Most people complain about web-site age-verification while you refuse to complain about drive-by spying. Your acceptance of literal fascism with a "return on investment" rationale is ignoring the problem: Why can corporations commit stalking but not ordinary citizens? You're pretending there's a difference between the government owning the cameras and the billionaires owning the cameras. Who do you think is saving all the data? This is corporations existing only to do the government's bidding: Please show me a shop that will sell me the (check-point) location of your vehicle, in real time.

The US government is consistently bad at privatization.

The government always pretends that a for-profit entity taking charge of taxpayer's money can have only happy outcomes. Add-in pork-barrelling contracts and scope-creep, and a lack of auditing and legal responsibility, and the result is worse outcomes on all metrics.

It's like the billionaires have bait-n-switch down to a fine art.

Translation: ... as obstructing US imperialism .... The Canadian authority levied a fee at 1/6th the cost paid by competitors and wealthy US corporations complained, do I have that correct: So the authority tripled the fee for protecting Canadian culture. Now, the US corporations must pay half (soon to be 60%) of what their competitors must pay.

But what's happening in the courts? Has the court issued a preliminary opinion on US money-grubbing?

This sounds very much like a "look ma, no hands" sort of plan.

Do bio-sciences have the tools to build DNA, one letter at a time? To date, DNA editing sounds very hit and miss: With a, say, 40% success rate, this engineering would cost millions.

If a moa embryo has to grow for, say, eight weeks, a chicken egg-sized yolk will cause starvation and death. Also, the moa embryo will quickly outgrow the chicken egg.

The federal government has declared these betting agencies are legal: The states automatically lose jurisdiction. I think the courts have already ruled the states have no right to contradict the federal government: Thus, "states' rights" when the states have to pay (or, it's too contentious for the White House to get involved) but not when federal employees can make a profit.

Every government enforcement agency, from the DMV to NSA, is part of the "intelligence" community. No-one wants to know where the leaky oil wells are, so not the EPA, and politicians don't want police getting their tax records so not the IRS, and also not children. Every municipal/state/federal department with a record of you, that doesn't mention your children, is fair game to the other agents in the US "community".

CALEA (1994) set the standard in allowing any agent (cop) in the country to demand free information from (privately-owned) databases of users and consumers. The War on Terror and US-led Total Information Awareness built the current police state.

The USA already has ALPR data the FBI can buy: The problem is, the FBI wants to spy on low-volume highways and the current surveillance network isn't built for that. Thus, the FBI is promising to fund the build-out of the network: Although, I think the cost will be 4 times what the FBI is offering.

The value is, every half-wit can generate a technical report by pushing a button and call himself a "programmer" or a "security engineer". The world is full of people pretending that 5 seconds of work makes them skilled and worthy: Just look at all the graffiti that is really, childish black scribbles. I don't have a problem with people stroking their own ego, but just like a throbbing penis, they don't have the right to shove it in my face.

Exactly what rights do factories have for making toxic waste: There's a whole US department, the EPA, saying they don't have that right. Traditionally, it did say that.

They're arguing what: They have a right to say anything, such as "this can be recycled (if someone wants to lose money)", and if the people don't recognize the dishonesty, it's a "them" problem?

This is why self-regulation doesn't work: The 'regulation' changes to "Not my fault, that's a 'you' problem."

The Democratic Party helped billionaires by repeatedly hiding the fact that the GOP's tax-cuts for billionaires were funded by destroying social safety nets, thereby shifting the cost of de-funding government from the wealthy to the poor. US congress has followed a "let them eat cake" policy for decades. As the post (by _0x0nyadesu) following this, reveals, shifting the cost to poor people is standard practice.

Reagan changed government policy from forced growth (imperialism/colonialism) to rich-people-will-give-us-free-stuff. That enabled the rise of an oligarchy: The plutocrats were no longer fake persons and dangerous beasts to be corralled but messiahs gifting their beneficence upon the USA.

Rich people aren't going to vote for more taxes. Raising interest rates requires bankers agreeing to take more money from the working class. Unfettered greed chooses both outcomes.

Far as I know, no. This was before vegan became a thing, so avoiding animal-derived ingredients would have been difficult.

I also met one person who was never bitten. When the mosquitoes were about 40cm from her, they stopped and turned around. Something was sufficiently strong for them to ignore carbon dioxide, sweat and body heat signals.

Anyone else notice the word missing from all these dreams of a brighter future: Wages.

We're all being gaslighted into a nightmare that a machine doing our jobs for us, will make life better. The Jetsons didn't talk about the construction workers that were no longer needed. Jobs disappearing is not new, because worker's wages has been turning into billionaire's profits for a few hundred years. But that's not the real problem which has a word, too: Productivity. The gaslighting is the idea that productivity helps the worker: It doesn't. Workers are a fixed-rate cost to the business. The more work, they can do for that cost, the more money flowing into billionaire's pockets. That simple economics is not capitalism. Under capitalism, wages are proportional to that productivity. No-one's repeating that principle: No-one's promising a bigger pay-cheque (or a shorter work-week). No change means the old system remains to punish those who do not have employment with less comfort, less mobility/leverage, less healthcare and less pension in old age.

It's important to remember this is zero-sum gambling, the entire market can't bet on the same outcome. But a professional player can take the same position on multiple bets. Some of the wins are due to the professional players having more information and doing number-crunching. That skews the market movement against the random guess of a casual punter, turning the punter into a 'mark'. It's why the casual punter always loses on sports betting and day-trading.

But the biggest wins can only be insider trading.

I can understand the people who generate AI slop to sell books and music but what's the point to generating AI code? It's like giving a paintbrush to a monkey and calling the monkey's owner, a great artist. This is graffiti, where 99% of 'artists' are really excusing their abuse of someone else's property (Notice: It's never their own.) with delusions of grandeur. Unfortunately, everyone else has to suffer.

... Can it beg for a donation?