n/t

n/t

LMAO even.

..for the deadliest virus in human history /s^2

yes, but just think of the _competitive wages_ they can bring to existing megafirms here in the US.

>Also, what is the court going to do when China misses it's goal by a huge margin, which is likely to happen?
Blame Trump, probably.

too long; didn't read

nice

quoting from https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R...

"First,using the analogue of the company town, social media sites could be treated as state actors who are themselves bound to follow the First Amendment when they regulate protected speech.If social media sites were treated as state actors under the First Amendment, then the Constitution itself would constrain their conduct, even absent legislative regulation."

Sure reddit isn't the entire Internet, but it's definitely one of the bigger spots. If all of the big players follow the same narrative on what's acceptable, then those with a dissenting opinion will find themselves effectively censored entirely. With this precedent in place, the gradual adjustment of what's deemed tolerable will quietly shift. One day you will find yourself impacted by it, or you will simply never have had an original non-sanctioned opinion in the first place.

just wait for nonbinary chess

n/t

I think they're about a century late to this particular market.

A more relaxed version would be the Doctrine of Dickery.

They just want to make sure we don't vote for the wrong candidates.

It's not German. You can tell by the joke hidden inside it.