Daemon Spawn at that.

we need to regulate speech then, exactly the same way we want to regulate firearms.

Only those authorized by the state ought to have speech. Safety First!

(this is largely sarcastic in nature)

The bigger you are, the harder it is to turn the ship in an emergency. See Titanic.

At some point the inertia of change isn't worth it, as you suggested. It is possible, but is it worth it?

The last way to look at this is a way to start the process of diversifying our Tech holdings. Windows, Office, Adobe, VMWare etc. But here is my take, STEAM is showing the way out. We're not there yet, but the tide appears to be turning (to keep the nautical terms going).

Broken clocks are still broken, even when they occasionally tell the time correctly.

Yeah, I've become the old greybeard I used to make fun of. The Tech version of a hero living long enough to become the villain.

Now, get off my lawn! ;-)

Rather than a threat I'd say it moreso would fall under "conspiracy to commit murder".

Discussing plans to commit a crime is a crime (eg, conspiracy).

Now, I'd wager she didn't really intend to go through with this, and in the end there's a good chance the charges get dropped, but seriously - don't be talking about shit like that. I can't even see where someone would joke, vent, or otherwise say - even in private - that they plan on committing a mass murder.

"That police department is a bunch of assholes!" - sure I get that. I might say that. I might say they're crooked, lazy, incompetent, or any other set of negative adjectives, but talking about killing people is not a good way to be venting.

"We at Siemens have seen how successful SCO was, and think we can be just as successful!"

Probably put her in solitary because she kept insisting she was innocent.

So why isnt it mandated for homes and all devices that receive radio currently?

Why is my car the only thing that *has* to receive AM?

This is another bullshit “I have a hobby horse and Im going to fucking ride it at everyone elses expense” political move.

Noooooo

You don't see how?

That's why.

It's because its not the same.

I don't understand why Democrats want to stop idiots from losing their money, except as some sort of "gotcha" law passed by Newsom. Who exactly are they trying to protect? And more importantly, why?

OR

You're a son of a president, selling "Art".

Not so sure about that. We have Biden and McConnel

There is a reason why its not enforced, it is exceptionally hard to prove AND generally doesn't rise to criminal activity. Politicians lie all the time in Advertisements. All sides do it. It isn't new, or one side is better than the other.

A politician can say they are in favor of the new "don't kill puppies and kittens" law, that also has a bit that allows them to send millions to their buddies at the "don't kill puppies and kitten NGO" and doesn't save a single puppy or kitten. And if you oppose it, you hate puppies and kittens and want to kill them. Its all a lie, wrapped up in emotional language. What can I do to stop it? Who do I call? And why do they hate puppies and kittens?

So, this Meme Coin Law isn't going to do anything useful except for "Owning " someone somewhere for political points. Puppies and Kittens.

What was the basis for his rise to power, if not for SF Political Circle, with Pelosi at the helm?

Its not unfair, because it exists. The SF Democrat Cabal is close nit.