arrosenberg

8 ms·

61.
by arrosenberg 1y ago
This is a hopelessly naïve viewpoint. A strong, liberal federal government is the only guarantor of civil rights nationally. If you get rid of it, it won't be replaced by enlightened anarchism, it will be replaced by oligarchs like Pet
62.
by arrosenberg 1y ago
Why should they have access? ICE has no legitimate use for citizens tax returns. We have a right to privacy.
63.
by arrosenberg 1y ago
That really should be illegal. It looks like there might be workarounds, but that defeats the point of being easy to use. None of my non-technical relatives have Comcast, so I’m not sure how it would work out. It works fine on ATT, Verizon,
64.
by arrosenberg 1y ago
Technically anything is possible with the Calvinball Supreme Court, but states can choose not to extradite their citizens. E.g. NY has a shield law for abortion doctors. https://ag.ny.gov/resources/organizations/po
65.
by arrosenberg 1y ago
It takes less than 5 minutes to set up NextDNS with the same functionality and it costs $2 a month for unlimited DNS calls. If you download the app it absolutely can police cellular. If these legislators cared about keeping kids safe, they’
66.
by arrosenberg 1y ago
The culture of the people involved got us to this point, I’m not sure it’s the solution to the problem. > The progressive spin would be to now ban acquihires somehow, and then whatever new legal invention will be created next. Progressiv
67.
by arrosenberg 1y ago
Piracy is theft - you have taken something and deprived the original owner of it. Copyright infringement is unauthorized reproduction - you have made a copy of something, but you have not deprived the original owner of it. At most, you deni
68.
by arrosenberg 1y ago
Nope, I just fat-fingered it :)
69.
by arrosenberg 1y ago
Add the query parameter udm=14 to get AI free search results from Google. I agree with the other poster that you should consider paying for something like Kagi*, since Google will only continue to enshitten the internet with this stuff.
70.
by arrosenberg 1y ago
Bundling services is another mode of anticompetitive behavior that Google/Youtube use to obscure their pricing.
71.
by arrosenberg 1y ago
Uber executives would not survive first contact with public hearings that transit authorities regularly have to engage in.
72.
by arrosenberg 1y ago
If a casino or sportsbook allow unlimited losers, they shouldn’t be able to cut off winners. Conversely, if they cut off winners, they should be required to reimburse loses above a statutory limit. In a healthy economy “Tails I win, heads y
73.
by arrosenberg 1y ago
Yes, it’s an anticompetitive tactic, but we refuse to update our antitrust laws for the internet era.
74.
by arrosenberg 1y ago
Which affects the decision making of the company. There are things they won’t platform for fear of offending an advertiser. The effect is pervasive, regardless of whether you are paying the full rate or not.
75.
by arrosenberg 1y ago
Their point is that people do pay for these services and they have still introduced ads to squeeze out more revenue. Ergo, paying for a service guarantees nothing.
76.
by arrosenberg 1y ago
The same March of Dimes that was founded by Franklin Delano Roosevelt when he was President? Technically the money didn't come from government coffers, but it's very silly (and incorrect) to suggest that the effort was independent
77.
by arrosenberg 1y ago
There is no private entity that will broadly fund basic research. The most likely candidates, like Harvard, are also being attacked. The point of all this is to promote anti-intellectualism. No one is coming to save us from it.
78.
by arrosenberg 1y ago
It’s because the Church itself has trillions of dollars in property that it has no interest in being forcefully divested from.
79.
by arrosenberg 1y ago
At the end of the day, it’s all gangster shit.
80.
by arrosenberg 1y ago
Well that’s asinine. Big time “she made me hit her” energy if that’s actually your argument (which isn’t clear at all from what you wrote).
81.
by arrosenberg 1y ago
If their concern was actually DEI (instead of destroying the federal governments power) they would change the grant process going forward and maybe cut funding selectively. That they aren’t doing that, but cutting funding wholesale, is a cl
82.
by arrosenberg 1y ago
I read it, I just disagree. Bidens DEI policies aren’t why they are gutting the NSF, that’s just an excuse.
83.
by arrosenberg 1y ago
How do you figure? If they simply changed the grant writing process back to what it was before Biden, that argument would make sense. Cutting back funding and approvals wholesale points to a more nefarious know-nothing attitude toward resea
84.
by arrosenberg 1y ago
I doubt that - pharma and biotech are some of the biggest benefactors of government funded research.
85.
by arrosenberg 1y ago
It’s not understandable, it’s abusive. These large outlets have the resource to both verify, credit the original work, and deal with the fallout. That they choose not to comes from avarice that should be regulated or litigable.
86.
by arrosenberg 1y ago
Doesn't explain it at all. The biggest swing from 2020 to 2024 was people under 45 voting for Trump at a much higher rate, mostly driven by men. Anyone under 45 was born at least 5 years after lead gas was banned in cars. They're
87.
by arrosenberg 1y ago
It sounds like you think material conditions haven’t gotten worse? Cost of housing, food and healthcare, plus flat wages seem to disagree. I think in this case people’s perception matches reality. I’ve noticed you refuse to put forward your
88.
by arrosenberg 1y ago
It’s the same hypothesis. Its a line trending down, and there is an awareness that today is less than yesterday and more than tomorrow.
89.
by arrosenberg 1y ago
I don’t believe so. I looked into it a bit more, and it looks like homozygous variant carriers are more susceptible to other types of infection (West Nile is specifically cited), but I don’t see anything showing the variant causes issues wi
90.
by arrosenberg 1y ago
If you have an alternative hypothesis, I’m all ears. The lack of good paying jobs and the knock on effects of expanding wealth disparity seems to be underlying most of the issues driving radicalism, left and right, up and down. In America,

More ›