Russ Allbery: California general election
As normal, probably of direct interest only to California residents and
apologies to everyone else since my hand-rolled blog software doesn't do
cut tags. I'm only going to cover propositions, since the state-wide
elections aren't very interesting and I both don't have strong opinions
about the local elections and would guess that almost no one cares.
See the voter guide for the full
details on each proposition.
Propositions 16 through 19 were put on the ballot by the legislature and
thus were written as well as our regular laws. The remaining propositions
are initiatives, which means I default to voting against them because
they're usually poorly-written crap.
Proposition 14: NO. I reluctantly supported the original
proposition to fund stem cell research with state bonds because it was in
the middle of the George W. Bush administration and his weird obsession
with ending stem cell research. It seemed worth the cost to maintain the
research, and I don't regret doing this. But since then we've reached a
compromise on ongoing research, and this proposition looks a lot more like
pork spending than investment.
I am in favor of government support of basic research, but I think that's
best done by a single grant institution that can pursue a coherent agenda.
The federal government, when sane, does a decent job of this, and the
California agency created by the previous proposition looks dodgy. The
support for this proposition also comes primarily from research
institutions that benefit from it. On top of that, there are way higher
priorities right now for public investment than a very specific and
limited type of medical research that isn't even the most important type
of medical research to do right now. There is nothing magic about stem
cells other than the fact that they make a certain type of Republican lose
their minds. It's time to stop funding this specific research specially
and roll it into general basic research funding.
Proposition 15: YES. Yes to anything that repeals Proposition 13
in whole or in part. Repealing it for commercial and industrial real
estate is a good first step. A rare exception in my general rule to vote
against initiatives.
Proposition 16: YES. Reverses a bad law to outlaw affirmative
action in California. I am in favor of actual reparations, so I am of
course in favor of this, which is far, far more mild.
Proposition 17: YES. Restores voting rights to felons after
completion of their sentence. I think it's inexcusable that any US
citizen cannot vote, including people who are currently incarcerated, so
of course I'm in favor of this more mild measure. (You may notice a
theme.) When we say everyone should be able to vote, that should mean
literally everyone.
Proposition 18: YES. Allows 17-year-olds to vote in California
(but not federal) elections in some specific circumstances. I'm generally
in favor of lowering the voting age, and this seems inoffensive. (And the
arguments against it are stupid.)
Proposition 19: YES. This is a complicated legislative
compromise around property tax that strengthens property tax limits for
seniors moving within California while removing exemptions against
increases for inherited real estate not used as a primary home. Some
progressives are opposed to this because it doesn't go far enough and
increases exemptions for seniors. I agree that those exemptions aren't
needed and shouldn't be added, but closing the inheritance loophole is
huge and worth this compromise. It's a tepid improvement for the somewhat
better, but it's still worth approving (and was written by the
legislature, so it's somewhat better written than the typical initiative).
Proposition 20: NO. Another pile of "anyone who has ever
committed a crime deserves to be treated as subhuman" bullshit. Typical
harsher sentences and harsher parole nonsense. No to everything like
this, always.
Proposition 21: YES. This is my other exception of voting for an
initiative, and that's because the California state legislature is
completely incapable of dealing with any housing problem.
This is a proposition that overhauls an ill-conceived state-wide
restriction on how rent control can be handled. The problem with rent
control is that a sane solution to housing problems in this state requires
both rent control and massive new construction, and we only get the former
and not the latter because the NIMBYism is endemic. (There's a pile of
NIMBY crap on my local ballot this year.) I would much rather be
approving those things together, because either of them alone makes things
worse for a lot of people. So yes, the opponents of this proposition are
right: it will make the housing crisis worse, because everyone refuses to
deal with the supply side.
That said, we need rent control as part of a humane solution, and the
current state-wide rules are bad. For example, they disallow rent control
on every property newer than a certain date that's forever fixed. This
initiative replaces that with a much saner 15-year rolling window for
maximizing profit, which is a better balance.
I hate voting for this because the legislature should have done their job
and passed comprehensive housing reform. But since they didn't, this is
part of what they should have passed, and I'll vote for it. Particularly
since it's opposed by all the huge commercial landlords.
Proposition 22: NO. The "exclude Uber and Lyft from labor law"
proposition, which is just as bullshit as it sounds. They're spending all
of their venture capital spamming the crap out of everyone in the state to
try to get this passed by lying about it. Just stunningly evil companies.
If your business model requires exploiting labor, get a better business
model.
Proposition 23: NO. So, this is another mess. It appears to be
part of some unionization fight between dialysis clinic employees and the
for-profit dialysis clinics. I hate everything about this situation,
starting from the fact that we have such a thing as for-profit dialysis
clinics, which is a crime against humanity.
But this proposition requires some very dodgy things, such as having a
doctor on staff at every clinic for... reasons? This is very reminiscent
of the bullshit laws about abortion clinics, which are designed to make it
more expensive to operate a clinic for no justifiable reason. I'm happy
to believe there is a bit more justification here, but this sort of
regulation is tricky and should be done by the legislature in a normal
law-making process. Medical regulation by initiative is just a horrible
idea in every way. So while I am doubtless politically on the side of the
proponents of the proposition, this is the wrong tool. Take it to the
legislature.
Proposition 24: NO. A deceptively-written supposed consumer
privacy law written by tech companies that actually weakens consumer
privacy in some critical ways that are profitable for them. No thanks,
without even getting to the point that this sort of thing shouldn't be
done by initiative.
Proposition 25: YES. Yes, we should eliminate cash bail, which
is essentially imprisoning people for being poor. No, this doesn't create
a system of government profiling; judges already set bail and can revoke
bail for flight risks. (This is not legislation by initiative; the state
government already passed this law, but we have a dumb law that lets
people oppose legislative action via initiative, so we have to vote to
approve the law that our representatives already passed and that should
have already gone into effect.)
The main point is: run the initial script and the later updates in the same configuration, which means the target branch needs to be reset to the upstream branch each time, before it's rewritten again by
Recently I've been writing a couple of simple compilers, which take input in a particular format and generate assembly language output. This output can then be piped through

The KDE Plasma desktop is soon getting an update to 5.20, and
There are lots of new features mentioned in the
I have been providing builds of KDE related packages since quite some time now, see everything posted under the 
This month I started working on ways to make hosting access easier for Debian Developers. I also did some work and planning for the
This
A few quick updates on
Here is my monthly update covering what I have been doing in the free software world during September 2020 (
Before and during FOSDEM 2020, I agreed with the people (developers, supporters, managers) of the UBports Foundation to package the Unity8 Operating Environment for Debian. Since 27th Feb 2020, Unity8 has now become Lomiri.
Recent Uploads to Debian related to Lomiri
Over the past 4 months I worked on the following bits and pieces regarding Lomiri in Debian:
For almost a decade, I ve been very slowly making progress on a multicast IPTV
system. Recently I ve made a significant leap forward in this project, and I
wanted to write a little on the topic so I ll have something to look at when I
pick this up next. I was aspiring to have a useable system by the end of today,
but for a couple of reasons, it wasn t possible.
When I started thinking about this project, it was still common to watch
broadcast television. Over time the design of this system has been changing as
new technologies have become available. Multicast IP is probably the only
constant, although I m now looking at IPv6 rather than IPv4.
Initially, I d been looking at DVB-T PCI cards.
Two Raspberry Pis with DVB hats installed, TV antenna sockets showing
Two years ago, I held the
Welcome to the 30th post in the rarified R recommendation resources series or