Oh right that makes more sense, here’s me looking it up on Wikipedia and thinking it has to do with American cowboy films or something.

Genuine question: what’s “American shot” and how are we paying for it?

Of course, there it is, they took their time on that one. It does kind of undermine the argument against the BBC though by posting fake quotes while waiting for the actual evidence.

What’s interesting is the BBC article from two years ago about the case contains much less bias.

That doesn’t contain the quote and was released months ago.

It’s not that I disagree with @BigMacHole@thelemmy.club 's sentiment here, I just think it’s bad to misattribute a quote like that, there’s enough misinformation going around as it is.

Was looking more for a link to an article. If they actually said that about the tribunal, that would be unhinged even by BBC’s standards.

Where did you see that?

It’s dangerous, yes, but why put any weight on anything he says? He lies all the time. If Trump says a boulder is about to fall on my head I wouldn’t believe it. Beyond that I don’t really care much about “American discourse” if it doesn’t involve getting rid of Trump.

Trump says a lot of things…

Good, that’s the only way to play this one.

The other alternatives: if all parties had contested it would split the vote. Any united progressive candidate would have trouble winning in Clacton. An all-party backed opposition candidate would have been unlikely and would easily be painted as “the establishment” by Farage.

As things are: an independent novelty candidate might actually have the best chance, small as it may be, of beating Farage if they can capture all the protest vote (the absolute majority of Clacton didn’t vote Farage in the last election). Or worst, most likely, case Farage wins a hollow victory unopposed by major parties, he hasn’t made his point, things stay the same only now he’s seen as wasting everyone’s time.

I don’t, really, separate issues.

People this slow are running our country…

Haha, brilliant, on cue!

Critics, though, have described the decision as “bonkers” or “not their finest hour”, lamenting the removal of iconic figures like Churchill in favour of creatures such as otters or badgers.

That’s a really silly take, but predictable, designs have always rotated every 10-15 years or so. The Churchill note has only been around since 2016 for instance so is coming up due to be replaced. Just that this time it’ll be nature instead of another historic figure, if it turns out they’re better to prevent counterfeiting then that’s the obvious choice since that’s the reason they’re rotated. No doubt the usual not-too-bright suspects won’t understand any of that and call it “woke” I’m sure.

I get a lot of value from YouTube that I would happily pay for, and I already pay for online services that respect me but I wouldn’t pay a company that treats users like they do. It’s not the ads I have a problem with, it’s the tracking of users. They could have ads on their website that don’t track users. You can subscribe to premium and presumably they don’t show you ads, but they still track you. If they didn’t do that I would happily pay them.

YouTube has ads?

My usual experience with non-computer people is that they really couldn’t care less and glaze over at any discussion of software choices what so ever. I’ve given up even trying to tell them for the most part. If you’re not required to use specific software by your employer (thankfully I’m not), then just use what you want and nobody will care, at least in my experience.

It’s not as impressive as last year unfortunately, to me anyway, most are just briefly on the horizon, but Jupiter is still nice and bright.

Since you asked, I thought the article seemed like a bit of a gossipy tangent of the more serious story of the day, and voted against it, it’s just a vote, not a monarchist, the opposite, just got fed up with too much monarchy for one day.

deleted by creator

Because in 20+ years of off and on using linux, I’ve never once gotten apt to install anything. I have however fucked up my whole system by doing sudo apt update/sudo apt upgrade.

Sorry but that’s really not typical, you must have been doing something out of the ordinary or been very unlucky.

I didn’t say I want to know why it needs them. I’m upset it tells me that it tells me it needs them, and then says “they won’t be installed”, but won’t tell me WHY they won’t be installed. If the program needs those dependancies, just install them. Instead it juat says “we know you need the dependancies, but we’re not going to do that”.

It’s the package manager that handles dependencies, not the program you’re trying to install. Random programs shouldn’t be able to just install things on your computer. Did you try installing the dependencies?