American free speech laws are the superior option. A government that has the power to arrest people for saying "hateful" things is no better than China or North Korea. But at least you won't need to deal with people saying mean things (that you can block) on your computer (that no one is forcing you to use for social media) anymore, right?

>> A government that has the power to arrest people for saying "hateful" things is no better than China or North Korea.

The US government is quite literally shooting dead American citizens in the street with zero consequences. You have a president who was found in civil court to be a rapist. He was impeached and had dozens of charges brought against him. He's unilaterally murdering people at sea and kidnapping foreign leaders.

EU countries balancing the right to freedom of speech against other rights is a drop in ocean compared to what's going on in the land of the free.

If the government ignored who people voted to president, it sure wouldn't be a free country would it? The eu "balancing" the right to freedom of speech is the same thing every authoritarian regime says. "We need to balance your right to speak to make sure you don't cause any disruption to the status quo (and knock us out of power)." Modern Europe is simply following the same line of thinking that every authoritarian regime has since forever. Just keep letting your rights get eroded.

Boring American arrogance.

America wants to be free to spread fascist propaganda and child sexual abuse material all over the world, i.e., it's utterly degenerate culture.

You are free to try, we are free to ban it. It's all good.

Fascist propaganda = i don't want 3 gorillion immigrants coming into my country every day.

If this is a real take you need to rethink your view on the world.

Got anything substantive to say?

its like we have different smaller governments that can pass their own laws inside of one larger government or something

While I get that... I'm talking about hypocrisy not sovereignty in that it's the same or overlapping group doing both.

This comment made my day :)

You are basically supporting slavery. This support is in no way appropriate, not even on race grounds, because it doesn't discriminate by race.

It's worse because slavery is a harmful incentive to keep people UNFAIRLY imprisoned.

What about for the tens of thousands that are demonstrably innocent and still serving time?

Every single innocence project has years or decades of backlogged cases.

Usually they did it. Dont be so suspicious you get convicted by a jury of your peers. We need more people in prison, not less.

You're an unserious clown.

Fewer than 50% voted for it, which means more than that voted against it.

Negative. I encourage you to go look at the election results.

  Kamala Harris/Tim Walz      75,019,230  48.34%
  Donald J. Trump/J.D. Vance   77,303,568 49.81%
  Various Others               2,878,359  1.85%

So, 50.19% voted against Trump, 49.81% voted for him.

Voting for a 3rd candidate isn't a vote against one of the other two, or does your logic work both ways? so 51.66% of people voted against Harris?

You know what, I don't even care if you respond. The election is over, and we can twist these numbers until the next election.

The logical leaps taken about voting for/against someone are troubling. The tropes around this are disturbing. The emotional vitriol around all of those are even worse.

The dude is the sitting POTUS. He stinks. Bitching about meaningless percentages isn't productive... at all.

There is no question that he won the presidential election in 2024.

However, when people say things like "this is what Americans voted for" ... there's a bit more nuance required. His election win is what our electoral process produced. But to conclude from that that an actual majority of Americans preferred his policies to anyone else's ... that's a mistake.

And yes, 51.66% of people voted against Harris - they could have voted for her, but chose to vote for someone else.

> The logical leaps taken about voting for/against someone are troubling. The tropes around this are disturbing. The emotional vitriol around all of those are even worse.

Alright, the next step is to accuse everyone who might try to ground the discussion in truth that they must have TDS. I am not a huge fan of accusing one's opponents of projection, but man, sometimes it really does seem to be the most plausible answer.

> Alright, the next step is to accuse everyone who might try to ground the discussion in truth that they must have TDS. I am not a huge fan of accusing one's opponents of projection, but man, sometimes it really does seem to be the most plausible answer.

Ground the discussion in which truth?

Every artist is capable of drawing CSAM. Every 3D modeler can render CSAM. Ban all computers !!

Well every human can be an artist with some training. I guess the solution is to ban humans.

And the artist is punished for doing so. Thank you for proving my point.

But we don't ban pencils do we?

right and X isn't having it's GPUs banned

This genuinely does not read like a real post.

Actually read like one of those AI-fueled cringe LinkedIn post.

If you software is not being distributed by that distribution and is using some external download tool, it is inherently not supported and the only way to make sure it works is to compile from source.

If you compile from source, but your distro is shipping library version that is incompatible with the app, you're still screwed.

This is why flatpaks/snaps/app images have been taking off. Devs don't have time for bugs caused by incompatible libraries. Distro packagers don't have time to properly test the thousands of packages they have to change to satisfy their 1 shared library version policy.

The bottom one is suspicious because it is bigger !!!!!

Explain to me why I should want an electric car?

Low maintenance costs, cheaper operational cost (depending on electric rates).

Some of them are quite peppy too. My Leaf isn't but it meets the criteria I just gave.