Look, I know "nuclear device" is correctly generic, so that RTGs and things like them, legitimately count. But let's be serious: right around the very same time this real stuff happened, some really great fake stuff happened too: the movie Goldfinger.
And once you've watched Goldfinger, "nuclear device" is just a euphemism for a bomb. So don't go calling RTGs "nuclear devices," please.
it is pretty clear trump would pardon or vacate any fine against a right winger org.
The president does not yet have pardoning power over civil judgements. Maybe a constitutional amendment to do that is coming, but we haven't had a vote on it yet.
Some good has come from promoting more user speech online, but also a lot of bullying, harassment, echo chambers, doxxing, stochastic terrorism, and so on.
You make it sound as dangerous as a 1775 soap box that people like Sam Adams would stand upon and shout from, or a pamphlet-printing-press that someone like Thomas Paine might use, where in both cases the goal was often to rowse the rabble into protest and action.
But is the internet really that dangerous?
If you think being a CS RCG is bad, try being a 55 year old coder who spent the last 30 years honing the craft, only to be laid off into a market where those skills are just no longer needed at all.
"The platforms" are, at best, a percent of the internet.
Sign up for a linode, put up any sort of website you can imagine on it, and explain why you would choose for the algorithms you write or install, to work the way that you fear.
It doesn't have to be as bad as you say, unless you want it. That's essential freedom.
This would result in suppression of anti Trump opinion
It will result in suppression of all anti- power/wealth opinion, i.e. all criticism of government or big-pocketed business.
This change is sponsored by litigious motherfuckers. Trump is only the instance-du-jour, a few percent of the overall threat, though very much a shining example of it.
> We can argue over the number
No, I will not argue over objective facts. Sorry not sorry, your talking point are out of date.
> and why wouldn't you include taxes as that's what is paying for Energiewende?
Because taxes are policy and obscures the underlying true cost of the energy. Same is true for government subsidies, such as the ones France's nuclear power gets (which are also paid with taxes, but not taxes on the electricity, so it's even more hidden).
=Smidge=
> A reminder that Germany has spent over half a trillion Euros on Energiewende and still has one of the filthiest grids in Europe (>400g/kWh) and has among the highest electricity costs in the world
Your talking points are out of date. Germany's CO2 emissions have fallen to ~320g/kwh as of last year and not even *close* to the highest costs in the world. They're not even the highest cost in Europe until you include taxes... which are used to help fund the renewable buildout that's bringing emissions and overall costs down.
=Smidge=
With one important difference, this reminds me of the 1974 Emergency Highway Energy Conservation Act, which established a national speed limit of 55 MPH. States had to either adopt a state speed limit of 55 MPH, or else lose out on funding, i.e. get punished.
Of course, that was a law enacted by Congress, not an Executive order. I guess, traditionally, they say that for first quarter millennium of America, Congress held the purse strings because some inky piece of paper said they were supposed to, as if Congress could ever handle that much responsibility! Can you imagine?! Anyway, we've decided Fuck That Tradition, let's try something new and put a thieving tool in charge of the purse.
Exactly. This press release is just a convoluted way to advertise how badass their product is.
NO! This is an outrage! [slams table]
Our religious war should be about reader's choice vs writer's choice!
Ok, but which of those things came with the new law? A lot of what you're describing (I suspect all of it) was already in place. What changed for non-banned users?
All constants are variables.
