To achieve the status of measles elimination, a country must have no ongoing local transmission of the disease for at least one year. It will lose that status if it has a chain of cases that spread from person to person for more than one year.

We’ve been heading in that direction, but we won’t have officially lost our measles-free status until the current outbreak has continued for a full year.

In this case, the post was asking for people’s expectations regarding this story specifically, and the response is entirely valid. It’s very reasonable to think that this one news story isn’t likely to be the tipping point.

It’s different when people reply to every story that is in any way bad for Trump with a comment about how none of it matters, nothing will change, and no one cares. As though anything that doesn’t result in Trump being immediately impeached, incarcerated, or inhumed is completely worthless. Much like how sit ups are useless because no matter how many I do today, I still won’t have a six pack when I’m done.

All those comments do is demoralize people and discourage them from trying to support opposition to Trump in any way.

Average age of a first time homebuyer is now over 40. Even at a reasonable interest rate, most buyers would die before they actually own the house.

Dems made them promise to put those ACA measures back in next year.

They got Thune to promise a separate vote in the senate on the ACA credits, probably in December. Even if that passed in the senate, Johnson won’t schedule a vote on it in the house. And if by some miracle it passed the house, Trump would just veto it.

It’s nothing. It’s absolutely nothing. At most they got Republicans to vote against ACA credits specifically, which is nothing compared to other shit they’ve already voted on, and will be far less effective than letting them take the heat for the shut down. The fact that they were willing to prolong the shut down just to kill the ACA credits says a lot more than a simple vote would.

They may not have felt that this was a good case for their purposes. Or enough of them may have felt that this was a bad time for it. Hell, maybe a couple of the conservative justices just don’t care enough to want to revisit the issue.

But respect for the law, the constitution, and the rights and wellbeing of the people hasn’t been evident in many of their recent opinions. Letting half the states pretend a fraction of marriages never happened wouldn’t even be the most disruptive thing they’ve done. They endorsed racial profiling, made racial gerrymandering presumptively legal, made prosecuting bribery essentially impossible, overturned abortion rights, and crowned Trump as king and gave him a license to kill. And that’s ignoring all the shenanigans happening on the shadow docket where they don’t even bother justifying their decisions. That they’ve at least drawn something of a line against the Trump administration trying to eliminate due process altogether makes sense only because letting go of due process would mean giving up some of their own influence.

I never said they would actually do it, only that they wouldn’t find it difficult to write that opinion. Seeing as they’ve had multiple cases in recent years where the opinion was completely untethered from law, precedent, and fact, there’s basically no position so extreme that I would assume they can’t rationalize it.

Their powers don’t appear to be limited by their physical form, and you do remain conscious while being transported, so it seems unlikely that you could trap one using the transporter. And that’s without getting into the question of how much of the Q is the body vs how much is something else beyond that physical manifestation.

If they can invent presidential immunity despite there being absolutely nothing in the constitution to justify it, I’m sure they have no problem writing an opinion that allows bans on gay marriage.

My best guess would be that they would frame it as being about the right of the states to regulate marriage. If the state can decide how many people can be in a marriage, how old you have to be to marry, how closely related you can be and still marry, the requirements for starting or ending a marriage, and so on, then what’s one more criteria? Add some tangents about the history of marriage in the US, some comments about how government is involved in marriage specifically because of how it connects to issues relating to reproduction, cite some cases from the 19th century, and twist some more recent precedent to reverse its meaning so that you can pretend to be following existing case law and you have a pretty standard ruling for this court.

Ordering a lot for yourself doesn’t necessarily mean eating it all at once. Leftovers are good too.

That said, there was a time when I worked in a pizza place that sold by the slice. I had to predict what we’d sell 10 minutes in advance without creating too much waste or leaving customers waiting. Sometimes fat people would come in, order way too much, complain about needing to wait for more, and generally making my day worse. I realized I was starting to resent fat people and it was adding to my already miserable mental state working that shitty job. So whenever it came up I started playing baby elephant walk in my head, and I wasn’t so resentful anymore.

For deliveries, the only customers I judged were the ones who treated us like shit, lied to get free stuff, or who were terrible tippers despite clearly having the money.

Noticed some anti-voting accounts pop back up this week after being dormant since last November. Must have gotten spooked by the election results on Tuesday and want to get a head start on trying to suppress turnout for next year.

Any deal that doesn’t put everything in one bill is worthless.

Let’s pretend for one moment that Republicans actually joined Democrats in passing the extension of ACA credits and any other concessions they got in the negotiations. Even if they passed the bill, Trump can just veto it. As long as he gets what he needs in a separate bill, he can veto anything else. And if there’s enough support for the compromise to overturn a veto, there’s enough to prevent it by passing it all as one bill.

But I’m sure Schumer will happily explain how Republicans voting against the ACA credits will be on their permanent record and how that will make this all worthwhile.

I’m not saying he actually has the stuff. More that I could see it being something Soong had in storage in his lab and was going to give to Data along with the chip, but never got the chance.

How long before the announcement that they are awarding one of their billionaire buddies with a no bid contract to replace air traffic control with an LLM based system?

Data doesn’t have emotions, but he does form attachments, has preferences and priorities, and can view experiences as positive (preferable) and negative (not preferable). So while he doesn’t experience things the same way that we do, he can still value the experiences.

The mechanics of Little Data (Datum?) are obviously never established, but given that he breathes and grows hair, it wouldn’t surprise me if the thing couldn’t double as squirt gun / turkey baster. I’m sure Soong would have probably wanted Data to be able to father a kid the old fashioned way if he chose to. Hell, now that I think about it, the old man may have kept some samples on ice in case Data ever needed them.

This whole administration: Better that 100 innocents suffer than that 1 innocent not suffer.

As I understand it, the fine print allows the board to wave a lot of the requirements and award a large part of the pay package anyway. And since the board is entirely under Musk’s control, that’s pretty much guaranteed to happen.

Too bad most of us have already been paying taxes and need to file in order to get a refund.

Surely this will get Donny his Nobel Peace Prize.

In this case, the order for the DoJ was about discovery relating to a motion to dismiss based on vindictive prosecution. If they fail to comply with the discovery process, the judge can simply grant the motion to dismiss.

Overidding his own administration after they agreed that that they can and will do the thing. Fighting in court to avoid doing the thing. Defying a court order to do the thing. All while blaming the democrats for his not doing of the thing.