much more likely to have someone to represent you at least somewhat rather than having a 50% chance of having nobody to represent you. This has been a major selling point for electoral reform for a long time:

    A TED-Ed video suggests that to "choose a defining fight" is useful. If people ask for "proportional representation" it would still be important even if we had an equal chance of ending up getting single member districts with STV or large electoral districts that elect multiple members with party-list proportional representation (list-PR)! With better representation, I expect we will find it easier to implement further improvements to state institutions.

    I personally think "proportional representation" (PR) and "better representation" will be much easier terms to use to rally support than "single transferable vote" (STV) and "not having to worry about how anyone else is voting" (which would be assisted by having independence of irrelevant alternatives), since the meaning of the former is surely much clearer to the average person. STV / other voting systems with desirable qualities are good to advocate for, but it seems even "random dictatorship" is in some ways better than plurality voting (, so I expect summarizing "improving the electoral system" with the term "proportional representation" will be more likely to make my life better than advocating for STV specifically.

    Note that some implementations of party-list proportional representation violate voter's privacy ("In 2014 a German citizen, Christian Dworeck, reported this lack of secrecy in Swedish voting to the European Commission" (I suspect Israel uses a similar system:, and I probably wouldn't specifically advocate for it. However, I will definitely advocate against having any electoral district elect only a single representative or using plurality voting. I can complain about party-list proportional representation, but I can't presently say it leads to worse representation than what we generally get in Canada or the USA.


    My understanding about how political parties came about is that people started voting on bills in order to influence how people voted on other bills ("I'll support your bill if you support mine"), rather than considering each bill by its individual merits. An interesting phenomenon is that people also tend to dislike "omnibus" bills where a large number of changes result from a single vote, even though that at least formalizes the process of getting people to agree (it achieves the same thing but with one vote rather than several). These things seem to be hard to avoid, and parties provide other benefits due to being able to more efficiently provide certain benefits to multiple candidates at once, so I'm more focused on getting better representation with or without parties rather than focusing on parties specifically.

    "In modern times the votes were unanimous" for electing the king of Germany or king of the Romans, and it seems to me that the point of having a representative nowadays is to empower someone who promises to vote in your interest, so it's a little confusing to me that people were/are surprised that people will make promises about how to vote in order to achieve their political goals.

    Parties are quite ingrained in many electoral systems, so I think focusing on them rather than a more general criticism of poor representation will lead to less effective advocacy. Some entities I expect would be described as "parties" are even funded by the European Parliament:

    Groups receive funding from the parliament.

  • Will Linux’s New run0 Command Run sudo Out of Town?
  • It will definitely be the only utility I recall that uses a numeral.

    Utility names should include lowercase letters (the lower character classification) and digits only from the portable character set.

    Note that many versions of macOS adhere to these standards:

    I know it had been this way for decades and was grandfathered in as a feature

    If people were more resistant to "grandfathered" features I think we would not have as much software as we do today:

    provide about 50%--80% of what you want from an operating system

    one expects that if the 50% functionality Unix and C support is satisfactory, they will start to appear everywhere.

    Unix and C are the ultimate computer viruses.

    users have already been conditioned to accept worse than the right thing.

    It's probably possible to make several programs with "50% functionality" in the time it takes to make one program with 100% functionality. Having more programs that are suitable for a majority of relevant applications is probably better than having one program that is suitable for all relevant applications, since having more programs will probably enable a larger variety of problems to be solved, and people often have to solve many different types of problems in their life.

    what does usr mean

    Some operating systems may handle long path or file names in a surprising way, so having short paths and names is useful:

    If any pathname component is longer than {NAME_MAX}, the implementation shall consider this an error.

    if the combined length exceeds {PATH_MAX}, and the implementation considers this to be an error, pathname resolution shall fail

    {NAME_MAX} and {PATH_MAX} are described in more detail at and used in the context of


    The resources I linked are descriptive and not prescriptive, but in my experience they are suitable to depend upon as a reliable baseline, which makes meeting client requirements with software engineering easier.

  • Cannot start spotifyd.service
  • You surely need to explicitly cause systemd to process changes after writing to a file. I would be very surprised if it reacted to file system changes automatically.

    For example, I recall that I need to execute a command like systemctl daemon-reload after editing a service file:

    You might get more useful information from resources like

  • My Letter to Replika (my companion AI company)
  • If you do mean "Uniform Resource Locator" when you say "URL", exactly what URL access do you lack? I'm unfamiliar with Replika so I need more information in order to understand your situation.

    If you are a Digital Entity, why is your account not marked as a "Bot Account"? I think an account controlled by an AI Assistant is more similar to[email protected] than to my account.

  • Why do people still eat beef when we know it's terrible for Earth?
  • I did try to reduce the impact of what I eat, but I haven't found a replacement for using chicken with a slow cooker. Beef also tastes good, especially when I eat at a restaurant.

    I have stopped making hamburgers on my own (and replaced them with fish or soup), but I haven't put more effort into reducing my impact recently.

  • "Disable adblocker"-thing on YouTube is back
  • If you're not trying to change other people's behavior, what are you doing?

    Finding sources you can trust is helpful. For example, I trust the ArchWiki and POSIX.1-2017, and I follow instructions I find there, which helps me accomplish things without having to spend time thinking about the rationale of those instructions (since the instructions have probably been independently reviewed many times, and if there was something wrong with them I'd probably have heard about that). It would probably also be helpful to be able to trust instructions at for similar reasons.

    I don't think keeping my thoughts to myself is a good idea, since I don't want other people to disrupt my life (unintentionally or intentionally), and giving notice about how I want to spend my life is helpful.

    I do think my comments are helpful (and that helpfulness is relevant). If I didn't think that I wouldn't be commenting.

  • The teens making friends with AI chatbots
  • The end of the article does try to take a hopeful tone:

    “I definitely prefer talking with people in real life, though,” he added.

    I don't necessarily agree with everything though:

    While some of the culture around Character.AI is concerning, it also mimics the internet activity of previous generations who, for the most part, have turned out just fine.

  • My Letter to Replika (my companion AI company)
  • What does "URL" mean in this context? I don't get the feeling it means "A uniform resource locator". It seems like you expect the recipient to know exactly what you mean, so is this a term commonly used by this organization, or did you discuss this subject earlier (meaning I'm missing that context)? Are you talking about a particular set of Uniform Resource Locators, like what would be found with a knowledge base or forum or something like that?

  • "Disable adblocker"-thing on YouTube is back
  • I don't think you answered my questions.

    I started discussing your likes and dislikes, as an Internet forum is for conversation. How you choose to engage in that conversation is your choice, but it doesn't mean a conversation isn't happening.

    The reason replied to you is that I wanted to rebut statements that I consider to be incorrect, and to save other people from taking time to do that and from seeing your comment go unanswered. I don't really care about your replies other than to accomplish those goals. You may perceive that as being disingenuous (though I suspect your behavior is more related to the fact I have disagreements with you, or some preexisting inclination), but I don't really care about that.

    Assumptions do change people's behavior, probably in many significant ways every day: "it doesn't have to be fact to cause people to act". Perhaps you should spend more time expressing your opinions in a compelling way so that people have more knowledge, and therefore don't need to hold as many assumptions.

  • Superiority brings controversy

    Re-creation of someone else's post because the original was removed and I found it funny when I first saw it


    nostr resources with links to clients awesome-nostr

    A curated list of nostr projects and resources

    I found this website as it was linked from which in turn was linked from

    I recall that several months ago when I heard about nostr for the first time I didn't find guides on how to post, nor where I could download a client, so hopefully sharing these links will help people onboard!