You've made a blatantly racist comment that is factually incorrect.

It has been well established that criminal sentences are lighter and heavier based on a whole range of subjective factors, and those absolutely include appearance and skin color. The entire concept of sentencing guidelines solely exists to try to make the process more fair, and less subjective.

Did you know there are prisoners in jail today, despite members of the jury finding them not guilty? After the civil war all across the south, white politicians faced a labor shortage, and were looking for a way to maintain power over the black population. Their solution was to create a series of laws that intentionally targeted the minority population. They also created the concept of a non-unanimous jury. This way, if any black people made it onto a jury, they could be out-voted and still send black men to prison. Once in prison, the prisoners were used as slave labor, and rented out to wealthy landowners. This practice has been in place for over a century, and continues to this day. As recently as last month, enslaved prisoners were used as substitute labor, after regular employees refused to work because of the pandemic.

Using the words "cheat code" and "exploit", imply that they are knowingly abusing the system to borrow more money than their legal agreement and margin buying terms with Robinhood allow.

Using money that they know they are gaining access to through abuse, and they know doesn't legally belong to them, is theft. Using a computer system to steal that money turns them legally speaking into hackers, and brings on additional charges for computer fraud. They should be giving their lawyers a heads up rather than bragging about their crimes on social media.

It might surprise you, but the people of Puerto Rico voted overwhelmingly to become a US state in a referendum on the issue in 2012. You should blame congress for inaction, not the people who already voted. It's horrifying that you think the federal govt depriving US citizens of timely humanitarian aid is justified for any reason, but especially frightening that you think their voting patterns and politics are valid reasons to let people die.

The thing is, Slack is easily reproducible by any other company or open source software. Its just a fancy IRC after all, there are hundreds of similar tools you can install yourself, right now. They just made it easy and cheap, and made a sales pitch to business clients which made it reasonable to use.

Luckily, whenever wall street screws it up and/or hikes the prices, it will take about one week to build/install an adequate replacement and migrate your team to that. Since it is primarily used by small teams, it would be super easy to migrate your entire team to a replacement, unlike the challenge of say, migrating your family and friends away from Facebook.

He was arrested for lying to investigators about his communications to members of Trumps campaign. The topic of the communications that he lied about, was wikileaks.

So if you absolutely want to split hairs:
"FBI Arrests Trump Associate Roger Stone Over His Communications With WikiLeaks" is not quite accurate
"FBI Arrests Trump Associate Roger Stone Over His Communications ABOUT WikiLeaks" would fix the semantics.

Do advertisers have an inherent right to know the location of the device I am using (and by extension, me), when I specifically want to keep that information private?

Putting ads on billboards, or tv networks may be annoying, but targeted ads are:
* collecting information about me against my will, even when I use numerous methods to try to block them
* using that information to attempt to manipulate my behavior

Good and evil are relative terms, but I consider the majority of the industry to be outright "evil".

Thats the first thing that popped in my head too. The same exact process is used to justify high frequency trading bots as being a necessary part of stock exchanges. Will this bill outlaw HFT?

Or is the government proposing that middle class consumers are entitled to protections when buying toys and shoes, but are NOT allowed the same protections if they want to buy financial assets?

Facebook claims the vast majority (86%) of its total business is performed by 6% of its employees that just so happen to be based in Ireland. Facebook Ireland uses a basic double Irish tax structure to pay effective tax rates of less than 1% on the Irish business.

This means they are effectively only taxing 14% of their business.

Just to clarify, I do NOT think their actions are reasonable. I think it's a horrible invasion of privacy, and absolutely object to it being a requirement, and don't want it to spread to other companies. However, the colloquial phrase "none of their business", doesn't apply in this case. It IS their business- in the sense that they make profits and losses and business choices, based on this data. It, quite literally, is their business model.

P.S. You are complaining that parent didn't read, but then made up the word reasonable, which I never ever said....

As much as I hate their policy, I have to disagree with your point that it isn't their business what you do in private. They are selling you life insurance, and thus could lose money based upon your bad choices. It is in fact directly within their business model to care about what you do in private, that is the basis of their business.

Suddenly these Irish companies pretend to care about America, the land that gave them everything to start their business. America is also the country they refuse to pay their fair share of taxes to, and the country who's political dysfunction they knowingly and intentionally made worse, while profiting by selling propaganda to their own userbase, purchased by foreign enemies. Spare me your crocodile tears. They only care that they got caught, since it puts their profits at risk to face additional regulation.

maybe we should start arresting criminals -- you know, like in every other part of life -- instead of trying to make consumers play their own game of cops and robbers every minute of every day.

I live in the inner city of a high crime city. Anytime I walk outside, I have to pay attention, since there are dangers lurking nearby. I don't expect the police to make everything totally safe, nor would I want to live in the kind of absolute police state environment that it would require. Similarly, I don't want a "totally safe" internet, where all content is curated and carefully vetted.

A lot of people are salary exempt and get paid a fixed amount every week, whether they work 20 hours that week, or 60. There isn't always a direct connection between 1 hour of work = 1 hour of pay.

We've been spending years on this site talking about AI, the increasing automation of jobs, subjects like universal income as a solution to the coming wave of unemployment, and the future of what "work" will become, and you choose to blame Obama for not just the impact of technology, but also blame him for baby boomers reaching retirement age? That seems a little unfair...

You also like to cut n splice clips of Obama debating himself, but seem to be ignoring the times that Trump contradicts himself on an almost daily basis, sometimes in the same run-on sentence!

I think the courts have been pretty consistent that inciting panic (shouting "fire") and inciting violence do not qualify as free speech, and aren't under the same level of protections. Media companies are reacting in a somewhat reasonable manner in trying to curb and remove the calls for violence that Alex Jones keeps issuing on their platforms. It just so happens that most of the requests for violence are coming from right-wing talking heads. I'd HOPE for the same kind of response if left-wing talking heads kept calling for violence towards their political opponents.

I'm sure there are plenty of counterexamples, but pro-gun groups & people are much more consistent about using guns as their solution when compared to the anti-gun crowd for instance.