...device. In particular, the distinction between A and B was based on where on the physical bus things were plugged in. In the HP machine mentioned above, for example, there was one 3.5" floppy, which was drive A: 2/2
January 11, 2026 at 1:31 AM
...device. In particular, the distinction between A and B was based on where on the physical bus things were plugged in. In the HP machine mentioned above, for example, there was one 3.5" floppy, which was drive A: 2/2
I started using computers at age 5, 1985. By 1995, my parents owned a TRS-80, an Atari ST, a SunOS 4.1.3 workstation, and a Windows 3.11 PC from Hewlett Packard.
The distinction between A, B, and C drives, in addition to being purely a Microsoft thing, was not entirely driven by the type of... 1/
The distinction between A, B, and C drives, in addition to being purely a Microsoft thing, was not entirely driven by the type of... 1/
January 11, 2026 at 1:31 AM
I started using computers at age 5, 1985. By 1995, my parents owned a TRS-80, an Atari ST, a SunOS 4.1.3 workstation, and a Windows 3.11 PC from Hewlett Packard.
The distinction between A, B, and C drives, in addition to being purely a Microsoft thing, was not entirely driven by the type of... 1/
The distinction between A, B, and C drives, in addition to being purely a Microsoft thing, was not entirely driven by the type of... 1/
That was not my experience at all. Hard disk was synonymous with hard drive, which were the stacked platters that lived in the computer permanently. 5.25" floppies were floppies, because they were floppy. 3.5" were also "floppies", because they were the v2 of the 5".
January 11, 2026 at 12:57 AM
That was not my experience at all. Hard disk was synonymous with hard drive, which were the stacked platters that lived in the computer permanently. 5.25" floppies were floppies, because they were floppy. 3.5" were also "floppies", because they were the v2 of the 5".
like "we should remove Maduro from power, but in a slower and more annoying way" 6/6
January 4, 2026 at 5:01 PM
like "we should remove Maduro from power, but in a slower and more annoying way" 6/6
...not because they actually believe it.
And, for the record, I do think Maduro is a bad guy, and also think that we should follow the constitution and international law, because the law matters.
But like I said, we live in a time of near universal corruption, so that sounds, effectively... 5/
And, for the record, I do think Maduro is a bad guy, and also think that we should follow the constitution and international law, because the law matters.
But like I said, we live in a time of near universal corruption, so that sounds, effectively... 5/
January 4, 2026 at 5:01 PM
...not because they actually believe it.
And, for the record, I do think Maduro is a bad guy, and also think that we should follow the constitution and international law, because the law matters.
But like I said, we live in a time of near universal corruption, so that sounds, effectively... 5/
And, for the record, I do think Maduro is a bad guy, and also think that we should follow the constitution and international law, because the law matters.
But like I said, we live in a time of near universal corruption, so that sounds, effectively... 5/
...losing debate for pro-gun advocates. This is why it's virtually impossible to dislodge them from talking about the 2nd Amendment: having an actual debate means they lose.
I'm suggesting that some of those who chose to defend Maduro are doing so for that same "win the argument" style reason... 4/
I'm suggesting that some of those who chose to defend Maduro are doing so for that same "win the argument" style reason... 4/
January 4, 2026 at 5:01 PM
...losing debate for pro-gun advocates. This is why it's virtually impossible to dislodge them from talking about the 2nd Amendment: having an actual debate means they lose.
I'm suggesting that some of those who chose to defend Maduro are doing so for that same "win the argument" style reason... 4/
I'm suggesting that some of those who chose to defend Maduro are doing so for that same "win the argument" style reason... 4/
...of the US Constitution, but are, in fact, always policy debates about what types of arms are legal for civilians to possess under what circumstances.
However, conceding that point means we're no longer having a debate about holy writ, we're having a debate about public policy, which is a... 3/
However, conceding that point means we're no longer having a debate about holy writ, we're having a debate about public policy, which is a... 3/
January 4, 2026 at 5:01 PM
...of the US Constitution, but are, in fact, always policy debates about what types of arms are legal for civilians to possess under what circumstances.
However, conceding that point means we're no longer having a debate about holy writ, we're having a debate about public policy, which is a... 3/
However, conceding that point means we're no longer having a debate about holy writ, we're having a debate about public policy, which is a... 3/
Which grants the broad ability to "bear arms." In practice, however, no pro-gun person actually believes in that as an unlimited rule: they have no problem with laws against the civilian possession of nuclear weapons, for example. So in fact, gun control arguments are not about the supremacy... 2/
January 4, 2026 at 5:01 PM
Which grants the broad ability to "bear arms." In practice, however, no pro-gun person actually believes in that as an unlimited rule: they have no problem with laws against the civilian possession of nuclear weapons, for example. So in fact, gun control arguments are not about the supremacy... 2/
I'm saying the "false dichotomy" is a political tactic, because conceding the aim (removing a dictator) means you're arguing over tactics (in favor of slow, procedural means).
The flip side of this is the argument over gun control in the US. The pro-gun side leans entirely on the constitution, 1/
The flip side of this is the argument over gun control in the US. The pro-gun side leans entirely on the constitution, 1/
January 4, 2026 at 5:01 PM
I'm saying the "false dichotomy" is a political tactic, because conceding the aim (removing a dictator) means you're arguing over tactics (in favor of slow, procedural means).
The flip side of this is the argument over gun control in the US. The pro-gun side leans entirely on the constitution, 1/
The flip side of this is the argument over gun control in the US. The pro-gun side leans entirely on the constitution, 1/
An alternative diagnosis. In an age of near-universal corruption, advocating that people follow the law, go to the UN, get a resolution, and respect the outcome of that process sounds like this:
January 4, 2026 at 3:45 PM
An alternative diagnosis. In an age of near-universal corruption, advocating that people follow the law, go to the UN, get a resolution, and respect the outcome of that process sounds like this: