Excepting that news organizations, big platforms,... are publishers, and therefore not supposed to be covered by the Section 230 protections. The latter is only supposed to protect the carriers (Comcast, Verizon, T-Mobile,....), who transmit that, given that they're just transmitting that data from the creator to the platforms, and separately, from the platforms to the subscriber.

Suing people/companies for defamation is perfectly legal, and while politicians are not above the law, they're not below it either. Trump can sue any news organization that he thinks defames him, and that news organization can fight it in court, if they so choose. Or if they choose to censor opinions b'cos of how they think Trump will react, that's on them! As for individuals, platforms like Facebook and YouTube (and previously, Twitter under Dorsey) had already shown that they were willing to censor content that ran against the Left, so they can't bitch now if they get sued every now and then for what they allow... or don't

Rather than re-write the law, take a look at who it applies to. It should only apply to the internet service providers, be it Comcast, Charter, Cox, FIOS, or mobile internet carriers like Verizon, T-Mobile or AT&T. It should not apply to the likes of Fakebook, Twitter/X, Alphabet (YouTube) and others, since they do have the prerogative of banning users for any reasons. So opinions hosted on their platforms aren't something they should be shielded from, unless they had an absolute zero censorship policy

The above writeup mentioned New England, Los Angeles and Utah. The first two are both exclusively Democrat run, and Utah is more purple these days. Nothing to stop your queen from putting the kibosh on coal plants in your state. Also, the bulk of coal plants are in states like WV, VA, KY,.... and there was no mention of plants there closing down

...all the stuff written previously in C/C++ or any other language, is being re-written in Rust? Why not write just newer things in Rust, while leaving old working code alone?

Also, Russia gets its drones from Iran, of all places. It's not like Iran could legally buy semiconductors from US makers. It's probably from China, and therefore, if Kyiv wants to sue anybody, it should be the Chinese manufacturers who sell those parts to Iran to manufacture them for Russia

Yeah, Chandler seems pretty justified in rejecting it

In fact, why don't they build data centers in Alaska, where energy is cheap, and where all that heating would be offset by the ambient temperatures? They don't need many people there, so that should be the perfect location for those datacenters

I consider it interesting that Phia is available as a browser extension on Chrome and Safari but not on Edge

Well, I'll have to admit, I didn't have "learning that someone on Slashdot believes that the Cold War was a myth" on my bingo card for today.

You seem to be confusing "wanting to get rid of communists" with "wanting their countries to be poor and dangerous".

I had read that MIPS has pretty much abandoned its ISA in favor of RISC-V. Not a major deal, since only 2 instructions were different. Also, in addition to OpenSparc and OpenPower, ARM itself is "open" in the sense that it can be licensed, after a company pays an upfront membership fee (According to Steve Furber, it was to keep ARM from going into the red).. I daresay one could even do what Cyrix and Centaur, in addition to AMD, used to do in the 90s w/o running afoul of either Intel or AMD ISA patents

How?

...the Tenth Amendment, IANAL, but sure looks this way

USAID was horrifically corrupt

The cuts to USAID are projected to cause 14 million extra deaths - a large minority of those children - by 2030. And USAID engendered massive goodwill among its recipients

But no, by all means kill a couple million people per year and worsen living conditions (creating more migration) in order to save $23 per person, that's clearly Very Smart(TM).

And I don't know how to inform you of this, but the year is now 2025 and the Cold War and the politics therein ended nearly four decades ago. And USAID was not created "to smuggle CIA officers" (though CIA offers used every means available to them to do their work, certainly), it was created as a counterbalance to the USSR's use of similar soft power to turn the Third World to *its* side.

They can go back at any point if they don't think the conditions and salaries offered are worth the job. What matters is that they remain free to leave, with no "catches" keeping them there (inability to get return transport, inability to communicate with the outside world, misinformation, etc etc). Again, there's a debate to have over what conditions should be mandated by regulation, but the key point is that the salary offered - like happens illegally today en masse - is lower than US standards but higher than what they can get at home.

What on Earth are you talking about? Nobody is trying to make other countries poor and dangerous. People come to the US from these countries because even jobs that are tough and underpaid by US standards are vastly better than what is available at home. Creating a formal system just eliminates the worst aspects of it: the lawlessness, the sneaking across the border in often dangerous conditions (swimming across rivers, traveling through deserts), "coyotes" smuggling people in terrible conditions, and so forth. The current US system is the dumbest way you could possibly handle it: people wanting to work, US employers wanting them, the US economy benefitting from it... but still making it illegal, chaotic, dangerous, and unregulated for those involved.