I don't know what part of "bothsides!!" you find as being valid when both sides are not acting equally.

One "side" is very much advancing the agenda of transparency and release. One is not.

That makes them very much unequal, which invalidates your theory.

You are making a very false assumption that motivations and policy never change over time. That's an equally ridiculous foundation to base an argument on. Things change, and policy changes to reflect those changed things, and it happens all the damn time.

Which is all well and good if you're talking about something you can easily replace.

Do realize that when someone spends $130M on a passenger jet, they expect to get a couple decades service out of it, and they aren't going to be ripping out the electronics every other year to upgrade like it's a PC - they upgrade things when they will either get more service revenue out of it (i.e. there's an RoI to be had), or if it's required on an airworthiness directive for safety.

Some of these systems were created before ECC was a thing. And more of them are using industrial components that are designed to work within a very specific range of operating conditions (temperature and power consumption being incredibly important) that even today may not be able to accept ECC RAM - for example, do you know of an off-the-shelf ARM64 CPU that can run inside of 15W and supports ECC? Neither does anyone else. Yet there are companies that are making avionics hardware that is not part of critical safety systems that run on ARM64 because of the power / heat dissipation problems.

It's a very difficult problem space without getting inordinately expensive due to having to make custom hardware at every single turn.

You do know that every single person doesn't have to be in the target demographic for a product, yeah?

If a small car doesn't offer you the needed features, DON'T BUY ONE.

That doesn't mean that it isn't a perfectly viable product for literally millions of other people with different conditions and constraints from yourself.

Because you don't understand that a prosecutor is not going to torpedo their own conviction on appeal by releasing everything and tainting future jury pools, should the case be remanded back to district court for further findings of fact?

Ghislaine Maxwell's Writ of Certiorari was denied on October 8 of this year by SCOTUS, exhausting all appeals.

Learn how the courts work please. Until all appeals are exhausted, the case files remain sealed without a court order saying otherwise. End of story. Asking why that is and trying to blame a President who kept his shit-digging hands OUT of the Department of Justice shows that you have no idea how any of this works.

Or, more concisely: Countries should aim to be poor.

To be fair to the nutballs, their proposal will actually slow it down as compared to not limiting immigration. That is, from their nutball perspective the proposal is an improvement, just not a total solution. For a total solution, they need to go full right-wing nutball and also ban women from working so they'll stay home and have proper Swiss babies.

Maybe the unanimous consent passage in the Senate will change your position?

Or perhaps every single Democrat in the House voting for the release of the files?

Or perhaps the great lengths gone to by the GOP leadership to prevent that vote to begin with? They held the House out of session for SIX WEEKS to delay the vote as long as possible while putting Republican members that signed the discharge petition in a headlock to get them to take their names off it - why?

Open your god damn eyes and stop with the "bothsides" bullshit. There is clearly one "side" that is acting in good faith, and one that is not. And you are arguing in bad faith for the side that is acting in bad faith, so just stop it.

Except that they aren't blocking sideloading. With the planned changes you can still install apps via:

1. Other app stores. The apps will have to be signed by a registered developer account.
2. By one-click installation from a web site. The apps will have to be signed by a registered developer account.
3. By ADB. No registered developer account required.

And for the cases that require a registered developer account, that account can be anonymous and free as long as the number of installs is small.

That would be fun, actually. I'd have to give them slashdot and substack. They'd have no idea what either of them are.

Well, it would be fun until they denied me entry.

FTFY

This is a gaslighting that he'll probably largely get away with, since most Americans -- especially his voter base -- have little contact with tourism or people from other countries.

His ongoing attempts to gaslight them over grocery prices, though, that one's going to be tougher. I'm surprised he's trying that. I mean, he's dumb, sure, and insulated from truth, but surely someone around him is smart enough and clueful enough to tell him that it would be better to sell it as a period of unfortunate but necessary pain on the way to long-lasting economic revival and stability. His base would eat that up, but even his diehard supporters are having a hard time reconciling "grocery prices are down!" with their own grocery bills, and he just keeps repeating it. He can cherry-pick specific item prices or gush about the lower-price of a (conveniently scaled-back) Thanksgiving dinner basket all he wants but people who actually buy groceries (such an old-timey word! <eyeroll/>) can see the truth during every weekly trip to the store.

Sorry, arresting under color of law without the due process of law is indeed unlawful detainment as spelled out by about 200 years of jurisprudence and the literal interpretation of the 5th Amendment to the Constitution. And if you go over state lines with your unlawful detainment, it's technically human trafficking.

EVERYONE gets due process, whether an "undocumented" or not. If you are geographically within the boundaries of the United States or its protectorates, you are guaranteed due process. Unless, of course, you happen to have brown skin apparently.

Open your damn eyes.

Except that you are describing the actual Congressional Review Act, which allows the Congress to tell the administration to go fuck themselves if they take issue with any administrative regulation that is proposed to be entered into the Federal Register under authority granted to it by Congress.

TL;DR: the Congress can change any administrative law they want, any time they want; because legislative law supercedes administrative regulatory authority created by legislative law.

And yet it's the Democratic leadership in the Congress forcing the issue on releasing all the documented evidence about the Epstein mess, not giving a single shit if anyone in the Democratic Party is named. They (rightfully) see this as an opportunity to clean house and get rid of the corrupt felon child abusers and sex traffickers while the GOP has been coddling and covering up for them.

I don't know how many "well ackshually..." posts I've seen alluding to Clinton getting wrapped up in all of this, followed by a litany of actual Democrats saying "so what? Child molesters need to go no matter what party affiliation they claim or what their name is" which there is never any response to.

Why is the GOP still trying to make it all go away with ever-increasing distraction? Who are they covering for?

I care about the kids, and I don't think this is treading on them, I think it's pushing them to have IRL relationships, and that's a good thing. I say that as a nerd who had few friends when I was a teen (in the 80s), but even normal, social kids today have far fewer real friendships and many of the geeky kids like I was now have none at all.

We're a social species, we need and crave socialization, but social media is to real relationships like drugs are to the normal joys of life; a false but massively-amped substitute for the real thing, addictive and harmful. It's perfectly possible to get high or drunk from time to time and still enjoy real life, but you have to use the artificial happiness in moderation and control. There are really good reasons why we try to keep kids away from drugs and alcohol, and keep adults away from the really powerful and addictive stuff, and get them into treatment when they get hooked (well, in the US we mostly just put them in prison, but some parts of the world are getting smarter and focusing on treatment).

The same logic applies to social media. We need to figure out how to tame its effects on adults, especially those who are for some reason especially vulnerable and get very warped by it. IMO, it makes perfect sense to just try to keep kids off of it entirely, especially since we don't really understand it yet.

True. If we were to make the decision based on medical and scientific bases, the drinking age would be 25.