Assuming that OP is correct in everything, it isn't shown anywhere that swap must reside in persistent storage. It could be stored in RAM, couldn't it? I mean you always have a fixed max amount of swap, so if it fits in memory , then why not put it in memory? But then why bother with swap?
depending on OS and upper limit, yeah RAM all the way. But I suspect the kernel doesn't think like that. I know that OSX does things differently, so perhaps there are better ways
While we are at it, just off the top of my head, lets make it required to include at least one bald person, at least one person with blood type AB, and at least one person with freckles. We shouldnt descriminate against them should we?
These are board members. They are not hired in the first place, and generally need to be re-appointed every few years. This law has been slowly ratcheting up, so either people have simply been not re-appointed to the board, or they have increased the size of the board to include new members who were chosen from more diverse backgrounds.
It doesn't mean that at all. You can hire a black person and not fire anyone. They may choose to fire someone, but given these are board positions, and it literally takes just one person -- they can easily accommodate simply hiring someone.
If that was the literal rule (you had to fire a white male) then yes, I would be against it. The intent isn't to be spiteful against white males. It's to give space at the table for other groups that are intentionally excluded due to their race.
>Moreover, as the self-appointed facilitators of the new self-government of the online global population,32 currently there is little that would prevent the leading social media platforms from using and canalizing this civic power for the goals they see fit – much like a government with the difference that governments are subject to democratic oversight..
2 things on the above:
First point, self-appointed does not matter. It is just a declaration. What matters is that people/users themselves turned this declaration into a fact. So, second point, platforms are subject to democratic oversight: Like you control your vote, you control your keyboard or mouse that clicks the sign-up button or accepts the TOS, you control the mouth and the fingers that propagate the information, and the brain that consumes it.
I really dislike it when people , by their own actions, become dependent on a service someone else offers in such a degree that they feel they are now entitled to the service and that it is now a public good. They strive to establish and cement this dependence on their own terms, assigning now the responsibility of maintaining it to the offerer (again on their own terms). That's the relationship between a spoiled child and its parents, not between a man and the society.
