And William Barr as well.

More fingers. That’s better or worse depending on what floats your boat.

The government should not force someone under threat of violence to do work.

So if there’s a feedlot set up next door to your house, the government shouldn’t proactively require them not to dump the pig slurry into your backyard? Sure, maybe you can sue, but they’re thousands of times richer than you, and as the suit goes through the courts, you’re still buried in pig shit.

How about every credit card company refusing to deal with you because, for example, you’re a libertarian? Just fine, start your own bank? And how about a water company or some other lifeline utility?

It’s entirely reasonable for governments to impose standards on business. Everywhere and every time that has not happened, businesses have committed abuses. Even Adam Smith (the real one, not the modern crackpot who stole his name) knew that. “People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the publick, or in some contrivance to raise prices.”

Social media platforms have a TOS that binds them just as much as the user.

They can change their TOS at any time, and frequently do so, so no, they are not bound “just as much as the user.”

It’s literally just a contract.

An unconscionable one, at best, considering the vast power disparity between a large social media site and any user. Clickthrough contracts should be banned outright. There’s no way to negotiate. It’s “my way or the highway.”

Tate’s just another example of what the rightwing mean by “free speech”-- they mean forced platforming for them, and suppression of anyone disagreeing.

No, a judge agreed with Meta’s objections and shut the lawsuit down.

it looks like we’re steering more toward another 1929 than another 1999

What really needs to happen is another 1789.

You’re using the wrong model. Look up how a pump-and-dump scam works, all will be revealed.

Just let me know how to disable it, OK?

There are some comments in the code I’ve written saying “before you attempt to modify this module, it’d be wise to get a barge pole.”

The shareholders aren’t going to be paying it. The ai customers are.

It’s much more likely that the banks and their insurers will be left holding the bag, and they’ll then be bailed out by the taxpayers.

There’s already negative ROI at even the current loss-leader prices.

Two things can both be wrong. And removing something that’s been in place for millennia and deeply embedded in the culture is likely to be more challenging than eliminating something that is still more planned than actually materialized.

Leave me out of this, partner.

There’s code over 20 years old still in use that I had written using that approach.

I’d rather have a phone that does what I want it to do.

Libertarians are people who turn a blind eye to externalities.

Drive up the cost of energy enough and those suburbs will be abandoned as more people move into cities.

You can easily tell from the propaganda what they want: they want us isolated, fearful and dependent on fossil fuels.

Getting the fossil-fuel monkey off our collective backs will not only improve our health and quality of life, it’ll also drive dictators and despots out in several countries. In particular, it’ll destroy the revenue stream that funds Russia’s imperialism. It’ll also make those AI data centers non-viable, making it harder for our own local oligarchs to oppress us.

A flaming meteorite. What are the odds of that?

And get some replication in there. Even if there’s not a single point of failure, if a DB instance ever goes tits-up, you’d better have a standby.

Source: I’ve cleaned up others’ messes where they didn’t.