I mean, I would still file a complaint with whatever relevant government agency, worst that could happen is that things stay the same I figure.

In the US at least that is very much illegal, though I am going to guess this isn’t in the US.

Nah, the 1st amendment does protect non-citizens as well as citizens.

It technically means the government needs to pass a very high bar before it can restrict any kind of speech, that bar being strict scrutiny.

Of course, the view of the public and the court historically has been that blocking union busting activities has passed strict scrutiny, since it a) is justified by the government’s interest in preventing the kind of violence that occurred when union busting was allowed, b) doesn’t restrict actions outside of union busting, so it’s narrowly tailored, and c) is the least restrictive method yet proposed, only other method I can think of is compelling union membership for everyone.

If ethical reasons are a concern, you might want to avoid Trader Joe’s as well on account of their union busting activities.

Not really no. SMS is nowhere near as versatile as a service like Discord in terms of being able to meet new people or have conversations that don’t overload unrelated but potentially interested people with notifications.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8H1u-zh9dmU

As much as I’d love that idea, I would guess there are financial reasons to not allow things like that, as both advertisers and credit card companies seem to really hate erotic and erotic adjacent media.

I assume the rich neighborhoods will have already have had their pipes replaced, in which case it would only be those people who are affected. Not that I have anything to back that suspicion up.

Technically that’s still on appeal, and tbh I do expect it to get overturned somewhere.

IIRC homes are protected in bankruptcy, because someone decided it would be unfair to inflict homelessness on someone for committing the crime of being broke (irony very intended).

Didn’t even offer a refund it sounds like.

“Hey, I know we just fucked up and let a ton of personal information out into the wild. As compensation how would you like to keep using us?”

I will point out there are actually pretty good driverless cars, they just aren’t made by Tesla. Look up Waymo if you want to look into them.

I agree it would be best for Wikipedia to address this on their end, but I have actually no idea where to begin with asking them to make a change like this.

It actually does switch automatically on mobile, just not desktop, which is why I get annoyed enough when it happens to mention it.

Please, anyone who reads this, stop posting links to the mobile version of Wikipedia. It doesn’t switch automatically on PC, and I see it happen all the time. Just take the half a second to remove the “.m” from the beginning of the link, save everyone else from the pain of having to be surprised by it and taking the time to do it themselves.

What do you mean unless it was also from a ballot measure? I’d say it should override laws even from a ballot measure since the new ballot measure is more recent, though in that case it would be best to communicate that the new ballot measure is overriding the old one just for clarity sake.

Perpetual licences have their place, like I’m reasonably confident under the hood you have a perpetual licences for the OS your phone runs on. The point isn’t to get a piece of software that will be updated and supported forever, it’s to get something that works, fits your needs, and that you know can’t just be revoked at the whim of another. Problem is that last one is becoming increasingly untrue.

I mean fuck AT&T, but fuck needless consolidation, pointless service bundling, and revocation of perpetual licences even more.

I for one would be fine with a digital ID to be used for even age verification, so long as it is only used for verification and is completely detached from any other form of identification. Honestly I’m getting kinda sick of rumors of Russian and Chinese trolls, true or not, as well as AI commenters influencing genuine discourse.