DerpyBaby123

I think the comment you replied to was being facetious

From their 'about' page:

NASASpaceFlight is not affiliated with and does not represent the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). NASA initials used with NASA’s permission.

>In any other branch of government and any other court with the federal judicial branch, he would at minimum be required to disclose those gifts.

I believe that SCOTUS justices are also required to do these disclosures, FTA:

>His failure to report the flights appears to violate a law passed after Watergate that requires justices, judges, members of Congress and federal officials to disclose most gifts, two ethics law experts said. He also should have disclosed his trips on the yacht, these experts said.

It's not relevant or insightful unless you and your buddies have a shared conflict of interest, and are influential in public life. This is corruption at the highest level.

You claim deplatforming has been in a Democratic playbook "for years", then cite the introduction of a WH DGB which opened and closed this year, after being open for less than a month

>Do you think sources for these easily-googleable facts don't exist

>does the Democratic party want this sort of censorship against other people, and they self-evidently do

People ask for these "easily-googeable facts", and your response is 1 link to something not really relevant, and an assertion that it is "self-evident". Apologies if not everyone finds this to be a convincing argument

>Or are you somehow implying the White House is not run by Democrats?

Of course not, this is obvious?

>You're fine with Gavin Newsom, a Democrat, banning advertisements from gun manufacturers and retailers, presumably pro-gun, but you have a problem with Hulu not wanting advertisements that are anti-gun.

I may or may not be fine with either of those things, why do you assert something you don't know?

So far you've demonstrated an inability to source the information in your original claim, "this sort of deplatforming hadn't been part of [Democrat's] playbook for years."

>ban ads for firearms

Source? That sounds like a law to regulate advertisements, not a deplatforming

>Google and Facebook already ban that as well

This is irrelevant - these are not Democratic organizations, and they do not have Democratic policies. Are you somehow implying Google and Facebook are run by Democrats, and so supposedly Hulu is run by Republicans?

>"Noon" when the sun is at the highest point, can vary over an hour across a timezone.

this is "solar noon" - just "noon" denotes 12:00 on the clock [1]

[1]https://www.bsu.edu/academics/centersandinstitutes/ceres/hel...

>exactly this sort of deplatforming hadn't been part of their own playbook for years.

Can you source this, repeated examples of Democratic policies to deplatform ideas?

I do not know enough to answer about that question, nor to say if Plato even makes that link honestly. I think you're arguing with my summary.

Imagine if I'd edited it to read: 'choosing to stay within the bounds of the government, and enjoying the benefits'

Sovereign citizens do enjoy the benefits of the US state, do not reject them nor make strides at moving away from them (from anything I've read).

Do "sovereign citizens" make to overcome those restrictions on movement? Is there any effort given?

Plato's Crito[1] deals directly with this question, after Socrates has been found guilty and sentenced to death for 'Corrupting the youth', his friends offer to help him leave the city rather than die.

To paraphrase, Socrates says "Though not explicitly, I have by my actions agreed to be ruled by the laws of Athens by carrying out my life here and not choosing to move away to somewhere with a different set of laws"

[1]http://www.columbia.edu/itc/lithum/wong/textclip.html @ [52b]

I believe Plato will say they consented to be governed by this state, not at birth, but throughout their life by choosing to stay in a place that is governed by this state and enjoying the benefits.

Not op, but I can imagine it would be easy to be in the 'bottom' tier of an industry by revenue/sales/etc - if I want to be credited, just make a tiny barely functioning company and collect the credits

Many people in the populace would have supported it, look at how many now even today deny that it was a riot aimed at disrupting the peaceful transition of power of the government.

If they didn't do a good enough job at it, it doesn't mean it didn't happen.

I agree that it may be probable, on the evidence that the angry crowd built a gallows and was chanting 'Hang Mike Pence'

[0]https://www.ourquadcities.com/news/national-news/capitol-mob...

I didn't say that at all. However, taking control of the government is exactly how coups are executed, please look into it if you haven't.

It doesn't just do that, it pushes you more and more into specific niches. It doesn't have to do that either, but Youtube has designed it to do it, to put users into the famous Youtube Rabbit Hole.

This rabbit hole encourages extremism in some people, and that can be harmful to society. Why the defeatist attitude, that huge companies have to encourage extremism or people will stop using their products? That's non-sensical

"Nearly Died" yes, because the leadership guiding the riot wasn't particularly competent. If they had control of more institutions, it would likely have been more successful.

When saying "any other show of power other than that they managed to break through a few weakly-secured doors" you downplay the fact they the rioters interrupted a session of Congress and succeeded in their purpose of delaying the certification of election results.

Why do you jump to that conclusion? Youtube's algo is long suspected of pushing more and more extreme/radical content, and the comittee seems to be looking for more information on if that process affected the Jan 6 riot

That's not looking for a scapegoat; it's looking for a set of root causes

Maybe so, although he has been featuring other authors on his blog regularly now. He works with them to keep the quality high, check them out.

I think you're referring to a different piece of software, Windows 11

I got words that do exist, for example "high-performance motor"[1] and "retrogradeness"

[1]https://l.thisworddoesnotexist.com/sxFD

That's fine, I guess, for a silly website - but it's not hard for me to imagine a company taking this idea, "AI/ML created X" and selling X's, even copyrighting them... when X already exists in the real world

This is a curse of many highly influential works, they seem unoriginal after experiencing the works it influenced first[1].

[1]https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/SeinfeldIsUnfunn...

>a break and oil change is a simple DIY task

Agree, the argument is that many tasks on Teslas should be simple DIY tasks but Tesla has engineered away access so that they are no longer simple DIY tasks. As you quoted FTA: "Many basic repairs are impossible to do on its cars because of software locks"

See what some Tesla owners reported for bills for bills for brake replacements, which should be cheap and DIY-able, about $8500[1]

[1] https://teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/threads/ouch-first-huge-repa...

I think it is right, as a result of winning the Nobel Prize, she received significant coverage in multiple published sources. At least, I don't see any current wikipedia sources from before the time she was recognized as a Nobel winner.

From wikipedia[1]: >People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject.

From this definition, it seems you can't 'earn yourself notibility' directly, except as to earn it indirectly by having independent reliable sources publish about you.

[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_(people)#...

But make sure to do it in a new tab, because it breaks the back button

It opened for me in firefox on mac, but it broke the back button

Yes, the first is a literal cost, you lose something you used to be able to use.

The second is the cost of a degraded system of instagram messaging

Let me summarize through quotes:

>This is not an update, but a new messaging system from which you can’t switch back.

> These are simply features presented to artificially devalue one of the systems, distract from the real changes, and manipulate users into changing to a different system.

> this change will eventually link to your real name.

Yes there is expertise and capital costs involved, which make it not an arbitrage play. It is more like a cartel, which seems to explain what is going on here, with the 3 insulin producing companies all fixing their prices together (at least in the US)

In theory there is 'nothing' stopping another company from coming along, even a group of Biohackers may try to do something - I wonder if that's been done... :)