flipht

Correct. Most states’ laws do not envision the situation we are currently seeing, let alone what’s coming.

Check your state. What constitutes harassment, and can you think of harassing things that could be done without violating the law? I can for my state.

deleted by creator

I think you’re right if the goal is to stop them all together.

But what we can do is stop people from sending them around and saying that it’s true/actually the person.

Once they’ve turned it from a art project into a weapon, it should have similar consequences to “revenge porn.”

Wonderful in theory, but in practice it’s a dumpster fire. Quick, mainstreamm-acceptable takes are incentived, and nuanced, alternative viewpoints are nearly impossible.

If it were all for hobby stuff, it would be fine, but when this is how most people get their news, it’s not good.

These folks won’t witness it either. Not with that eye anyway.

Not the original person you responded to, but I type 120ish wpm. The trick is to try to tap into the same part of your brain that verbalizes words when you talk, rather than the part that composes stuff when you write.

I don’t think you can expect rational discourse from a collective concern.

Some people will agree with you. Some people will disagree, because at the end of the day, if you’re willing to vote for someone even when they don’t do what you like, then they have no incentive to consider anything you like.

Neither position is wrong.

Our system, which sets up two bad options, is what’s wrong.

This is ultimately a false dichotomy. We operate as if there are only two options, because no one person has the power to fix this, but instead of recognizing that the system is broken, we blame each other for not going all in on what we all admit is problematic.

As with most things, “free market” is what they demand when they don’t get have access to the market or can’t command the whole market.

Once they have access or enough of a percentage to set the prices, suddenly the best thing is high barriers to entry and whatever else will help them maintain inelastic demand.

Very unlikely. There’s a statement at the bottom that explains what the fee is. There’s a QR code at the top for more information, which OP cut off.

I doubt they went through the effort of updating their POS system, providing links to info on the receipt, and chose not to post a sign or put a note on the menu. Everywhere I have been with a service fee like this posts it, which would negate any legal issue.

Caveat emptor.

It’s literally what’s happening.

Texas used the same concept to empower private people to sue abortion providers and receivers under civil law since they couldn’t do it criminally.

The country as a whole has done it for a long time with cellphone data, the five eyes alliance, etc.

They have access to information they’re barred from getting directly themselves, and they get it from private companies. Spying by proxy.

100%. Most business is just advanced sophistry at this point. Marketing and advertising serves a useful purpose for new products, when the market isn’t aware that it exists.

But by quantity and cost, most advertising is just social manipulation and is effectively an extra drain on the economy.

I saw one program that Rick rolled Bluetooth device lists.

It’s all the same thing. He “offered” to buy Twitter and then tried to back out. Market manipulation.

The board of Twitter forced the sale, because they had every right and responsibility to their shareholders to do so.

Now he’s wrecking the company seemingly on purpose. Market manipulation.

True. And we can’t legislate our way out of this. Any legislation we proffer and make happen will be weaponized against the poor.

I don’t think anyone told him he couldn’t buy it.

The board of Twitter is who sued to force the sale, since musk had kicked himself in.

That doesn’t mean his offer and subsequent behavior with the company isn’t market manipulation to be investigated, which is being done by the government.

Both things can be true. He stupidly kicked himself into a deal he was forced to complete, and his behavior since has indicated that he’s just gaming the market since he had to complete the deal.

Some countries make their penalties a percentage of income. Makes the sting equal for everyone.

While you’re right, I think the issue here is the hypocrisy of Musk claiming to be pro free speech (specifically on his platform) only to then repeatedly limit speech he doesn’t personally like.

Overpaying and then destroying the value means that eventually, he will be able to claim losses on his taxes. This will allow him to reduce his tax liability for his profitable businesses.

I mainly want internet for streaming a and games. I’m fine with cutting off the majority of news and social media.

Agreed. I want internet, but beyond that I don’t want to be near anything. My mom was telling me to prioritize a place with good medical services, but it seems like by the time I am old and in constant need, the unsustainability will have come home to roost.