Has Musk ever started a non-profit? I call bullshit — I don't believe Musk has ever had any interest in a non-profit. It's just not in his nature.

Sure, let's classify them as employees. At a minimum, the company needs to start paying minimum wage for all of those 20k agents. That includes payroll taxes which will help feed into Medicare and Social Security, which those agents will never claim. Those new employees will start paying income taxes based on where the agent is running which might also establish tax nexuses exposing the company to new liabilities. Smaller companies using agents will become bigger companies, losing protections for smaller business under various laws, and also will be penalized if they don't provide health insurance options.

All so a CEO can say his company is bigger. Geez.

It's suddenly popping up because Trump wants to deport everyone they can get their hands on, lawful status or not. And they're picking up citizens along the way.

RealID isn't intended to prove citizenship. Citizens can get them, as can immigrants with lawful status in the country. That was on purpose, because people with lawful status also travel, enter federal buildings, and do lots of perfectly legal stuff in this country.

The problem is the Trump administration is intent on finding any reason to kick people out of the country, whether they have lawful status or not. The RealID doesn't tell them whether they have to let you go because you're a citizen.

Smart TV spyware is why I just use Linux on an old laptop and a dumb monitor. That way I at least some control over the level of spyware and adds.

You're only free to commit crime at will if you've got 100 bitcoin to give the president in exchange for your pardon, or if he's hoping you'll do something else for him.

I find it interesting that every time xenophobia pops up, nothing ends well for the xenophobes. History rhymes.

WTAF. You can get SDR (software defined radio) boards for under $10 in bulk. I suspect they're already using SDR, especially FM HD-Radio. They've already got antennas, speakers, and amps, so that's not an issue. I really don't see how anyone could think that this would drive up costs in any significant way.

It's true that AM radio is best for emergency broadcasts. There are dozens of "clear channel" stations in the US broadcasting at 50 kW, each reaching 100s of miles. And worst case scenario, it's pretty easy to build your own AM radio receiver.

> Since this is the FCC and the supreme court says they lack the authority to actually enforce anything

The Supreme Court hasn't said any such thing. All the Supreme Court has said is that they have to enforce what the law says, and not just make things up on their own if the law doesn't say what they want. The problem is that in reality, that's pretty much what the FCC has been doing with ISPs for years.

The law tries to make a clean delineation:

• A "common carrier" just provides communication. If (for example) I use a phone to commit a crime, it's not the phone company's fault (because they're just a common carrier). In return for that, the phone company is not allowed to control my communication. They can cut me off because I fail to pay my bill, but not because the dislike what I say. A common carrier also has to stay out of the business of providing most content--they're limited to providing "neutral" communication. So in the days of Ma Bell, they could provide a few purely informational kinds of things (directory assistance, and a number for the date and time), but that's about it. And even those were sometimes at least mildly controversial.
• An "information service" doesn't just provide communication--it may provide or exercise control over content (e.g., locking accounts for posting content that doesn't fit terms of service, even if the content is actually legal). Since they're allowed control over content, they can be held responsible (to at least some degree) for that content.

The FCC has basically tried to create a combination of the two, where ISPs aren't really either of those. They want to continue to hold ISPs responsible for user's content, but also prohibit (at least some kinds of) decisions about the content they carry.

Classifying an ISP as a common carrier would be particularly problematic for ISPs like Google that not only provide communication services, but also provide content (search, YouTube, office tools, etc.) It would only take some fairly minor policy changes for some ISPs to fit the definition of a common carrier--but for others like Google, it doesn't even come close to fitting at all.

And the FCC shouldn't be in the business of telling ISPs (or whomever) which classification they should fall into. It should be up to the company to decide which fits their business. Once they've made their choice, the FCC makes sure the abide by the consequences of that decision (e.g., if they decide to be a common carrier, they can't be held responsible for users' content, but they also can't provide or control content).

I think ours started showing this in October. Maybe it is for the non science museum theaters?

Not all of the 1200 who died on October 7 were killed by Hamas. Many of them were actually killed by the IDF under the Hannibal directive. Basically the Hannibal directive says that it's better for an Israeli to die under IDF fire than the government be forced to negotiate their release. It's not clear how many died due to IDF fire, but one location apparently had about 75 vehicles destroyed by the IDF returning to Gaza -- most of them probably with would-be hostages.

This was a bill passed on April 1, that mentions Sasquatch.

I'm not sure the BBC got the joke.

Whoever wrote the summary either didn't get the joke, or is an asshole trying to stir shit up -- probably both. They also didn't mention that it would only apply only to actions "for the express purpose" of affecting the weather.

> If at any point in time an intelligent person begins to have doubts about the fundamental worthlessness of the failed species that is humanity, bringing up the topic of chemtrails (or COVID, or...) is a great way to get a quick reminder.

Youâ(TM)ve certainly proven this point!

> intelligent people are well aware are not natural or normal.

Correct. Airplanes are not natural. Well done!

> This didn't used to happen in the 1990s; were there no planes flying then?

Wrong again! Contrails were common in WWII. https://www.pinterest.com/pin/...

> When "crazy nutcase conspiracy theorists" notice this phenomenon, it's called a "chemtrail"

Correct again!

> I've watched these trails spread out and become clouds in real time, and I've even recorded videos showing that it is unmistakeably happening, but to what end? The internet has plenty of such videos already, but the worthless cretins of America are too stupid to watch them.

I'm pretty sure every American has seen them -- no need to watch the videos. It's also easy to prove that they're condensation. Could there be some planes releasing other chemicals? Certainly -- I've seen crop dusting and acrobatic airplanes do it. But it's clearly a completely different phenomenon.

> Ever seen a KC-135 aircraft refueling a civilian passenger plane at low speed and atltitude? I've seen that twice, right over my house, in rural bumfuck nowhere. Explain that shit.

I find it odd that *any* commercial aircraft would be refueled in the air. How exactly would that happen? Why? They don't just build 737s out of the factory with air refueling gear. See https://www.flyingsquadron.com... for some actual expert commentary on the topic.

But the obvious explanation is that you live near a military base. Duh.

> Plans fly over in regular formation, on the exact same parallel flight paths and spaced exactly ~5 minutes apart, for hours on end, one after another.

Ah, an airport. You're confused by what happens near an airport!

Wait. How did Sasquatch not get mentioned in the summary? That seems to be a pretty significant fact.

Also, the bill was passed on April 1.

Didn't say it was clever (weird take there). My point was that controlling your own storage and using widely compatible cameras allows one to control one's own destiny, as opposed to being held hostage by proprietary "walled cloud" devices.