"fair" is subjective. What you think is "fair" isn't really fair. It is objectively unfair to use qualitative terms in discussion of policy.

What would be fair, is that Government live within the means we ALREADY tax out of the public. Cut Spending first. Then, when all cuts that can be made, are made, then MAYBE we can have a discussion on tax increases.

Its Not Your Money.

Envy isn't a virtue.

The problem here, is "fairness" is subjective, not objective.

Use of that particular term is deliberate tug on the emotional center of brains. it works, which is why Progressives ALWAYS use it.

Which is exactly what they said a hundred years ago when they instituted the "income tax".

Rich people will move out. And take their wealth with them.

Taxes are regressive. All of them.

Conspiracy theories are, until they are not.

Secret Pedo island owned by rich dude with elitist ties was once a "conspiracy theory". Now we know that Epstein killed himself 100% because "They" said so.

"I'm just asking questions" idiots notwithstanding. I'm looking at you Candice.

Security isn't convenient.

Security isn't easy, but it isn't hard either.

Assume you're' a target (because you are) and make it so that you're hardened. Don't be the easy target. Criminals are lazy.

Instead of fearing AI, use it to secure software and make it better.

We have nothing to fear but fear itself.

Yeah, the privacy aspect of EFF doesn't align with social media in general IMHO.

Are they trying to "earn" some $ from social media? That's a silly goal, but might be a nice side benefit.

It's worse than that, because with proper skill, it isn't even a copy/pasta. It is one app that posts to everything all at once. Even the social media places that didn't make the list.

  Buffer, Hootsuite, Metricool, Robopost or Later ... just off the top of my head.

One could probably tweak posts for each platform with AI effectively.

Here is the list they are staying with ...

  Bluesky, Mastodon, LinkedIn, Instagram, TikTok, Facebook, YouTube

So, where did the audience go? It didn't go to the existing places from 20-8 years ago. And I doubt it went to the two new kids.

What this tells me is that their audience is aging/dying off, and the younger generations aren't there in numbers. This requires little to no political inferences to understand. It is easy to mistake one for the other.

Yes, I am a Boomer. I don't rely upon AI to tell me what to think. I am also a Libertarian and interested in Privacy and been a long time proponent of Open Source. Maybe figure out what intersections to the younger generations align and go there.

Using AI is training AI to replace you. If you can be replaced with AI, you will be, and should be.

If you don't use AI, your peers will be, and you will be replaced by AI anyway.

Good Luck

Lying to yourself is the biggest danger for trying to stay Anonymous. With enough patterns to recognize, the idea that one can hide is a delusional take.

The only way to win, is to run EVERYTHING you post through an AI that changes the tone and words used in all your online activity. But even then that may itself be a lie.

It's Not Enough to "Caution Against".

That language is TOO PASSIVE.

The correct and appropriate phrase is "HELL NO" and start tossing out 1st, 4th, 5th amendment claims IN COURT.

I read that and was simultaneously laughing and angry. I'd call it a load of horseshit, but that would be insulting to horseshit.

What a bunch of windbaggery. Meaningless, feckless corporate speak.

We know. They know we know. We know they know we know. They don't care.

Nothing says "fuck you" like a "well worded" press release. It was only missing the AI EM-DASH.

Climate is notoriously complex set of wild interactions that are unknown at best. Predictions of climate crisis have always been wildly off, because the goal is to scare people into action.

But the boy who cried wolf is a cautionary tale that climate people failed to learn.