So, if Juul users are addicted to nicotine and you just cut off the supply of juul, what exactly is going to happen? Kind of seems like this is going to end up with a whole bunch of Juulers become straight up smokers. I guess I got lucky. Switched to vapes before all the hysteria, ratcheted myself down to 0 nicotine, and now with an RDA, 0-nicotine DIY vape juice is dirt cheap and easily available.

Certainly no way forced labor among prisoners doing technical work could go badly. I mean, not like anybody goes to jail for computer crimes.

That is true and raises a bunch of questions. Did videos containing other races of people, who are also primates, ever trigger this suggestions? If you were to say "Yes, I'd like to continue seeing videos about primates!", would the algorithm suggest any videos about humans, or where humans are treated as other primates?

This kind of looks like a list of capabilities of ePSXe 20 years ago.

OK, but rather beside the point since no one actually seems to be calling for anyone to be vaccinated by actual force. Anti-vax seems largely about insisting that no one has the right to ask you to prove you're vaccinated, or deny you anything if you're not. Them insisting that "Stopping me from shopping unmasked in Walmart with no vaccine card IS forcing me to get vaccinated" is kind of the problem.

No

Previous verdicts are actually verdicts, so they've got reasoning supplied with them and a provided legal basis for their reasoning, and typically information on nuances of the particulars. Your typical whataboutism doesn't come with any of that beyond the most superficial level. Beyond that, it takes a hell of a lot more effort to demonstrate a case is not really similar to another then it does to allege that it does. Bad faith actors can just flood with "what about..:" until the other side is exhausted. Try that in a court of law and you'll get censured.

But this is contradicted by the constitution itself. Despite the flowery language in the Declaration of Independence, the founders were OK with unequal representation. You really don't need more then to look at the Senate to know that. Remember the 3/5th compromise? The constitution counted slaves as population - not as much as free whites, but it still explicitly counted them. Giving unequal representation to certain citizens based on non-citizens was not merely accepted, but was deliberate and intentional. This pattern is not uncommon at all. One couple with 12 children? 14 people for the census, even if only the man is allowed a vote. One man with 500 slaves? That's one man with 301 votes.

Why exactly is that appropriate? Citizenship isn't mentioned in the appropriate text in the Constitution, either in Article 1, section 2, or the 14th amendment, section 2. They do require 7 years of citizenship to become a representative. To just be counted in the census though? Not required.

Isn't it was immunity as long as they act to remove illegal content once they're notified about it? So, Parler would be in the clear if they were removing posts advocating for violence once they were notified of it, but they have no moderation policy at all, so they're not an the shield goes away.

The FCC doesn't think it's a division of the executive branch: https://transition.fcc.gov/cgb... -- "As a Commission, the FCC is a U.S. government agency independent of the Executive Branch and is directly responsible to Congress."

It's not 14 tons, it's 14 million tons.

Is that necessarily true of all possible realities though, or just our own?

That would depend on relative effectiveness though. They wouldn't rule it out so completely if it were possible to shut down an exacerbation with significant risk. Suggests to me either the risk is extreme, or that short term treatments wouldn't significantly affect the disease. Probably both - something like you need to be on huge doses for three months to get any appreciable benefit, and the side effects put your life at risk starting on day 1. The current medication are already in "Stab yourself daily for the rest of your life for a slight reduction in how quickly you'll degrade - if it's being given a hard no like this, there's a reason for it

So, I take it you're a Democrat then? Because, wow. You're bitching and complaining about Democrats bitching and complaining about things they are themselves doing. You're doing exactly that - complaining about things you yourself are doing, at that moment. That's meta on a level that Hofstadter would stand in awe of.