This all reminds me of the systemd ini-like syntax vs shell scripts debate. Shell scripts are superior, of course, but they do require deeper knowledge of unix-like systems.
I've been working with Linux since I was 10 (I'm much older now), and I still don't think I "know Linux". The upper bound on understanding it is incredibly high. Where do you draw the line?
Biden will probably not enforce the ban (no fines) and Trump will likely continue that non-enforcement, essentially nullifying the will of Congress and judgement of the court.
I think Biden talk is a nothing burger. You need time to enforce things. Ban goes into effect on the 19th. Do they send out violation notice on 19th (Sunday), 20th (Monday and holiday and transition day) or 21st (first working day) when Biden administration does not exist.
Yes. Not all offices are open on weekends. Of course armed forces are of course police are working but should all agencies be open every day? And are they? Check your neighborhood. Post office may be open on Saturday but not Sunday and definitely not on MlK day. Check the city hall. Check the bill payment in-person windows. Check the social security agency.
Some problems such as LA fires require immediate response, some problems require an escalation mechanism and many others can be dealt during regular business hours.
I think the point being made here is that many offices, including but not limited to your local post office, are closed on Sundays. They were not saying that your specific local post office is integral to enforcing the TikTok ban.
Is there a section in the text of the law that says that enforcement has to happen outside of normal office hours or do you just assume that’s the case because the law is being talked about in the news?
So long as we’re agreeing that they’re not doing anything because the date falls on the day before the administration is dissolved, yes!
I am glad that we are on the same page that the answer to “why don’t they enforce the law that they can’t enforce” is in the question.
> I don’t understand, why wouldn’t they send it out on the 19th?
> "Given the sheer fact of timing, this Administration recognizes that actions to implement the law simply must fall to the next Administration, which takes office on Monday," White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said in a statement.
Don't fool yourself or fall for the propaganda: China is hardly an adversary -- just look at how much money we send them and how many goods they send us. If they were truly an adversary we'd be treating them like we do Russia.
> If they were truly an adversary we'd be treating them like we do Russia
As you said, we trade with them extensively. We didn’t tighten the screws on Russia until it actually invaded Ukraine. Until Xi actually invades Taiwan, it’s profitable to pretend.
I don't know about Shorts but Instagram has solved the addiction problem by ignoring signals like the user tapping "not interested" or scrolling past videos quickly. They just show junk.
The proof here seems to be an interview with someone (owner of the LA Times) who talked with RFK for a few hours came away believing he knows more than doctors. Is that right?
Not knowing something isn't what makes them idiots. Spouting off about it as though they do is what ruins their credibility. At the very least it demonstrates that they're bad at vetting their sources.
I was talking about Dr. Patrick Soon-Shiong not Dr. Ben Carson. Care to show any evidence that Soon-Shiong is an idiot?
Just because one doctor is stupid doesn't invalidate all doctors, does it? In that case, Dr. Ben Carson would be proof that Dr. Fauci is also an idiot.
Of course not, but it highlights the risk of Appeal to Authority: one's expertise in a specific field does not make them experts in others, even ones adjacent to their own. For a more local example, I have a lot of experience writing Python. Someone outside the field might mistakenly think my opinions on, say, Java, are equally informed. They're not.
Of course not. That would make him an expert on developing oncology drugs, not on the ethics of drug safety and especially not on communicable disease control.
If chemotherapy meds had the incredibly low adverse reaction rates of common vaccines with the same typically high effectiveness, I bet his general opinions on the subject would be different. No, of course we shouldn't require school children to get preventative chemotherapy because the risk-reward ratio would be awful. And of course we should vaccinate them against polio because there's trivial risk in the prevention compared to the life-altering effects of the illness.
If these things are truly happening -- especially the alleged arrests on US soil -- then that should be really easy to demonstrate to the American people. That the government hasn't bothered to prove the allegations is telling.
Of course, if the allegations were proven, the people would demand more action than merely banning a video app. Action which would have an huge negative impact the economy and would be unpopular among the powerful. So maybe that's why they haven't bothered?
reply