N.B. I originally went looking for a reason that maybe it was okay that Andy Yen was giving the thumbs up to Gail Slater. I thought this was an unfair internet pile-on. I think now it's a fair internet pile-on.
egerlach
joined 2 years ago
The official @[email protected] account replied and doubled down
[email protected] - @jonah
Corporate capture of Dems is real. In 2022, we campaigned extensively in the US for anti-trust legislation.
Two bills were ready, with bipartisan support. Chuck Schumer (who coincidently has two daughters working as big tech lobbyists) refused to bring the bills for a vote.
At a 2024 event covering antitrust remedies, out of all the invited senators, just a single one showed up - JD Vance.
1/2
[email protected] - @jonah By working on the front lines of many policy issues, we have seen the shift between Dems and Republicans over the past decade first hand.
Dems had a choice between the progressive wing (Bernie Sanders, etc), versus corporate Dems, but in the end money won and constituents lost.
Until corporate Dems are thrown out, the reality is that Republicans remain more likely to tackle Big Tech abuses.
2/2
(Less importantly, my response)
Which documents, you say?
What happened?
Shredded, you say?
How badly?
To bits, you say? Oh my my...
Technically, you're correct. In this particular case though, I don't think it's the best kind of correct.
Juries are the triers of fact when present. In a civil case, that means the judge can ask all kinds of nuanced questions in the jury instructions, as that could be necessary for the judge's application of the law later down the line.
In the US criminal justice system, the laws are meant to be interpretable by the common person (a lot of work being done by "meant-to-be"). A judge only asks them a single question: For the charge X, how do you find? Since juries do not need to justify their decision, they can use whatever reasoning they want to behind closed doors to reach their decision: facts, ethics, or flipping a coin. The lawyers use voir-dire to try to exclude jurors that would be too biased, or would be willing to use a coin flip (juries almost universally take their job seriously—they hold the freedom of someone in their hands.)
As mentioned elsewhere, an acquittal by a jury in the US is non-reviewable. It doesn't matter why they acquit. Convictions, OTOH, are reviewable, and judges have famously thrown out guilty verdicts from juries before.
If you listen to the news segment, it talks about security completely and not about chnaging the corporate zeitgeist around the priority balance between workers, customers, and shareholders.
Hear that whooshing sound?
Maybe you should be on an instance that doesn't literally have "world" as its top-level domain?
It's okay if they use the Play Integrity API, they just need to also whitelist the keys that sign the official Graphene OS ROMs. Not that I expect they'll do that, mind you...
Agreed. According to current polling, if the Conservatives get votes at the botttom of their confidence interval, and ALL the other parties get votes at the very top of their confidence intervals, it's still a PCPO minority.
The problem as I see it is that both the OLP and the ONDP see the other as "taking their voters". "If only those idiots supporting the would vote for us, then we could defeat Doug Ford!"
Meanwhile, if they ran as a semi-coalition, and got out of each others way in a few dozen ridings, they could at least reduce Ford to a minority, or possibly form a coalition. In the absence of proportional representation or a ranked ballot (or both), it's the best way to prevent vote splitting among 60% of Ontario from allowing Ford to win again.
Examples:
- Scarborough Centre: If the NDP gets out of the way, it goes from Lean PCPO to Likely OLP
- Timiskaming-Cochrane: If the Liberals get out of the way, Lean PCPO → Lean NDP
- Algoma-Mnitoulin: Liberals get out of the way, Toss-up NDP/PCPO → Lean NDP
- Barrie—Springwater—Oro-Medonte: NDP get out of the way, Toss-up OLP/PCPO → ... okay this one probably stays a toss-up, but the advantage shifts to the OLP from the PCPO.
Notably, I would leave ridings like Humber River—Black Creek out of consideration, as that's a solid 3-way race.
If you're concerned about being able to govern as a coalition, make your #1 priority electoral reform. Get that done and then see where it goes from there.
I took 5 minutes, and looked at one polling aggregator, and found a possible path to moving 4 seats. You need to move ~30 seats to get Ford out of power according to today's polling. If the OLP and ONDP can't work together to find a path to victory for them together, neither of them deserve to lead, IMO.
(Fortunately for me, I get to vote for Catherine Fife (NDP-Waterloo), and her seat is pretty safe)
Ahh, the comment I was looking for
I would have also accepted: "Haskell did it first."
Yeah, I just saw news about that last night. If he can make recess appointments it's all over.
Not really. It sounds like they haven't gone after them for emulation, but instead for emulation-adjacent things: copying ROMs, circumventing digital locks, etc.
They explicitly mention (one of?) the developers of Yuzu sharing ROMs in the article.
In other words, the emulator itself isn't illegal, but in order to use the emulator the way most people want, you have to do illegal things, and that's what they go after you for.