Is it for the sake of “Trump proofing” or are there other reasons? Looking at what has been safeguarded one thinks they are expecting a some sociology department purge. No matter what one might think it’s still a really bad idea to start a book burning. Even if it could be objectively proven that all that stuff is nonsense and dangerous it still doesn’t mean that they warrant destruction, because everything is worthy of keeping around because it can still be referenced and for history’s sake. People who ban books and restrict access are really more afraid of an argument than protecting the truth.

fyi: Never title our posts like “I found this on site X” or “I found this to be cool”. It’s seriously bad practice.

Now I’m imagining a Roomba with 9mm pointing at me.

Nothingburger. Most likely just another “fuck you” tripwire policy from Biden admin to Trump admin. Most likely Just to spite republicans and make people like Trump and Rubio fight each other instead of doing something else. Remember; US foreign policy does not change when the president changes and this does not mean that Cuba is off the hook.

Really highlights the fact that any free speech and naive western sense of freedom in these walled garden is just a button press away from being taken away and that there are no rules or standards. Whenever the owners or their friends feel even slightly displeased, annoyed or god forbid afraid the masks go off and the hammer falls.

Holy ideology, Batman!

The only significant “China risk” for European companies is future western sanctions on China, not anything China will do. Washington will one day come up with an another “stop China” plan for whatever reason. Brussels will follow it without question or thought about negative effects on Europe, just because it’s given in Brussels that EU will follow US wherever it goes. EU has no ability or even the will to do otherwise or really stand against the US for European economic self interest.

Chinese market and manufacturing is not something European companies they can do without anyway. Especially after the current sanction war, the economic necessity for trade with China has only increased, but so has European reliance on the US. European companies just have to go for it and pray that Washington will not fuck them over (they will).

But then who on this planet was expecting that.

And you both are oversimplifying by putting the christian zionist nutjobs within the same basket with the vast array of other nutjobs and assume that they are all the same.

Centralisation and large scale has it’s benefits. There were also many problems with everybody hosting their stuff by themselves. Enshittification is results of private companies having to go profit first (and google being google of course), not so much because they are the only game in town. Being the monopoly merely enables the shitting on users for profit. I see youtube and many google services more like internet’s utilities that are privately owned and that is causing problems, not that they have gotten so big.

Every social media that isn’t under anglo american control is a possible threat to the current global order. We have all seen this.

Increasingly not even for their own benefit. They are like a parasite that is killing it’s host and therefore it’s means of subsistence

It’s more like they have tons of more money and larger numbers in their portfolio. it’s however not a significant increase in actual wealth, since the money they have is increasingly wort less and the worth of their assets are increasingly more and more speculative in nature. The pockets of billionaires is where all the printed money eventually ends up and society is no richer for it. The money contributes to inflation, but it really doesn’t get invested or anything.

I think there is no risk to Israel if it’s their own guys doing the destabilizing in Syria.

The project is open source so it would keep going, at worst case people could fork it or whatever. They would just lift up one of the maintainers to take Linus’ job. I don’t know how this would apply to the Linux foundation, but I think he still would be replaceable, it’s all designed that way, because IT sector wouldn’t have all it’s eggs in one basket that might break if one guy leaves or dies.

Well the requirements for government IT stack is really more about security and reliability than performance.

The real issue is that these companies are purely for profit and couldn’t give a flying fuck about any negative social implications of their product. Every Le bad thing about any service is just down streamed from this reality of society.

It’s not some break towards fascism. It’s more like liberal capitalism has always had a fascist tendency and right now the western elite feels pressured everywhere so they let the mask slip and start easing in the policies of the periphery back to the core, just to keep power. This chat control is there to both allow easier crackdowns, but most of all make everybody feel that they are being watched and are less likely to start any shit against the status quo and submit, as if in a panopticon.

The Taliban are nice and moderate compared to this.

A very vocal minority is using it, and only because Musk changed the moderation rules on X. Otherwise Twitter was as shit as it has ever been

i’d say it’s very reasonable for russia to fuck right off and fix the damages, which is to say nothing of the lives ukraine lost because of that choice - anything less is unreasonable

Yes, This is what you want! It’s a wish not bound in any sound perception of reality on the groundt.

people shouldn’t have to keep dying for a lost cause and I will not apologize for that. Ukraine still has a change for a future, but it won’t if it fights this war to “the last Ukrainian” as zelensky and many “pro-Ukraine” trolls seem to want.

bullshit bullying that happens with all major military powers

International politics have always been law of the jungle and ability to do violence of political, economical and military kind to other countries has always been the measuring stick of international power and ability to guard national interests. Why anybody got to believe otherwise was because for a short time in the 90s and early 2000s US was the unquestioned global hegemon and could by itself set a global rules, enforce them and crush dissent. That gave the illusion (in the west mainly) that there were no longer small and big countries in competition in the world. With US as the policeman there got to be some semblance of law between countries like there was law within these countries among individuals. Now Russia is portrayed as a law breaker when it’s using it’s “military veto” in Ukraine and pushing against the post-cold war status quo and “restoring normalcy” in international affairs.

I don’t think this is necessarily good, but I do think it is very much happening and it was bound to do so.