Why do your share how much you hate yourself over and over?
Businesses can throw out assholes whenever they want and that includes social media platforms throwing out anybody that they don't want there. And the court case you're claiming as a victory has already been so eviscerated on appeal that the vast majority of it was struck down and the applying it to all the federal government was struck down and now that literally one remaining aspect of it only applies to the president a few other people.
90%+ of adults use porn. Porn has existed for thousands of years. Nothing is going to change the human nature of horniness. You're welcome to pretend you're above it all, but forcing others to follow your deranged, humanity denying path is absurd.
How can a voluntary program be forced anything?
They'd be much better off monitoring child pageants, which is where you'll actually find groomers and child predators in positions of power. But the right would never ban those twisted festivals that literally exploit children because reasons ordained and only knowable by God.
George Soros is the final villain of Baldur's Gate 3! Muahaha, I've spoiled the game for all of y'all!!!
Nope, you're proving out point that is our right to not have to listen to your nonsense. And following your logic, I should be able to go into conservative churches and preach the liberal gospel of Jesus and if they try to stop me that'd be oppressing my freedom of speech.
I think news companies should pay me for reading their news. The logic is for such payments is as sound as the logic for forcing Meta and Google to pay to host the links of news stories that they don't even post themselves.
Magical thinking--infinite growth can happen within a finite system--summons zombified businesses, which is a business that is mindlessly devouring the source of its income aka enshitification. It doesn't make any sense but Team Senseless has the momentum of a gauss cannon's fired payload in that thousands of billionaires continuously support the system that made them billionaires.
If somebody is willing to stage a coup to stay in power they're most certainly also willing to flee America to escape justice. That's not unreasonable at all.
The government has to respond to every single FOIA request made no matter how absurd because any citizen can make such requests and there's little barrier to make such a request, basically a computer with an internet connection. A corporation being asked to comply with a court order is dealing with a very narrow situation where there is a huge barrier to filing a request in that you have to hire attorneys to do the work if you want a judge to take it seriously. A judge will notice a per se filing pretty quickly and has discretion to dismiss the request because it's clear the applicant doesn't understand the law. The government doesn't have that kind of "this is clearly written by somebody with no knowledge of the law" discretion when it comes to complying with FOIA. You're comparing apples and electrons. Thinking government should somehow mimic business is an erroneous assumption not based in reality. A business has responsibilities to its shareholders, governments have responsibilities to all its citizens.
The butt plug that is your brain has fallen on the floor yet again.
That logic would conclude with it being ok for somebody to own a nuclear weapon because the government does.
When it comes to the GDP, unemployment and income growth Democratic presidents have done immensely better than Republican presidents in the last century. Just like how the blue states subsidize red states when it comes to federal funds while the red staters pretend they're pulling themselves up by their bootstraps while getting subsidies from blue states. Or how the murder rate is much higher in red states than it is in blue states. CA has less than 5 deaths per 100,000 residents while in Missouri they have over 22 deaths per 100,000 people. The Democrats may not be the best but they're immensely better than the party that doesn't believe in facts, respecting all the citizens of America (let alone all the citizens of the world) or does believe that violence is a legitimate solution to political issues.
Houston heard your complaints and is now busy converting over two dozen libraries into disciplinary centers for "problem" students. Sadly, that's not a joke, I'm clarifying because I often post snarky things. Their governor is behind it and everybody in Houston is against it.
It's all part of the Lizard People's grand plot to depopulate the Earth of humans but now that you've discovered this they're destined to failure. You have saved all of humanity!1!! Congratulations!!!!
The word rigged sets the tone because it is accurate. Good job whiteknighting for a Bond villain billionaire, he truly needs your invaluable help.
It's not TD's fault the Musk is such an out of control walking disaster that his every other utterance is so ludicrous it demands to be noticed, by design from Musk, and therefore covered. The article at Ars said other EVs actually under promised range so drivers ended up happy with unexpected extra mileage while Tesla did the opposite because Musk insisted that drivers feel good about their range when they drive off the lot as opposed to feeling good when they actually use the car on a regular basis. It's an idiotic choice. Musk's decision allows the customer to feel good once when they drive off the lot that they're getting more mileage than they will actually get. But then in real life experiences they get less than promised while with the other tested EVs were smart and gave their owners bonus miles every time they used it because it under promised how many miles it could go. Musk is a moron and billionaire moron is something that people are going to cover relentlessly because we're enjoying watching his self immolation. You want to see the articles cease? Convince Musk to act like a decent, rational human being that can admit to making mistakes so they can course correct. He doesn't have to initiate "censorship that we love and miss" for this to happen, he just has to stop being so damn stupid.
I have a feeling we're being vigilant enough to make the level of noise required to get noticed so that those Democrats, who think they're doing the right thing, will take the time to listen and learn that they're being duped, That places like the Heritage Foundation have come out declared they will use KOSA to get all discussions of LGBTQIA+ information banned as indecent for children placing all queer discussions behind an 18+ only legally mandated gate.
I'm really disappointed this article didn't mention fractional liability. A trial can legally determine that, for instance, 80% of the responsibility is the property owner who didn't install barriers that couldn't easily be moved/stolen by vandals, 15% is the local government for not insuring barriers were in place if the property owner didn't put them there and 5% belongs to Google for not updating its maps. Too many people in the comments are arguing about who is ultimately responsible but that's not how it works. Not mentioning this allows people to conveniently think since Google has the least liability, obviously, they shouldn't be held responsible for their negligence. Other facts missing: Waze, owned by Google, had the correct information that the bridge was out at the time of the accident. Bing Maps also had the right information at the time of the accident. Competitors maps knew the correct information and Google was warned their incorrect information was dangerous. Whether or not Google is responsible will be decided by a court but it's definitely not clear cut Google isn't responsible and that's why they're being sued with the other people. And because they can found liable just not for 100% of the damages because, clearly, Google isn't the primary reason this happened. Nonetheless, if their map information was correct it would have never routed the driver over the bridge and he would in turn would have never died because he would have taken a different, safe route. Also, another article point, the picture Masnick used to make his assumptions wasn't taken from the time of year of the accident and were in fact taken at a different time of the year when vegetation would be more prevalent. Finally, we don't know what speed the driver was driving or what precautions he took. Given that it was night, with no street lights and it was raining an out bridge could easily not be seen until it's too late. This was nowhere near the driving into the lake during daylight scene in The Office. Everybody pretending it couldn't happen to them because they're safe drivers are deluding themselves as attentive, safe drivers die all the time in accidents. Less often than inattentive drivers, for sure, but being a safe driver isn't a magic talisman against the chaos of life that cannot be predicted like driving in the dark in the rain and not seeing a bridge is out until its too late. You can pretend you have preternatural skills and would've seen it because you're such a safe driver but reality says otherwise.