It will be extended this time, and it will be extended next time, until Trump is out of office or he finally succeeds in getting his friends to own it.

It pales in comparison to the gajillions his tariffs are bringing in. /s

Because it's our fucking country, not his! He was elected for his second and final term and after less than a year in office the vast majority of the country is regretting that decision. He's bleeding support from all sides and he's well on his way to becoming almost completely impotent. There's no need to renounce our membership in the Union when we can just be patient and wait for him to inevitably fade like a fart in the wind, forever to be known as the country's most shameless and disgraced leader.

This will create a huge chilling effect on the internet and provide elites with an unprecedented amount of power over what people can say on social media platforms. If my fellow Americans are dumb enough to support legislation like this, then unfortunately we deserve all of the terrible consequences that will inevitably result.

And what happened to American exceptionalism? Do we really want to take the freedoms we enjoy and sell them out just to become more like Canada and Australia?

Think about the consequences of this. If a coalition of people go onto whatever platforms you happen to enjoy and flood them with messages threatening the safety of high-ranking public officials or making libelous or slanderous claims, those platforms could be sued into oblivion if they're not able to keep up with the removal of those messages. And on most platforms there's a lot more users than mods, so the platforms don't stand much of a chance. Given how divisive and volatile our society has become, I estimate coordinated campaigns against platforms would happen within days of a law like this being enacted.

So many people today seem to be buying into oversimplified solutions to our problems and lack the imagination to see the consequences of enacting these solutions. If lawmakers are dumb enough to pass this, I believe society will eventually recognize the magnitude of those consequences, but can we use our imaginations first instead of this trial-and-error spaghetti-against-the-wall method of legislation?

Halle-fucking-lujah, we've finally rediscovered a sane default UI choice that people in the 90s and early 2000s took for granted. And the rest of the UI seems pretty tasteful and responsive as well.

1. The kernel and the vast majority of its modules are not being rewritten in Rust. The last time I checked, Rust has its own directory in the Linux kernel source tree and it's meant to be used for new modules.

2. Projects evolve as they're implemented and many developers have a list of things they would have done differently if they knew ahead of time how the project would end up. If someone chooses to rewrite their project based on lessons learned, why not choose a language that has similar performance, a more modern technology stack and set of tools, and prevents all contributors from making foolish mistakes?

3. Rust is already fairly popular and seems to be growing in popularity. It may be easier to find contributors and maintainers for a project in Rust in a decade or so, which helps the longevity of the project.

Trump and the Tepublicans already have an extremely soft stance against Russia. Moves like this might be the straw that breaks the camel's back regarding aide to Ukraine. This doesn't make sense since they stand to gain millions in the lawsuit but risk losing billions in U.S. support to Ukraine.

Soros Derangement Syndrome is real.

While the war in Ukraine is something that no one other than Putin wants, the scenario you describe sounds like the best of a bad situation: the U.S. replaces old hardware with more modern, capable hardware and Ukraine gets our aging equipment to fight against Russia's aging equipment.

You didn't lead the horse to water. You told it water existed and left it to its own devices to find it.

There's also another interesting thing called Rule 42, which implies that everything exists on some corner of the internet. That includes materials which support your point as well as materials that refute your point. If you don't provide the specific evidence, I could end up finding the weakest evidence of your point as well as potentially stronger counterpoints. But ultimately, if you can't be bothered to provide evidence of your own claims then why do you expect me to do it for you?

I'm not a fan of Twitter's censorship (I think in some ways it did more damage than good), but Twitter wasn't "dead" before Elon bought it. In fact, it was making more revenue at that time. Of course profit matters over revenue, but that's going to be much harder to generate now since the platform makes profits primarily from advertising and companies don't want their branding featured next to unmoderated, unhinged, politically-charged rhetoric. And that doesn't even begin to cover all of the interest that needs to be paid for the loans Elon needed to purchase the company, which only makes profitability that much tougher. I guess it will be fine as long as Elon is alright with never making a profit on it and funding it indefinitely out of his own pocket to act as his own personal platform, which he can easily afford to do.

He's literally paying people in developing countries to pretend to be US Americans ranting about keeping out people from developing countries.

This is certainly within the realm of possibility but do you have a source? Also, why would he recently release a feature that shows the country of origin for accounts if he was shilling accounts in other countries?

Sperm export would certainly help, but it won't do anything to stop someone from touring sperm banks all over the world.