IIRC there’s still an ICANN fee that has to be paid by the registrar per domain registered

I might be wrong, but I seem to recall there’s an ICANN fee associated with registration as well.

Great idea! This will save the taxpayers literally hundreds of dollars in domain registration fees! That’s over 0.0001¢ per taxpayer!!

If you actually bother to read it (regularly, not just once or twice on selected columns that you saw posted online), you would not think that. The opinion column is very neoliberal with a hint of libertarianism.

The Taiwan issue has exactly to do with the fact that sending official diplomatic representatives to it means recognising its legitimacy and sovereignty. Even though most Western countries already believe this, sending the representatives would be to express that they believe this which is what upsets the Chinese government. China doesn’t care what people think as long as they keep it to themselves. It’s when they get “embarrassed” on the world stage that Chinese leadership thinks it demands action.

Especially not their opinion column but I’m just posting here because it’s interesting to see what the neoliberals think about it and it’s a good discussion point

Washington Post columnists said it would probably just capture the “Never Trumper” moderate Republican voters who currently begrudgingly vote Democratic because they understand that the Republican Party is nominating only yes-men and fascists.

The whole system of formal diplomatic recognition needs to die. Right now, “recognising” a government seems to be tantamount to acknowledging that government is legitimate and representative of the people. This is a very obstructive and unproductive system. It doesn’t matter whether you “recognise” a government and it also doesn’t matter what you decide to call your representatives to it. Refusing to recognise a government doesn’t mean that group of people doesn’t hold power or doesn’t actually control territory. It just prevents you from engaging with them in a constructive manner. It’s just a head-in-the-sand approach to intergovernmental relations.

If there’s a group of people calling themselves a government that holds power over a group of people or a piece of territory that you are interested in, it shouldn’t have to result in this whole game of charades. You should be able to send official representatives to that group without having to worry about offending everyone else. The whole concept of “recognition” is just nonsense.

Important distinction: it was cited 29 times [by non-parties to the case who filed amicus briefs carrying no legal weight].

It was not cited 29 times in the actual ruling.

This is a fantastic idea. The brilliance of the 47th president strikes again. Give them work permits, ensure they are paid a fair wage and the labour standards are adhered to, and it will guarantee that they become hardworking honest taxpayers who contribute to the American economy.

Wait, that is the plan… right?

Right…?

The party of domestic terrorism strikes again

I think one other factor that people have not considered is the monitor. To run all games at 4K maximum settings, yes, this type of PC might be required. But at lower resolutions, such as 1080p or 1440p, this is overkill and one would be able to run any game as maximum settings even with a computer costing a third as much.

That was already done weeks ago

What happened in San Diego and Minneapolis?

What are some examples of non-lip-service changes to national policy that the Democratic Party could be making right now?

Like the Republicans wouldn’t just get rid of the filibuster the first time it’s used against a major Republican policy objective

What policy are the national Democrats intended to be doing with their swanky majorities of -8 in the House of Representatives and -5 in the Senate?

This is part of what the opposition is supposed to do. They criticise, make fun of, offer legislative resistance to, and draw attention to the bad policies of the government.

Saying that firing Musk made the Government more efficient is like doubling the price of a TV then marking it “40% off” for Black Friday

> takes over the government

> disbands USAID and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

> refuses to elaborate

> fucks back off to running his Nazi car company

Patent obvious things still need to be said because:

1. Not everything realises/believes the thing is true even if it is patently obvious
2. If it is not said then it allows those who lie about the thing to be unchallenged, and the infamous Nazi propaganda minister Goebbels (edit: putatively) said, if you repeat a lie enough times, people will believe it