People in no shape or form talk about this enough.
Because
1) It's utterly true.
2) It's not exaggerated.
3) it's a level of fraud connected to vast sums of money
4) it's our actual health, it's central to life.
but somehow we shrug
When I fled an abusive monster 500 miles away to North Carolina, an anonymous prepaid phone saved my life, literally..
It was my only shield.
Now the FCC wants to kill that lifeline for every survivor by forcing ID + a physical address just to buy a prepaid phone.
Payphones are gone. You need a number for jobs, housing, everything.
This is the slow death of privacy, from “for the children” ID checks to biometric iris scans and cameras on every corner.
Your 4th Amendment right “to be secure in your persons, houses, papers, and effects” is being erased 250 years later.
Uh, no. The DSA is explicitly against borders - think about the implication just of that - wants to end the checks and balances system by subordinating the Presidency and Supreme Court to Congress, and is against markets to boot, in addition to the batshit woke stuff you mention.
@ZaidJilani birthright citizenship is/was widespread in the Americas because they desperately needed people. Most countries had it at one point, Europe just rolled it back ages ago.
not commenting on either good or bad, just why it exists here.
@mtaibbi serious alcoholics actually re-train their cells to function on alcohol over water over decades... which is why withdrawal from serious alcoholism can kill you, whereas withdrawal from most other drugs just fucking sucks ass
Anyone who can't see what is happening is blind.
1) Banning of the ability to have privacy with a cellphone
2) Banning of the ability to own a foreign router (which may not "comply" with future "required" legislation )
3) Identity checks at the OS, App Store and Service provider levels.
4) Ability to restrict individuals access to the internet, to given types of content, etc
5) Forced front and center "official" news media forced into online services.
6) Control over AI algorithms
7) Control over algorithms for visibility/sharing of content
8) Control over peoples cars (remote kill switches, embedded biometrics, automated reporting to LEO, inebriation checks).
9) Forced biometrics to login to computers, phones, etc
10) Digital ID to replace physical ID.
11) Digital cash to replace physical cash
12) Millions of biometrics and license place cameras + millions of "gun shot detection" systems
13) Banning of mobile applications and endpoint software the government deems wrong, dangerous, or incorrect, etc. (Tiktok, Kaspersky, etc)
14) AI being embedded in every processor, mobile device, desktop OS, etc.
15) Laws demanding "backdoored" encryption.
16) Laws demanding client side scanning.
17) Laws demanding control over speech deemed harmful, violent, dangerous, upsetting, etc
18) Charges and convictions against anyone releasing privacy focused software (tornado cash).
19) AI predictive policing and predictive dissent detection
20) Centralizing of all healthcare, psychological, financial, online, offline, travel and government records.
21) Forced biometrics collection to travel, attend public events, etc
@Protectaxpayers remind me again, how much taxpayer money goes to the USPS? None? oooooh.
if congress fixed the USPS healthcare prepayment boondoggle, it is profitable.
congress fucked this up
This isn’t surprising at all. A 2021 survey found that the DSA was *85 percent* white people. A huge chunk make 6 figures and almost everyone has a college degree. It’s made up of elite progressives trying to speak for poor minorities, who mostly don’t want what they’re selling.
Greg shares my message to @TheFIREorg’s staff today on the urgency of the fight for free speech in the digital age — and the growing headwinds we face.
@RepBenWaxman you can't require players to set daily loss limits.
you can require platforms to restrict accounts.
one is grossly unconstitutional, and the other is regulatory.
@JamesSurowiecki I am aware of the reason; I was pointing out that at no point did the federal government imply or state that a business owner can be prosecuted for denying patron based on politics. You sua sponte raised that angle as a straw man to bolster your point about waste of time (true)
@RockChartrand capitalism is a benign description of market-led economics not a political position. Capitalism doesn't protect anything, well written constitutional rights that are vigorously defended from our own government is what protects us capitalists.