Musk really needs to do it now to get a decent listing.

The problem is he has no income for all his AI stuff, Twitter advertising revenue is still in the toilet, and spaceX’s biggest customer is the US government, but the Democrats fucking hate him, and the mid terms are coming up.

So time to squeeze the little guys to get some revenue.

Sure.

Must have missed it.

I scrolled back to check, but obviously not far enough.

I had never realized how much Halle Berry looks like Zoolander till I saw the third picture.

Got to cash out their shares using your pension fund before they go bankrupt.

Calm down Rambo, the second amendment’s only good for two things.

1. Making it easy for kids to shoot up a school.
2. Sitting there with your thumb up your arse and convincing yourself that your rights can’t be taken away so long as you’ve got a gun.

The only person that almost managed an insurrection was president at the time.

Does it matter?

The Dems can’t filibuster for the supreme court.

Providing there’s a Republican majority there’s literally nothing they can do to stop it.

I don’t know man, that sounds interesting rather than dull.

I’ve been using rdx since the end of support for 3rd party clients to occasionally lurk.

I appreciate the work you’ve done. Thank you for all your effort.

So this is pretty good.

https://measuredcollective.com/is-google-forms-gdpr-compliant/

It’s a list of things you need to do in order to make the use of Google forms gdpr compliant.

One thing they don’t touch on is the use of personal accounts to collect data. People tend to use Google forms because it’s easy to set up using their personal account, but that essentially removes any company oversight from the collection and data processing. This makes it much harder to satisfy the data controller requirements.

Of course if it’s an external contractor gathering the data and processing it independently, your company is likely to dismiss all this as not their problem.

If it’s real academic research it will have had to go through ethics approval, and this should include data handling, and gdpr compliance.

Yeah, how racist do you need to be for this supreme court to decide it’s a bit much?

Let’s hope they try to replace their lobbyists with AI.

You can blame American puritism for that.

No sexual content on these websites, instead we’re going to stir up rage and sell everyone an AR-14.

Yeah, there’s two problems with this.

1. Congress is non-functional and can’t act as a check on the executive branch or the courts. In the past they’ve passed fuck you laws where they initially passed a law saying X, the supreme court interpreted it to say Y and then they passed a clearer version of X. This hasn’t happened in a long time.
2. The supreme court likes to reinterpret the constitution. This means if you want to correct the supreme courts interpretation you have to pass a constitutional amendment. Even if Congress functioned properly this would be difficult.

The idea we’re talking about wouldn’t work anyway. The problem is, many of the state supreme court judges are also batshit.

The only way round this is to copy other countries that have functional judicial systems and stop making judges either political appointments or directly elected. They need to be professionals selected on merit, and firable, or at least replaceable after a term, if they’re incompetent.

The best thing for this is to just ignore it and let it die a failed startup.

No one should care what a Peter Theil backed startup says about the truth. It probably thinks Greta Thunberg is the antichrist.

deleted by creator

A lot of the frustration in these early games comes down to no save function, which is fixed by the emulators.

So pick a game that’s meant to be good and just save-cheese it.

Otherwise, the early Zelda games are great and hold up well.

My favorite was when Priti Patel suggested we should use wave machines to drown migrants trying to cross the channel.

The only problem was she was home secretary at the time, and actually in charge of the borders.

You’re never quite sure if mockery or horror is the right response.

"Because of my views - and they’re lawfully held views - they are missing out on this opportunity, and that’s the part that is absolutely galling.

And it’s also a lawfully held view for scope to think she’s so terrible that they want nothing to do with her.

Fucking coward. If your only justification for your views is that it’s “lawfully held” you need to admit to yourself that you’re a bad person.

Did he look in a mirror?