Jokes on them. I’m going to use AI to estimate the value of content, and now I’ll get the kind of content I want, though fake, that they will have to generate.

I should make a crypto currency and call it Condoms?

If they had attempted to overthrow the government don’t you think they would have gone in armed? This is the problem with the internet being politically bifurcated. The claims on both sides for what is reality get more and more disconnected over time. The echo chamber only rewards those who make claims beyond what has already been claimed and never rewards those who make a correction. Each echo chamber then has a steady velocity toward madness.

Due process.

I posted this to a few places. If you want to see what different places on the net think:
https://goatmatrix.net/c/USPolitics/DrjNYLpSU5

That is a fair point. I suppose it is a weak argument to say that the government should do something else well instead, because it currently doesn’t. But more broadly government shouldn’t be placing serious penalties on anything that doesn’t have definite harm that has occurred on a definite victim.

Fining you for speeding sure. But castration or even jail longer than six months, I’m going to need to see an actual victim with a substantive harm where but for the accused’s specific actions they would have not been harmed (proximate cause).

But people think with emotions and can be told to dislike this or that person (sometimes fairly but often unfairly) and then people will support any level of penalty suggested thereafter.

More amendments we need. It should be easier to pass amendments that restrict government where the majority agree, strong majority to grow powers. Yet another amendment we need.

But it could also be an absolute check protecting persecution.

In theory due process would protect them. Personally, in the same vain, I don’t like qualified immunity. I think government officials and workers should be owed a slightly higher level of due process to protect against political targeting, but should also face higher sentences because as a member of government they should have a higher respect for the law if they are convicted.

Qualified immunity prevents that and so do pardons for government mis-actions.

That’s fair.

And also a reminder that Switzerland flirted with actual nazism. Remember that whole “neutral” during WWII thing. That was really finlandization of Switzerland from western powers. They operated inside the German economic block.

So telling a swiss company that Trump is a nazi and association with anything even 0.0000001% a nazi would be outside of what you’d expect for a Swiss is kind of funny.

The only thing Nazi-like about Trump is his support of Israel committing a genocide against people who are in the way of Israel’s Lebensraum.

Shouldn’t it be tens of thousands of dollars? So it’s like $2,000 dollars and $40 bucks?

Are you saying something is going to be uncovered?

Yes. It’s literally not a suggestion from me. I worry it reads that way. It’s more like saying it is pointless to plug one hole in a sive. Either plugging all the holes in the sive is worth it and you do it, or it’s not and you don’t. But people who demand that we plug one hole in a sive either are stupid or have a different motive. If you want to look at the other motive possibility look at who is angling to buy it.

But other things have influence too. If Russia bans Youtube are we going to call them draconian for it? Saying we are going to ban something because we ended up with political outcomes we didn’t like that we don’t want to spread is what authoritarian regimes do.

Addendum: If you were to not single out a single company and actually address the fear at play you wouldn’t even single out the app store. You would ban any chinese company from distributing any networked software in the US. That’s what an actual law would look like instead of making a law blatantly making rules for one entity. That would be a pretty intense law, but at least it would address the fear that’s being claimed, be logically consistent, and apply the same rules to everyone. The question would be if that juice is worth the squeeze. That’s not something I’m trying to sell or not sell. Other people can think about that. But the absurd wackamole version is ruled out of making sense.

If anything it makes congress come off as stupid. We’ve got Rs and Ds on this issue. And maybe we can drop the tribalism for one second and have a cogent take away from this for once that correlates with observed reality. Maybe, congress by in large is stupid.

This is also very critical because Trump is very anti-intervention, except when it comes to Israel. Anything for them says Trump. Someone has to counteract that.

The problem is female and women aren’t grammatically equivalent, so you can’t just drop one in place of the other anytime you want. It bugs me when people say woman president. Imagine electing a man president. The correct word in that case is male. You’d be electing a male president. I don’t care about anyone’s politics. I’m just getting tired of people in suits on tv using poor language and being asked to be taken seriously. And I’m not singling out democrats. Republicans adopted that language too. There are people on tv who wouldn’t pass kindergarten telling us what they think will affect GDP.

So if I make a better car using customer feedback is the rights to the car really theirs because it was their opinions that went partially into the end product?

IP is a joke anyway. If you put information out into the world you don’t own it. Sorry, you can’t have it both ways. You can simultaneously support torrenting movies (I do, and I assume you do too), while also claiming you own your comments on the internet and no one can “pirate” them.

If you are loosing an argument just mention the Nazis.

Maybe it’s a good reason to reduce public spending in general. People act like public spending is a way to even things out, but in practice as the post evidences, the more we tax and the more the government spends the more wealth has actually been concentrated.