misk

That sounds massively illegal.

Holding elections and referendum together is kinda illegal but who's going to stop them.

I hope you have a good supreme court.

EU is suing us because supreme court doesn't meet criteria for being independent and impartial. Constitutional court is even worse.

But even then, people could still vote against the proposed referendum

The questions are "have you stopped beating your wife yet?" themed and any participation legitimizes this circus unfortunately.

Yeah, 50% quorum required.

Parliamentary elections turnout will easily exceed 50% so it'll be a huge cluster fuck to boycott referendum because people will likely be handed both ballots by default. It's illegal to take ballot away or destroy it. Invalid votes are counted toward quorum. So far it looks like we'll have to specifically refuse and have this on the record.

Right now all of the proposed questions are so bonkers that many people will get parliamentary elections ballot and ignore referendum. EU accession referendum is the only referendum ever that met quorum in Poland so putting that question on a ballot could potentially mobilize people.

PiS won't do it because their long term plan is to sow enough distrust to EU that they would have to "begrudgingly" leave the EU in a couple of years. They don't need a referendum for that either - previous government (led by PO) passed a law so that only a parliamentary majority is required for that IIRC.

Also worth pointing out: referendum campaign has less strict spending limits compared to parliamentary elections so this is one more way (on top of utilizing state media and state owned enterprises) that PiS can outspend competition in upcoming elections which are held on the same day.

If you're at the extreme bottom there's little chance to move upwards in capitalism but it's comforting to have some undesirables who have it even worse than you.

Religion is not the goal of conservatives, it's a tool to preserve hierarchy in the society. Capitalism is another tool that achieves that.

The people that aren't wealthy but are conservative benefit from hierarchy enforced by religion. It ensures that they're not on the bottom of society - that place is intended for various minorities.

This client looks interesting but community groups seem to be very WIP at the moment. Posts in those groups are sorted by community (some arbitrary amount is pulled), then requested order (new, hot etc) and it takes ages to load so it's probably not very threaded. Regardless, this looks promising and I'll keep my eye on it - thanks!

Look into OpenCore Legacy Patcher. I updated my GFs 2012 Air to Ventura and it's running okay. A bit clunky around MacOS updates since you have to specifically run patcher again to get graphics acceleration again but otherwise fine. It's definitely worth it for security updates.

https://dortania.github.io/OpenCore-Legacy-Patcher/

TikTok is absolutely scummy in how they nag you for access rights to phone features / data but I don't think there's a way to do this without adding third "Popular" tab next to Following and For You.

If they had this as a setting then it'd have to stay this way. Industry standard is to withhold such setting and constantly default to algorithmic page in the attempt to trap you there or make you tired of switching feed constantly.

I prefaced this with disclaimer that's a personal experience. It's probably hard to measure because people aren't that eager to self report tax avoidance.

It is government's interest though. Hence extensive AML regulations for example.

Yeah, their algo is fun most of the time but it's easy to fall into a bubble and detach from reality. It's also quite transparent how often you're subjected to annoying A/B testing. I'm glad this is happening because it gives users ability to see general view and get more control over their experience.

Building complex systems involving humans is hard because humans are flawed. The best thing we've come up so far are systems involving extensive checks and balances to prevent thing happening too rapidly and without necessary oversight and even then it's a tricky part to balance.

For the record, I'm not for entirely cashless society but organisations that are cash heavy have proven to be source of many headaches. There is a balance to be found on thresholds and barring some types of businesses from using cash and where digital money transfer is required. Banks and other money transfer entities will have to deal with scenarios where malicious parties will try to obfuscate their intent outside of those thresholds.