Every GitLab instance requires you to have an account there to comment and submit PRs. Projects are often hosted on different instances.

that’s exactly why it’s not AI. AI wouldn’t replicate the glass half-reflection that well. and the background is clearly the outside forest, nobody’s having pinecones detritus and plants in their own basement except that greenthumbsman from _goosebumps _

in fact i pine over its shining beauty

i don’t remember

seriously though maybe try the cozy-ish social game Sky: Children of the Light.

Regressive taxes are far, far more cost efficient than means testing. And like I said, the costs saved by eliminating fare are already factored in. They’re $33 million per year, and I added an extra $52 million on top of that for good measure.

Intel Arc discrete GPUs released 2022

Also, what does this have to do with means testing?

What is the point you’re trying to make here?

If you don’t include them then the cost is gonna be higher than $600 million. My point that it won’t pay for itself and has to suck up funds that could’ve been used for infrastructure remains.

Yeah that’s already factored in as savings and thus deducted from the costs:

The cost of eliminating fares from all city buses would likely be north of $700 million – an MTA analysis from 2022 put the cost for fiscal year 2026 at $778 million, Mamdani’s campaign said. A separate analysis on free local bus service from the city Independent Budget Office incorporated savings that fare-free bus rides would produce, including on fare enforcement and collection costs, totaling $33 million per year. They found the total cost would be $652 million.

I already deducted an extra $52 million for a good-looking number. Whatever the independent analysis didn’t think of is not likely to go beyond this $52 million.

seems like a joke copycat of nicole

edit: profile looks like a troll

I don’t think that’s gonna cover much of the $600 million after eliminating fare enforcement costs.

What do we feel about eliminating bus fares? It’ll definitely improve quality of life for drivers, riders, and new riders, but how they’re going to pay for that feels like a giant missed opportunity in improving rail and the subway.

Still, he has more influence than an assemblyman, board appointees, and a pulpit.

If it’s just an unchanging “no” and strongly in favor of not having the status quo go anywhere, I would indeed say that is “not leading anywhere”. Not changing what people think and how things were before is “not leading anywhere”.

nobody can’t just say “but the developers are working really hard”, or “a bunch of people actually use it” and make it all suddenly go away

That’s not what anyone’s saying either. AHemlocksLie said the article—instead of saying “we know better what the users want”—expresses frustration at caring and working a ton at (blind) accessibility only for people to say GNOME devs don’t care about (blind) accessibility; nowhere did they say that makes GNOME accessibility good. In the context of us understanding what AHemlocksLie said, I think it’s not aberating that we interpreted your reply the way we did.

squaresinger said what you think you said in their last reply. Look at the positive response to them.

You’re not criticizing. You’re saying “no matter how much people try to improve this, this will always be objectively worthless, because this is objectively worthless”. Nobody said you’re not allowed to criticize GNOME. Criticism includes specific directions to improve on and does not involve neglecting the size of the userbase to claim your personal preferences extend to objective truth.