Stephen Miller, who yelled at Lyons during morning phone calls with administration officials

No, you have it all wrong, it’s that two have the wrong color. Get out of here with those extra letters, you Euro weenie!

Normally, I am all for Techdirt’s takes. But I think this one is off the mark a bit, because I legitimately think that infinite scroll and auto play are insidious, and actually harmful enough to be treated as a dangerous design decision.

The whole point of Section 230 is that communications companies can’t be held responsible for harmful things that people transmit on their networks, because it’s the people transmitting those harmful things that are actually at fault. And that would be reasonable in the initial stages of the Internet, when people posted on bulletin boards (or even early social media) and the harmful content had a much smaller reach. People had to “opt in”, essentially, to be exposed to this content, and if they stumble on something they find objectionable they can easily change their focus

But the purpose of the infinite scroll and auto play is to get people hooked on content. The algorithms exist to maximize engagement, regardless of the value of that engagement. I think the comparison to cigarettes is particularly apt. They are looking to hook people into actively harmful behaviors, for profit. And the algorithms don’t really differentiate between good engagement and harmful engagement. Anything that attracts the users attention is fair game.

The author’s points regarding how these rulings can be abused are correct, but that doesn’t negate how fundamentally harmful these addictive practices are. It will be up to lawmakers to make sure that the laws are drafted in such a way that they can be applied equitably… (So maybe we’re screwed after all…)

16, and that’s just the things I’ve said this week

That joke is a gas.

It doesn’t matter. He has all the approval he needs to stay in power until Jan 2029, and if he sticks around later he won’t need anyone’s approval to do it.

But to make sure all the notes are at the right pitch, you need a tuna fish.

And it would be exceedingly strange if the justices take this claim seriously. The Constitution’s language is clear. The issue was settled in Wong Kim Ark. And Trump’s lawyers want to implement a 145-year-old idea that was deemed unworkable even by one of its preeminent original champions.

What the author fails to take into account is that this Court is bought and paid for. Once the justices rule in favor of their benefactors, they will be awash in gratuities…

But not before! That would be a bribe, and the Court is above bribery! They do have morals, after all.

I zoomed in a bit for you…

No, the apocalypse is here, just ask any recent college graduate. AI is coming for their jobs first. In fact, I’ve heard many people claim that the output of their AI is just as good as an entry-level hire, so why hire anyone?

What happens 10 years from now, when AI hasn’t measurably improved, but now all the humans who would have moved into those mid-level jobs aren’t there to do it?

You’ll probably have to pay in Dogecoin, or Sam Altman’s shitty WorldCoin. Sam wants to assign you a wallet by scanning your retina, so that tracks.

Only an idiot would sign that shit.

Isn’t that the demographic they are going for, though?

Just like the spammers who deliberately put bad grammar and spelling in their emails, they know the people who will click in spite of the obvious red flags are easy marks and can be fleeced for more before carrying on to the scam.

Something tells me that if OnlyFans didn’t exist, Andrew Tate would have still found a way to be an exploitative asshole.

But what if the original founders got enough? If we are against billionaires existing, shouldn’t we be cheering on folks who find an off ramp before getting there?

Well, yeah, that’s what owners and CEOs do, make money off the backs of others. (And other body parts, too, in this case). He’s no worse (or better) than the others.

That same Wiki article states that OnlyFans claims to have paid out $25B to “creators” as of last October. Ironically, these folks might be getting less screwed than content creators in other disciplines.

their Wikipedia article claims that he bought 75% of the site from the founders, and that the founders were still involved after the sale. Terms were not disclosed in that article, and I am not inclined to search further. But it is safe to assume the founders got their bag.

If this guy came along and made more off their work, who cares? I think those founders made enough that they don’t have to worry about paying for porn ever again.

It’s all about how the US government operates. The budget is actually non-binding, it’s a framework that is used to write the further appropriations bills that actually allocate money to departments. The problem here is that the Homeland Security Department is the only body that does not have its funds appropriated for the remainder of the fiscal year.

While there is a lapse in appropriations for the entire department, some functions (like ICE) already have separate funds appropriated. But apparently TSA has no stash of money hiding.