There is a world of difference between taking issue with someone making a poorly received argument and a government deciding that making that argument is inherently illegal.
There is a world of difference between taking issue with someone making a poorly received argument and a government deciding that making that argument is inherently illegal.
I’ve used my location history to remember names of places I went to over a year ago, addresses I was given and expected to write down but forgot, confirm for myself I actually went and did something that I couldn’t recall fully…
It’s great for someone with a shite memory.
I can’t cite a source but I read once that the lawyers got involved and said Microsoft/Windows/some other term they have legal control of had to be the first word.
Yeah the main lesson I’ve taken away from the last decade of cryptocurrency instability, NFTs, and things like algorithmically generated judicial sentencing guidelines that perpetuated the existing racial biases while making them seem more legitimate because “the computer can’t be wrong” is that we should run our whole society with them.
Misunderstanding on my end then, I made some clearly unfair assumptions. I agree with you there and apologize for the mischaracterization.
You might want to turn that incredibly critical eye you’ve got for communism back in on capitalism, that’s all.
Out of curiosity, how do you think governments in large capitalist economies (such as the US) properly account for greed for power and keep it in check? Do you think they are doing a good job on that front?
Yes. I would say people shouldn’t have to pay for the basic necessities required to live. Why should anyone live with the threat of homelessness and starvation?