The Swiss aren't exactly an industrial powerhouse, nor scientific. The largest sectors employing more Swiss are the banking, finance, trading and insurance sectors. Chemicals and pharmacuticals are their main physical exports, which means they're pretty much competing with most of Europe. So local universities will not struggle to meet demand and there's a load of British/German/French institutions they could use as well, also remember that they're smack bang in the middle of western Europe with open borders, so already a lot of people work in Geneva but live in France. A commute from Germany to Zurich wouldn't be difficult either.

That being said, even though Switzerland is a very static country, it would still be a mistake.

The only reason anyone knows about them is that the BBC had an article about them this morning.

I suspect it's very much a circle jerk like the British Sandwich Awards (called the Sammies, I'm not making it up) and at best a well paying job for a mid-level commedian-slash-light-entertainer to host.

Gaming in general has always struggled to get any kind of gaming centric event on the social map, E3 before it collapsed and maybe PAX but even that seems passe now so the best we can hope for is a mention in a TV and Film award ceremony suich as the games category in the BAFTAs.

FWIW, I think Clair Obscur cleaned up.

I guess they need to use Yandex for that.

Yep, but the last thing Disney wants is for copyright to be weakened... They'll have everyone doing to them what they did to the Brothers Grimm, Hans Christian Anderson, et al. that were never copyrighted.

As much as I agree with the sentiment, I think we should be careful with too much crowing. European fascists like le Pen, Farage and AFD are trying as hard as Russia possibly can push to get voted into power over here.

You're making it sound like Trump cares about the law. The republicans are too scared to speak up against him, the tame SCOTUS won't do anything... Your country's legal systems are effectively toothless.

Trump gets to rule by fiat and the Republicans and their backers have spent much of the last 8 years ensuring that their loyalists are in key positions.

I mean there are military troops in several US cities which are there on very dubious grounds (read: obviously there to punish and intimidate those Trump perceives as enemies and by enemies I mean people who didn't vote for him) above the express wishes of state governments or the local population.

https://eu.usatoday.com/story/...

So why do you think Trump will care about any other law? There's no-one to stop him.

Here's the thing, I was never a part of Twitter... definitely not a part of the TheAppFormerlyKnownAsTwitter.

My entire exposure to it from go to woah was via thrid parties... most notably reputable news agencies. As said news agencies care about their reputation, they've stopped quoting it as a source and social media in general. Twitter used to be very well cited, barely a BBC article used to go by without a section of "this is what some random twat on Twitter had to say about it" but that is all gone now.

Pretty much everyone I've spoken to has stopped using TheAppFormerlyKnownAsTwitter because it's just become a cesspool of hate. You might not like that, but it is quite significant.

A single mod down because someone wanted to silence what they didn't like... Elon, what is your /. user name.

Don't tell Lincoln that.

It changes from decade to decade, cause to cause- in both political parties.

I can't think of any Washington engaged in, but Jefferson for sure impounded Congressionally allocated money- though not for the purpose of trying to dictate policy to the States, and Congress didn't fight him on the matter. i.e., it wasn't contentious.
In fact, many Presidents have done that. It wasn't really a problem until Nixon. Impound Control Act was a result of that, and the Supreme Court authorized it as legal. Today, it looks like Impound Control may be about to collapse to the pre-Nixon state, depending on what SCOTUS says about the Harvard case- assuming Trump's DOJ appeals it.

Ultimately, Congressional authorization isn't required for all things. The President is individually empowered along side them for many things- like impoundment- it was considered a normal Presidential power until the 1970s- 200 years after its first assertion. Took us that long to get a real crook in office. I think that actually you misjudge how broad the job description is. I think modern people would perhaps be terrified of the Constitutional Convention debate notes. They envisioned a very powerful "Chief Magistrate" (President) that would be controlled by the impeachment power. They hadn't experienced the Party-over-Country politics of political parties yet- they literally didn't exist.

The theory behind checks and balances required that control of the 3 branches wouldn't be united by any common cause other than those which an independent thinker would come to. Party politics shot that out of the water 200 years ago. System was broken by the time its second President was inaugurated.

Agreed. The ruling party shouldn't be acting like it's in the fucking opposition. Especially at times when it was fucking critical for it to lead.

Where in the hell have you been?

Trying? Dude has succeeded. The ICA is dead. All he has to utter are the words, "foreign policy", or "national security". But yes- it was the protection from this kind of bullshit happening, before it had been entirely neutered by the Supreme Court.

There is no regulation. Read the order.
There is no organ of the executive that is not obligated to follow an executive order, as long as it does not surpass the executive's constitutional or statutory power.
You're probably referring to the very gray area in "independent" agencies, but it's pretty clear at this point that the theory of independent agencies within the executive is a fiction.

I'm definitely ready to see Democrats fight back.
The era of gentlemanly pool has been gone for a long time, and they didn't get the fucking message.

There have been many times in my life where I've agreed with Republicans more than Democrats on issues that I felt were important (never social issues though, sadly), and the Dems and I stand apart on a good many things today- but this country needs more than 1 party acting. The Republicans have had effectively, at several levels, 1 party government since the early 90s.

It's how we end up with best-effort shit like the ACA, which is just riddled with poison compromises.
It's time for some FDR energy, but hopefully with the wisdom, temperance, and concern for the full aspects of the future of an Eisenhower