The foreign reseller can understand how to follow rules. AliExpress collects taxes for different states in our country and also won't ship some things here.

Yes, non citizens and their corporations can own land here

That's because you haven't looked into it even slightly.

What happened in the nineties? It sure wasn't people not living in cities

The primary hazard being discussed here is shared hosting. The whole point of shared hosting is that other people can run software on your computer, whether they can traditionally "log in" or not.

It does not and it will not as long as it doesn't even have the concept of having the concept of something like respect. It doesn't have concepts. It has a model which it churns through and poops out patterns.

Nationalized infrastructure is a good idea and usually provides good outcomes... except when you're doing it specifically for the purpose of keeping excessively old nuclear reactors operating.

We have more than enough people to address multiple issues at once, if only people like you didn't need everything so simplified for them that they argue against addressing them because it's confusing.

I don't want to get it from Apple, I want it to be open source and standards based, but it's still the kind of thing I want. But I definitely don't want it to be this heavy or bulky, either. To have the gall to charge that much for such a goofy thing is bananas.

I install a lot of stuff from backports, but I've also had bad times doing that with important packages, so I'm not in a rush to do it for big complex things in particular.

The latter part of course depends on how they are used, but the former part is true unless you are talking about BRT, which is stupid because you could have used rail instead and not had to deal with pneumatic tires.

I know buses are a shitty way to do public transportation because I depended on them for years and years. Your assumptions are stupid.

I object to them when they are stupid. The world is complicated and you're trying to make me look stupid by pretending it's simple. That's fucking stupid.

I see you've not heard of video. Weird!

So what? The buses aren't the vehicles that make up the bulk of the road usage, it's the swarms of cars. The difference in road usage between vans and a bus which carries the same number of passengers is negligible. But the bus puts more wear on the pavement than hundreds of vans.

You are also a rando. You've deprecated your own opinion there.

I took the bus for years, that's how I know they suck.

Not just that, but it was true. We need more rail (which we had before the cars) and fewer cars (which a literal conspiracy attacked the rail to profit from.) Add a rail line, you have a ton of additional capacity on the same line. Add a highway, you need to expand it practically before you're done building it. And in this country, you need to expand it literally before you're done with the expansion, since we seem to be so shit at road work. Watching Japanese roadworks videos almost makes me weep.

No, troll. There's an entire class of fat cats, who ensure that justice is not done and funding is misappropriated. Save your clown shit for home week.

No, it's like trains which are actually good.

We've seen what utilization looks like on the BRT lanes in the UK... very low.

This is, of course, bullshit. There are vans which hold 14 passengers. You could also use minibuses, which have the same benefit... but frankly they are just prettier vans.