I recently switched my laptop to Garuda, it's an Arch based gaming distro. It seems to mostly work right out of the box, but I did have to tweak a few steam games to force them to use my dedicated graphics.
I guess I could go in and force steam itself to use the graphics card via env... But I only have a handful of large games at the moment. It's just as easy to set the requirement per game right now.
Never. They use the same spacing between degrees. The Kelvin scale was derived from the Celsius scale, just placing the 0° at absolute zero rather than at the freezing point of water.
The vast majority of ocean plastic comes from fishing boats, we're just told it's from land based sources so that major factory fishing firms can continue to pollute but make you feel guilty for dropping a straw in the trashcan.
I'd take things a bit further than just communism. I'd imagine a world where farm and factory are all largely automated and publicly owned.
Anyone who wants a role has one, but no one is punished for not. Housing and food are guaranteed to all, as are most small luxuries.
Want to make the world a better place? Do it. Science and Tech would be fully funded. Want to sit around and just sort of live? Sure, you get UBI.
The only work places not owned by the workers would be the ones owned by government. If it's an essential service, it's government owned and government operated. If it's for fun, then sure, let some people get together and work toward making something fun.
Another change; copyright and patent law would be maxed at 14 years. That number has actually been shown to be when 97% of the profit is made on most copyrighted work. This one change would open up so much potential for public domain creativity.
I'd allow for continuing trademark of character, if they were in continuing use. i.e. a sort of serialization exemption to the copyright limits. If the author keeps putting out new material, they get to keep a form of control over their works, but if they stop, then it's all public domain.
I may have put a lot of thought into this over the years, and parts would still likely need to be adjusted during implementation.
Every single fault of RCV is present in STV, but because it's a multi-winner format, the complexity and lack of transparency in the counting process are far worse.
If you really want proportional or multi-winner elections, then a better option is this.
It's based off of Score the same way that STAR is, but tweaked to be multi-winner.
The main problem with colonizing places is the displacement of the people already living there. You'll notice that space is notorious for not having people. It's one of the defining traits of space, really.
As to staying where we are, well. That comes with all sorts of issues. The first of which are big rocks. Then there's gamma ray bursts, and coronal mass ejections, and a host of other potentially life ending things that could hit our planet at any time.
We have all of our eggs in one basket. This is the height of stupidity when we could do something about it.
As to fixing our own planet? Why the fuck do you think we can't also work on that? There are billions of humans, we can surely multitask. Especially since actually living on the moon or Mars or whatnot will be a monumentally hard task in and of itself.
The first moon base will need to be 100% science to figure out some pretty important biology, like is it even possible to maintain a population at 1/6 Earth gravity.
That's a huge question that we don't actually have an answer for.
The difference between RCV (also called IRV) and STAR is the difference between an Ordinal system and a Cardinal system.
An Ordinal system is a ranked system. Chose one or the other, but never both. A vote for A means you cannot also support B. This lead to some math shit that actually gives preferential treatment to two party systems.
RCV claims to support third parties and solve the spoiler effect. The truth is the opposite in every way. It eliminates fringe parties that would spoil elections, but also falls prey to spoiler effects when you have very similar candidates. It's actually a mess.
STAR on the other hand is a Cardinal voting system. A vote for A is a vote for A and a Vote for B has no impact on A. A good example is saying that I give Chocolate Milkshakes 5 out of 5 stars and New Coke 1 out of 5. But here's the main difference to an Ordinal system, I can also give a Banana Smoothies 5 out of 5 stars. Because I'm rating them as individuals, not in comparison to each other.
STAR is literally a 5-star review of the candidates, and the two with the highest average (or just highest scores) are then put head to head. Each ballot is then looked at, if Chocolate Milkshakes are rated higher on any given ballot than Banana Smoothies, Milkshakes get the vote of that person. If they're the same, a vote of No Preference is logged, and the No Preference votes are also made public at the end.