But... but... the first poster on this article assures us Elon Musk got rid of the cEnSoRsHiP!!!1!!!!

Musk banned journalists and is shadowbanning posts that use transgender terminology (weirdly calling "cis" derogatory). He's also amplifying far right accounts so they drown out centrist and left wing voices.

Meanwhile Twitter, the social network Musk bought and turned into X, banned:

1. A few people who self identified as Nazis or white supremacists.
2. Hamas
3. People running harassment campaigns or who were otherwise blatantly violating the ToS (and then only after a lot of complaints.)
4. Trump, but only after January 6th, because of (legitimate) fears he was going to use Twitter to help with his insurrection.

And that's about it.

Now, if you're a Nazi or white supremacist, or a Hamas terrorist, or you want to run harassment campaigns, or you want to use Twitter to violently overthrow the government, you probably feel that this was "too far" and that somehow this is an affront to you. You probably think that PBS is "woke" too because of Mr Rogers Neighborhood. You are probably not a nice person.

Whereas the rest of us feel our social networks probably shouldn't have people like that in there, but have no objection to marginalized groups talking to one another, or journalists saying things that might offend the world's richest person from time to time. Most of us are dubious about algorithms in the first place, but especially feel our life isn't improved by having far right voices inserted in our feeds, preferring to have sane voices that aren't full of hatred, whether left or right.

But, that's just us. Just do me a favor: Don't pretend your version isn't "censorship" while pretending the version Twitter did was. People joined Twitter. They leave X.

Sure Jan: https://www.reddit.com/media?u...

It was a fucking Nazi salute. Own it, and fuck off.

Biden was busy cleaning up Trump's mess, he wasn't about to fast track the release of files that were already going through the court system and he had no reason to believe were going to be suppressed.

Remember that after January 6th 2021, nobody in their right mind thought Trump would ever even be allowed to run again, let alone become President.

She didn't have four years to do it, she wasn't even President.

And at that point the wheels of justice were going, just... slowly. There was no reason for Biden to speed up the process either. It was assumed that there would, ultimately, be trials and convictions.

Having the name that appears most, save for Epstein himself, in the Trump-Epstein files become President, coupled with the people he put in charge, including Pam Bondi who was AG during a suspicious period in Epstein's life, and given Epstein died under Trump's watch, made the issue far more uncertain and made it clear it wasn't practical to just assume the courts would do their job.

Republicans still don't believe Trump's policies cause inflation, do they?

(You know Biden actually had inflation under control by the end of his term, a problem he inherited from a combination of inheriting Trump's economy and the COVID supply chain problems, right? And he did that while maintaining full employment, which is unheard of. Meanwhile, while general inflation isn't significantly better or worse right now, tariffs and support for the AI industry and the unnecessary wars against two OPEC members have driven prices of energy sky high and made tech unaffordable for many. But no, COVID and Trump's mismanagement is all Biden's fault, obviously.)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

The majority of university level students in Iran are women.

Iran is not Afghanistan or Saudi Arabia, and while its regime is, in many ways, misogynistic, it's not quite the black and white situation the echo-chamber-right in the US like to pretend it is. Iran has many faults, could you stick to the ones that are real?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

Women make up a majority of University students in Iran. There's a hell of a lot of things to criticize about Iran, but you're laser focused on one thing that simply is bullshit.

TBF a "few" is a relative term, and time is measured in seconds. So unless Bitcoin transactions magically take under two seconds all of a sudden, they're right.

Since when is Adam Black a publicly traded US company? You're off your rocker.

What would be the libel here? For something to be libel it has to be more than false, it has to actually cause damages and, generally, be negative. Calling someone a mastermind behind a technology is not libelous even if it's false.

Leaving aside Ideapads, which I don't think are intended to be the same quality, Thinkpad's modularily varies quite a bit depending on what series you get. E-series Thinkpads are (in terms of modularity and build quality) almost only slightly better than an Acer, for example, and have been for the last 7-8 years at least. One bad yank on a USB-C charging cable can result in you needing to replace the entire motherboard.

Unfortunately Lenovo's Thinkpad division is just as obsessed with trends like "thinness" as every other laptop maker, and to be honest, this didn't start with Lenovo. Remember IBM's wonderful modular designs from the 1990s, with bays that gradually got smaller as time developed as IBM felt the need to trade functionality for some never-good-enough target of thinness, before being taken away from us completely?

> - Putting ports on a separate board than the CPU and ram and such. Physical damage comes to ports, especially charging ports. Having this delegated off board minimizes risk of having to replace something expensive.

This, 100X. I learned the hard way not to trust USB-C for anything critical (like charging) because compared to USB-A and standard barrel-style charging ports, it's trivially easy to break. Like trip-over-a-charging-cable easy. And if, as it is with cheaper laptops, including, alas, Lenovo's cheaper Thinkpads (E series in my case), the critically important port is soldered to the motherboard, you're basically screwed. Replacing the motherboard is half the cost of the entire laptop.

By comparison, in my entire lifetime of owning laptops, going back to the mid-1990s, I don't think I ever had a laptop charging port break on me.

Agree with your other points, but there's also the wider issue of modern keyboards being terrible because of the thinness fetish among marketing people and "tech journalists"...

It's certainly a perfect time to dip their toes in the water. The last time would have been Windows Vista, and for whatever reason mass market computers, despite his success with mass market music players, didn't seem to be something Jobs was ready to do.

There's a difference between lower end (none of these computers were even low end, just "on the lower end of Apple's offerings") and mass market. None of those devices are mass market, they're just the "non-pro" items.

The Classic, for example, was $999, which until the 2000s I believe was Apple's cheapest Mac. This was in 1990. It was still an upscale item, just slightly more accessable price wise than their Macs had been before. And its spec was basically identical to the Mac Plus, launched 5 years earlier.

To put it in perspective, including inflation, it cost four times the MacBook Neo, roughly $2,400 in today's money to $600. Given the PC architecture was dominant at that point, it was a niche platform with a high price tag that only a handful of people would spend money on. Oddly, students seemed to be the main market, and that was in part because Apple offered a sizable discount for students, while universities were one of the few places that supported Macs and PCs on an equal footing.

Commodore, Sinclair, Atari, Amstrad, Radio Shack, et al, were the companies doing the mass market stuff. Apple had a niche, and built upon that niche, but they were never interested in dominating the market the same way those five companies were. Which is fine. The Neo seems, however, to be a change from that.