SwingingTheLamp

That last but is almost NMEA 2000, which standardizes exactly that kind of information, but in boats. It's old enough that they based it on CANbus, but there are many repeater products to add IP devices (Ethernet, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth) to the network.

ETA: By which I mean to say, plenty of designs already exist in the marine market which could be used to bridge a car's CANbus to consumer devices, if they wanted to.

And, eliminate Euclidean zoning in the U.S., so that people can live near where they work, or work near where they live. (Not all of us can do it, or like working from home.)

Hmm, methinks that Anon (and all of us straight men) might do better by treating women as people. If we feel it's so important to have a cute girlfriend, then should we not respect that a woman might want a cute boyfriend? If we think women should keep an open mind about us, maybe set an example, and keep an open mind about non-physical traits that make a woman cute?

Yeah, it's always down to luck—that's just life—but being a good dude is putting your thumb on the scale in your own favor.

Well, the chief of police in my city did this (accidental discharge of gun in the oven) once, so make of that what you will. He did have the integrity to discipline himself, per department policy.

I think it makes sense in two ways: Some people in right-wing world think that women are property, without individual agency. If another man has been able to have sex with her, you have failed as a Real Man™ to protect what's rightfully yours, in the same way as you have failed if a fox gets into the henhouse.

Or, a Real Man™ is so good at sex that his wife doesn't want anybody else. Either way, being a "cuck" means you're not a Real Man™.

Add some fungus to that bacteria shit, and that's my favorite. Pair that with a yeast shit water, and it's heaven.

How about a government-sponsored, non-profit authentication service? That is, it should be impossible to get a loan, open a line of credit, or anything else in somebody's name, without the lending institution verifying that it's actually on behalf of the named individual. Eliminate the security-through-obscurity technique of using bits of easily-leaked personal information as a poor substitute for actual authentication.

I mean, (as a comparative example) I have to go through an OAuth2 consent dialog to connect a third-party app to my email account, yet somebody can saddle me with huge debts based on knowing a 9-digit number that just about everybody knows? It's the system that's broken, tightening up the laws on PII is just a band-aid.

Sorry, that I'm not certain of, since that's an installer-specific thing. I think I'd try that option first, and see if the installer lets you choose the empty drive.

Just spitballing here, but if I read this correctly, you pulled the Windows drive, installed Mint, and then put the Windows drive back in alongside the Mint drive? If so, that might be the issue.

UEFI firmware looks for a special EFI partition on the boot drive, and loads the operating system's own bootloader from there. The Windows drive has one. When you pulled the Windows drive to install Mint on another drive, Mint had to create an EFI partition on its disk to store its bootloader.

Then, when you put the Windows disk back in, there were two EFI partitions. Perhaps the UEFI firmware was looking for the Windows bootloader in the EFI partition on the Mint disk. It would of course not find it there. In my experience, Windows recovery is utterly useless in fixing EFI boot issues.

It's possible to rebuild the Windows EFI bootloader files manually, but since you don't mind blowing away both OS installs, I'd say just install Mint on the second drive while both of them are installed in the system, so the installer puts the Mint bootloader on the same EFI partition as the Windows one. With the advent of EFI, Windows will still sometimes blow away a Linux bootloader, but Linux installers are very good at installing alongside Windows. If it does get stuffed up, there's a utility called Boot-Repair, that you can put on a USB disk, that works a lot better than Windows recovery.

Paved roads don't just naturally occur, though. That lifestyle is already an insane prospect, unsustainabke but for the large tax subsidy required to enable it.

I live in the U.S. That comment is 100% true, no matter where one lives.

This is madness, but since this is a hobby project and not a production server, there is a way:

• Shrink the filesystems on the existing disks to free up as much space as possible, and shrink their partitions.
• Add a new partition to each of the three disks, and make a RAID5 volume from those partitions.
• Move as many files as possible to the new RAID5 volume to free up space in the old filesystems.
• Shrink the old filesystems/partitions again.
• Expand each RAID component partition one at a time by removing it from the array, resizing it into the empty space, and re-adding it to the array, giving plenty of time for the array to rebuild.
• Move files, shrink the old partitions, and expand the new array partitions as many times as needed until all the files are moved.

This could take several days to accomplish, because of the RAID5 rebuild times. The less free space, the more iterations and the longer it will take.