Social media can't "force their views" on anyone, since a. social media doesn't have views, only users of social media have views, and b. there's no way to force anyone to think anything.

It is weirdly hypocritical--but not surpising, really--that the rightists, who supposedly are all for "small government"--want to extend the government's power to decide who gets to say what. Would someone who considers him/herself a conservative please explain this?

This, and self-driving cars are a solution seeking a problem. Cars are bad. We're forced to live with them but that should not be our vision of the future.

The US has about 48% fewer hospital beds than it did in 1990. Sixteen hospitals have closed in New York City since 2005. This is not because of "the Republicans" or "Trump" or, for that matter, Obamacare or the Democrats. It's because "health care" in the US has nothing to do with health care, it's a commodity sold to the highest bidder. Welcome to "advanced" capitalism.

I don't understand why these folks don't just join an environment group outside of work.

No one's commented on the fact that this was possible because Puerto Rico is a US colony. It's another argument for independence, along with the shameful way the population's been treated by the federal government following a hurricane and an earthquake. Not to mention Giuliani's vampire financial schemes.

This would be useful if "law enforcement"'s purpose was solving crimes. It's not. It's convicting people. So they don't actually care if it's a false positive. As far as they're concerned, there's no such thing. Throwing you in jail is just as good as throwing whoever actually did it in jail.

The Times says free speech is a US "core value"--so how to explain the dictatorships that the US has supported and continues to support? And if you're going to answer, please do not include the word "Trump" in your reply.

Use Homeplug or whatever it's called. Works great. I run my TV and the music server off it.

Breaking up FB, even if it could be done, will accomplish exactly zero. Like every other breaking up, from Standard Oil in 1910 to the telephone monopoly.

You do see the irony in the phrase "misogynist cunt," don't you? If not, perhaps check a dictionary.

About ten years ago I bought a Prada-labelled shoulder bag in Vietnam for $10 from a street vendor. When I got it back to NY I asked around and it sold for around $400. Not only is it indistinguishable from the real thing, it IS the real thing. It's what I call a "real fake." As described above, the factory gets an order for 5000 of these bags, makes 6000 and sells 1000 out the back door. There is no difference between those 1000 and the other 5000. Did this happen in China with iPhones? Has Apple complained about it? Because they would surely know.

I guess the implication of this article is that there's something bad or dangerous about the fact that these apps are Chinese in origin or ownership. But why is that worse than anywhere else? Do the big US internet companies not work closely with the US government? Or the UK? Why is it that if it's Chinese it's sinister? Fu Manchu is dead.

Split up Standard Oil in 1910--how well did that work out? Split up Ma Bell--happy with the result? Split it up and the parts will recombine in some other form but functionally equivalent.