SkavarSharraddas

The Banana Republicans up to a good start.

Make sure to disable Windows hybrid sleep. If your system isn't shutdown properly and you access the Windows partition from another system that can destroy data.

If you just want to keep the data on the Windows partition and usually don't need to run Windows, I'd remove the Windows drive and keep it somewhere safe, and get another SSD for Linux. That way, the two systems are completely separate and can do nothing to each other.

Swap is mostly a crutch for too little RAM, if the system doesn't have enough the best solution would be an upgrade. If that's not possible, consider zram-swap, or if you have to, swap to an SSD (that will reduce its lifespan, though maybe not in a relevant manner). If you swap to an old HDD you won't have much fun using the system.

Disgusting.

Proud enough to show their faces?

Already showing us how he wants to protect women.

Canceling votes is a good start, but they shouldn't limit it to people they know, and even if all votes are cancelled, you still need more to actually win.

I'm unconvinced that pulling back from space programs will make Earth's ecosystem thrive.

My point was more or less the opposite: Anyone interested in space exploration should also be interested in keeping Earth well livable, because that is needed for its success.

If we can't manage to keep Earth's ecosystem thriving to support us, we certainly won't be able to create a new self-sustaining ecosystem elsewhere. And without that, there's no chance of any non-Earth settlement being able to sustain a healthy human society and culture long-term.

Without some serious (currently impossible) terraforming, Mars colonies are limited to deep caves or heavily shielded buildings, no outside to relax, nowhere else to go. Have a look at the list of crimes in Antarctica, a similar situation where people are stuck together, that's not a good environment for mental health, and it will be worse farther away. A Mars colony (edit: or space station) owned by a private company will be a corporate prison, the inhabitants are 100% dependent on that company - who would voluntarily put their lives into the hands of the whims of some narcissistic hoarder with no empathy or regard for workers?

I'm advocating for the outcome where the candidate that doesn't want to jail their opponents and use the military against protestors wins, so that you can continue to make your disagreement with parts of their policy known.

I'm glad to see that you're doing more than just voting, which I was advocating for in the first post you answered.

You agreed that either Trump or Harris will win. Your vote can only threaten one of them, by voting for the other or an alternative candidate. Same with not voting, the winner won't care about your missing vote.

That means no action you take in the election will harm both candidates, ergo there is no way to vote against both of them.

The current system (or voter inertia) doesn't allow you to vote against both. One of them will win, your only decision is which one you want (or despise less). If your vote doesn't threaten their win, then when you vote for neither you're voting for the winner.