Too bad nobody uses it. I'm always caught between europeans insisting on whatsapp and applepickers insisting on facetime. I always tell people to call and/or text me on signal, and they never do.

This isn't government funded.

You're not as familiar with this as you think. The overwhelming majority of data sent is a false positive. And Apple didn't try it, they were going to but buckled under public pressure in the US.

Besides, the EU mostly just pays lip service to privacy. Everybody makes a huge deal out of age verification laws here in the US for even pornography, but in Europe they're not only common even outside of pornography but there's even public backlash against companies that don't do it. See for example steam's refusal to implement age verification, many Europeans even on this very site have blasted them for "not following our laws" while totally disregarding why Valve doesn't want to do it.

If you're not aware, by the way, EU politicians have exempted themselves from this surveillance.

He seems to suggest that this is how somebody "copes" with the reality that in the US, there are fewer protections around employment.

But "coping" with that doesn't seem necessary in light of:
- If you live in the US, you're going to have a lot more disposable income than if you did in the EU. The only exception might be Luxembourg, who the US periodically trades places with at the top, but everywhere else in the EU you're going to do worse. That figure, by the way, is after you account for taxes, health care, food, etc.
- If you prefer job security over income and being able to afford everyday things, you could always move to the EU or anywhere else where the same applies. It's a long process, but people do it. Why "cope" when you have that option?
- Net migration between the US and the EU is in favor of the US -- it doesn't seem like "cope" when people actively choose that option.

But I'm not seeing how this is exploitative. If you start a business venture, and it doesn't work out, why should you be compelled to retain employees that you don't have any need for? It would be like saying you should still be forced to pay the guy who mows your lawn every week after you replaced your grass with rocks. This just doesn't make any sense. If the EU says you're required to keep paying him anyway, especially if you also have to fund his pension when he retires, that sounds far more exploitative to me.

If you were required to keep paying somebody to mow your lawn once you hire them, then you are probably less likely to ever pay them to begin with, which would explain why disposable incomes in the EU are much lower. Everything you do has a cost, and stalled economic growth is the price the EU chooses to pay. It's neither right nor wrong, it's just what they, as a whole, have decided they want.

If the EU is the same as the US in this regard, the laws around employment don't change based on that.

I'm skeptical that NYT would just collude with the Trump admin like that. It seems like the last thing they'd ever want to do.

Moreover, lately this site seems to do a 180 at the drop of a hat.

https://news.slashdot.org/stor...

You were under the impression that satellite communication doesn't involve photons.

They're hexagonal cells. However the bird projects photons, not snowflakes.

Surely it's impossible.

There's always a usable signal directly adjacent to any given cell within the penumbra of the spot beam that covers it. It's not intentional, it's just physics. GEO and LEO alike.

Penumbra.

Tell me that you don't have any capacity beyond weasel words without telling me that you don't.

I really should have called this out earlier, but I gave you the benefit of the doubt. You routinely make talking points that you can neither qualify nor quantify. What's a measured response even supposed to look like? What's it even going to accomplish? Especially on social media where by the time you "measure" anything, there's going to be more of it uploaded before you can even do anything about the first one.

And we've already seen where this leads as well: Nobody, anywhere, ever has the capacity to respond to that. Inevitably, topics that have nothing to do with it get caught in the crossfire. I'm sure you're already aware of this; I'd even bet on it. All that the Biden DoJ managed to do was suppress political discourse about a stupid laptop, and only for a few months. Everything else, including all the COVID-19 disinformation, spread like wildfire.

Perhaps that's your intent? So far, it seems so. You've already claimed to know what I'm like without knowing me at all. You've already demonstrated an inclination towards removing what you might find offensive before you even know whether you find it offensive under the dubious (likewise weasel word) claim of it not being black and white. What is that supposed to mean? We partially censor it? YouTube effectively already does that, and this is what we ended up with:

https://docs.google.com/spread...

Such irony that the word "democratic" will get content demonetized.

That's definitely not it. The responses vary, sometimes it will simply be a question like "what color?" rather than to say "we don't have any".

You neither know who I am nor what I'm "like". But if you want to really get technical about it, Trump didn't issue any response, let alone a measured one. Him and Carr simply ran their mouths in public. Everything that happened afterward was done by ABC and its affiliates.

If you want a measured response, we can go that way too. The Biden DoJ was already aware that the laptop story wasn't disinformation, moreover that it had nothing to do with Russia, when they pressured social media companies to suppress it. That certainly seems like a "measured response" to me given they already had all the information about it before they even started.

You call me a cretin, yet you're the one sitting here advocating for exactly what has just been used against you, simultaneously you sit here and complain about it. If you don't understand why the law is black and white, or why the first amendment exists by the time you finished high school, assuming you even did, then there's not much anybody can do to help you understand the self-harm you're inflicting, even if you don't realize it. More likely you just assume you'll never be the target of it.

If you look at my post history, I rarely make anything more than a slight against anybody, but let's make one thing clear:

The only difference between you and Trump is that he got elected. We need less of that, not more. You're going to have to set up your stasi, gestapo, or whatever you want to call it over my dead body, regardless of which one of you gets there first.

Hmm...I think ChatGPT will just have to learn to never say No in Japanese. Ever.

So if the Trump administration decides that Jimmy Kimmel is spreading disinformation, then in your book he's in the right to pressure local TV stations to stop airing Jimmy Kimmel?

The Biden administration made a not so dissimilar effort against the laptop story via the FBI, having them pressure Facebook, Twitter, and if the second link in TFS is to be believed, Youtube as well.

If you want to be all authoritarian like that, at least try to be consistent about it, otherwise you'd be no different from Trump.

No, but this really lacks context.

I've actually responded to that already, making this the fourth time, so let me state clearly: No, I have not. And that is in no way a requirement to calling out people who do. Only a fool such as yourself would claim otherwise.