Since the Corporation for Public Broadcasting has no funding any more, dissolving it will have zero effect going forward. Except, perhaps, to avoid running up debt they have no funding to pay.

NPR and PBS will, indeed, continue with funding from "viewers and listeners like you." The local NPR station here has, I believe, actually seen an increase in overall funding because their listeners have stepped up. They won't say it out loud, but they're not laying people off or reducing programming. The same will be true in most places where they have listeners, which isn't going to include a lot of rural areas (where people don't listen to their leftist propaganda, and never have).

No, it's always been a huge problem. As people wise up, and they will, they will make certain it's a problem for the people causing it, instead of everyone else.

Depends on who gets to define "rule of law." And the only definition that matters is that of the US courts. Who have never had a problem with this before, like when Noriega - a Latin American dictator "elected" through a shady process, and engaging in drug trafficking to the US - was arrested by US military and brought to the US, where he was tried and convicted, and served 17 years (before being extradited to France, where he was convicted of money laundering, and later extradited to Panama for his many crimes there). His conviction was upheld on appeal, and he served his time.

This isn't even remotely new, or controversial, to anyone not suffering from TDS.

Bingo. Buying votes is expensive.

The only way anyone could be surprised by this is if they've been in a coma for the last 30 years.

Trying to explain the facts on the McDonald's coffee case is hopeless. "Lawsuits are ridiculous" is a religious cult; people who believe that case was ridiculous can't accept any facts that conflict with that belief, and literally everything they "know" about the case, except that it happened, is incorrect.

Prosecute the CEO for practicing medicine without a license.

Pity it will never happen.

You're assuming that passing a law requiring warnings is about showing warnings, rather than simple virtue signaling.

There isn't a politician in the US at the state level or higher that has a good track record on that.

Be sure to also compare the difference between a - in your words - "carefully-worded" email versus some dipshit rambling on in a stream-of-consciousness babble. Specifically, how long it takes both people to communicate that way, versus, one while writing the email.

In short, it depends on the subject matter that needs to be communicated, and you're both full of shit.

Makes perfect sense when dealing with someone who should have technical skills, or in a context of technical know-how, like an interview for an IT position.

For a job interview for non-technical positions, though, you're just showing that you know as little about people as they do about computers. Which is a definite red flag.

At a guess? Your inability to understand or accept that your view of the world does not define reality, or possibly even relate to it.

Give that the glitches are dependent on the quality of the connection, and the quality of internet service is depending on location, and poor neighborhoods with low quality internet correlates pretty closely to Not Being White (and being rural, but that's a much smaller percentage of the population), yeah, lawsuits are inevitable.

Where they are headquartered doesn't matter. What matters is if they have a legal presence in the state. If they do, that presence, at least, is subject to their laws, including all the various enforcement mechanisms, like fines (and seized bank accounts if necessary), and even jail time for contempt.

If they don't - of if they abandon anything that can be moved - then they're not.

"These measures amount to intimidation and coercion aimed at undermining European digital sovereignty,"

And yet so far. Trumps goal isn't to undermine European digital sovereignty, it's to undermine all European sovereignty.

Or ever will be.