I'm detecting the presence of some form of personality disorder here.
don't understand how technology can fuck their tiny brains forever.
Have you heard of the expression "people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones"?
Because it seems rather appropriate for this.
You make a point. It would need to be comprehensive in it's reach.
The best way to achieve it in my view would be to strip much of the Presidential powers away. Trump has clearly shown that there is far too much power concentrated in the executive and that many of the unwritten rules are as good as non-existent.
I don't have enough knowledge to claim to know exactly how to do it. It would require a bipartisan effort and extensive legal work to ensure it's watertight. Giving Congress more power and giving the executive more accountability would be the way though I believe.
As much as I would personally like to see those responsible held to account I think you're right in that it would cause untold amounts of harm. It is the right thing to do but there would be huge fallout.
Personally I think America and it's reputation would benefit much more from putting in place robust laws, even amendments to the constitution to openly and definitively show the world "guys, we're really sorry. This will absolutely not happen again. Ever". That's the only way.
If you prosecute those responsible without changing anything then they will be back with even more vengeance and even more extreme and messed up ideas.
I'm not quite sure what it was that I said to trigger that response but I was referring to a leader not accepting a salary to do the job, rather than a leader who doesn't even have to take bribes which is what the user meant. It was a misunderstanding that was cleared up further in the comments.
I have no idea what part of my comment you're responding to though. I apologise of this isn't the case but it looks to me as though you've interpreted something in a particular way and used that to go on an angry tirade against Kier Starmer and the rise of right wing politics.
That's fair enough but not what I was talking about. I'll leave you to it.
Transparency International highlighted the UK has slipped due to record spending on election campaigning . Labour, Conservatives and Reform have been guilty of this in various instances.
It's easy to blame a single party, as some commenters in here might, but this is very clearly a systemic issue.
There need to be strict limits on campaign spending and absolute transparency about where that money has come from.
No more overseas donors. No more Think Tanks taking donations for "research", from opaque sources and funneling it back to the party.
Politics needs to be cleaned up and freed from the grasp of these rich wankers who think because they have more money they can set the rules on how we as a people are governed.
Welcome to America.
Anything and everything is susceptible to private wealth and exploitation of the poor.
Doesn't matter if it's your health or your property or you name it. It can and will be exploited to take money from you. The plebs.
a leader so spineless that you don't even need to pay him? Who'da thought?
Sorry but what do you mean by this? I'm struggling to see how this is bad. Would you rather a leader took all the money they could get their hands on? Because that's how you end up with Trump.
Sheer opulence.
I think what this actually means is that some companies are now using technology to extract as much money as they possibly can from you and me.
I bet it will soon be the majority (if it isn't already).
Am I fine with age verification? Yes, I am. Especially for social media. I don't want children being brainwashed by right wing propaganda that is prevalent on there and I believe the state has a duty of care to protect citizens.
No channels of privacy? No, I am not fine with that. I haven't seen any evidence to suggest that private conversations are not possible though, either via chat encryption or any other method. Is there any for the UK?
Chat control? I'm not sure. That sounds vague. I would need to know the specifics and what it's protective purpose is.
You are welcome to call me blind. You still haven't presented any evidence that the government is keeping secret social scores on it's citizens though, nor any evidence of state wide internet restrictions on privacy. If there is such evidence and I believe it is a threat to an open and democratic society then I will act.
The USA is currently descending into authoritarianism, in my view precisely because "freedom of speech" and freedom of ownership are so closely protected. Malicious forces can spread whatever messages they want and influence whoever they want with impunity.
My view is that the current UK government is not a threat to the people. The elites looking to purchase power and influence and eventually become the government are the biggest threat. Social media is their most effective weapon.
I would argue that if you can't see that then you are blind yourself.
I'm happy to agree to disagree though. Civility and all that.
I had never heard that expression before and had to look it up. Very interesting but they've been obsolete for decades now.
The procedure since the 1960s has been to delivery positive pressure ventilation to expand the lungs via tracheotomy, rather than housing the patient in the irong lung (negative pressure chamber).
Did get me reading about Paul Alexander too. The man who used an iron lung for 70 odd years, achieving a degree and a career as an attorney and author. Worth a read!
Not trying to prove you wrong. Just wanted to share info on the subject. Thanks for the comment. Sent me down a rabbit hole!