• 0 Posts
  • 137 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: March 11th, 2024

help-circle


  • Uh, no it’s not.

    It is. As a result of the Epic Games v. Google, Android builds with the Play Store are required to allow users to install apps without any warning at all. They obviously can’t allow any app to be installed without a warning because this would be a boon to malware authors, so this is now enabled with verification. You can now even share apps you build with your friends without requiring them to go through an unverified apps flow with a scary warning. Additionally, Google is not allowed to take a revenue cut from those installs.

    You’re confused because the install process for apps that are not verified (a path that didn’t exist before at all) or installed from a system app store has changed. This now has to be done with adb, which takes effect immediately, or via an on-phone process that takes a day to complete. Once it is done, this setting is copied to new phones, so the process actually becomes easier for most people who do this because they don’t have to go through the process repeatedly.





  • Which “the people” are you talking about? Sanders had much more support with “the people” (i.e. voters in general), but was unable to get that support from “the people” in the core of the Democratic Party (i.e. the folks who actually decide who the nominee is going to be).

    The primary voters. They’re not “the core of the Democratic Party.” They’re just regular voters. The people, if you will. The DNC decides who the nominee will be based on the votes of the people in the primaries. The people overwhelmingly voted for Clinton.


  • Okay, so they gave us Clinton by a double-digit percentage margin. That makes it worse, not better.

    The DNC didn’t give us that. The people did. Winkly’s claim was that Sanders was the people’s choice. The votes show that Clinton was actually the people’s choice, by a wide margin.

    For example, my primary ballot only had two options: “Biden” and “uncommitted”.

    The point remains that he was the people’s choice. In races where he ran against only one other option like yours, the margin of victory was even larger. The DNC did not bar anybody from running in that primary.

    Who do you claim was the people’s choice, if not the candidate who got the most votes?


  • obviously the people’s choice for candidate

    The people voted for Clinton over Sanders by a double digit percentage margin. It wasn’t even close.

    For comparison, Obama actually lost the reported popular vote in the 2008 primaries, but this includes a Michigan race that he dropped out of because Michigan moved its primaries forward in violation of DNC rules. Excluding Michigan, Obama won the popular vote by a 0.1% margin, increasing to 0.4% with estimated votes in states that had caucuses instead.

    did it again with Harris

    Biden won the 2024 primary by a more than 80 percent margin.

    The people’s choice was clear in both instances. When Biden dropped out, the people’s choice for a replacement wasn’t clear, but there was no path to rerun the primary, so they had to pick somebody who was closest to what the people had voted for in order to get closest to the people’s choice, which was a continuation of the Biden administration.





  • Never too late to get better at anything. I’ll give it my best shot, but if it still doesn’t make sense, ask an LLM to explain anything that doesn’t make sense, and keep digging, and you’ll know it inside and out.

    Basically, if the price was p currency units and is now 29% off, the price is now p-.29p = (1-.29)p currency units (by the distributive property). The old price is .29p currency units higher than the new price, and as a fraction of the new price, that is .29p/[(1-.29)p] higher. The p’s cancel out, so this fraction does not depend on the starting price. Write that fraction as a percent (per 100), and you get your answer.