The rot however must be addressed from the very top. It is clear here that Trump appointed 3 activist republican judges (by your standard) so we should impeach him for it too and cut the problem off at the had.

Kilmar Abrego Garcia was deported despite an injunction against the government to do so. The government then pretended that they couldn't get him back, but ultimately caved when that turned out to be a lie as well.

For the record I'm not American, I don't live in America, and my primary news sources are not American media companies. Yet even I can provide you a cite without googling: Kilmar Abrego Garcia. Given we've heard of his deportation despite an injunction in place to prevent it *against the government* in international news, I can only assume Americans would have heard about that too. I'm sure there's more. We've also heard news stories of DoJ laywers being held in contempt and ejected from court rooms due to their interaction with the courts.

We have the British Library. Not too be confused with the British Museum where we keep all our loot.

I'm struggling to understand the logic, even from a MAGA perspective. How does making tech more expensive for US companies help them compete against Chinese companies?

I suspect you were just asked to be nice, and through a combination of spectrum OCD and insufficient cognitive therapy, you decided somehow you were being asked to do something wrong.

So you helped elect an ignorant sociopath. Congrats on that. Maybe you should have attended more of those cognitive therapy sessions.

BE already is in the EU. They are one of the OG members. ;-)

Yeah self-centred self-righteous arseholes just hate being called out as self-centred self-righteous arseholes because it means they need to put effort into trying to ignore their self-centred self-righteousness. The easiest way of doing that is for them to cut funding to researchers showing them they are self-centred self-righteous arseholes.

I'm not surprised most Americans are glad to see the back of any researchers pointing this out.

I know right? So why did 70 million people vote for a person who promised no new wars, while an international agreement that was preventing Iran from having nukes was in place?

One of the first things Trump did was make it easier for Iran to get nukes by tearing up the protections in place. The second thing he did was legitimise their reason for wanting nukes. If your reasoning is the only reason, then there's 70million fucking stupid people in the USA.

The problems start when someone falsely accuses you of being AI. I've seen people applying for jobs be accused of it. If your application gets silently rejected because of that it's affecting your life quite severely.

Because there is a lot of negativity about China and Chinese brands.

In the UK you can buy an MG, and they are good, solid, well made cars, at very reasonable prices. MG is a very old British car brand, and stands for Morris Garages. Their cars were crap and they went bust decades ago because they couldn't compete with European and Japanese manufacturers.

Now they are a SAIC (Shanghai Automotive) brand. SAIC sells commercial vehicles under its own name here too, because commercial buyers are only interested in the numbers and no all the nonsense about Chinese products that consumers pick up on.

It works both ways. Berghaus is British, not German. Haggen Dazs is American, not Danish. Matsui is British, not Japanese, as is Superdry (all the Japanese writing on their clothes is nonsense).

But if you don't connect that remote sensor or monitoring station to the internet, they have to send someone to go read it. That costs money, so of course they demand it is on the internet. The marketing department needs that feature because all the competitors have it and the customers put it as a hard requirement in their spec.

These things are never driven by engineering.

Yeah but would you take the risk? You don't trust the zombies are dead without double tapping the brain, so why trust your computer to open a webpage. Click twice, just to be sure.

There's nothing ethical or unethical about this. The reality is that tariffs are a cost to a business paid by the business. They are not passed on to consumers directly unless you are a drop-shipping company. The costs may be spread around specific products, all products, none of the products (absorbed by business), or may even be spread around the entire world.

There's neither anything legal or ethical which would provide a precedence for a refund to a consumer. The consumer has not been wronged. A product was advertised at a price, the consumer paid that price, and received the product. The price of products are relatively fixed compared to business expenses which go into making them, and people are not normally discounted post sale if one of those expenses is reversed.

In many cases the companies you list weren't even impacted by tariffs or responsible for the sale price.

Unless you imported something directly either through an international purchase or via a drop-shipment seller, you didn't pay a tariff, you paid the advertised fee for a product.