I’m inferring from the language of the post that OP is against this policy change, but I’m not sure I follow the argument. Why is it problematic that Plex is asking for money?

You can create memory by arranging logic gates in bistable or latch circuits.

I’ve already addressed that point.

With such a high majority it would have just been overturned immediately, so no, he couldn’t have vetoed the bill. An attempt to do so wouldn’t have helped at all and might have undermined future cooperation.

No, he doesn’t. This is Trump just hurling executive orders at things he doesn’t like.

I clarified further. In the rail strike case, it was a senate bill, not an executive action. And the bill passed 80-15. Biden signed the bill, but that isn’t the same thing at all.

That’s incorrect, and these situations aren’t close to comparable.

When Biden was in power, eight out of twelve unions had already ratified the contract, and the senate passed a bill to force the final four to accept it. It passed 80-15, so Biden couldn’t have vetoed it if he wanted to.

Trump is attempting to ban unions altogether, by executive order.

What workplace is this that has dorms?

And now I’ve ditched Proton. Andy Yen’s comments made me skeptical, but I was still confident that their mission was intact. This move, to a social media platform with a demonstrated willingness to censor non-corporatist views, confirms my fears that they are giving up their principles.

I think this is right on the money.

You’ve got two Cleopatra stories mixed up there.

She was said to bathe in ass’s (donkey’s) milk.

She killed herself by holding an asp (snake) to her breast.

Yup

Keep at it!

You’ve got nothing, sorry.

You’ve failed at addressing my argument directly, failed at building a straw man, so I guess it makes sense you’d be trying ad hominem.

There are plenty of fake accounts in existence.

You don’t know either way, which makes your attribution entirely fallacious.

You really can’t address the argument I made, can you?

Your comment was so reductive as to be indistinguishable from bad faith equivalency. The claim that you didn’t mean to speaks only to your naivety.

You can’t just ignore parts of the argument to which you have no answer.

You don’t know who that person is or whether they even exist. It is beyond spurious to assign their statements to any other entity.

I pointed out that your argument was so reductive as to amount to both-siding. I’m glad it wasn’t your intent, but it’s a shame that you don’t see the problem with that regardless.

If you mean @barry_aptt then I’m happy to report that I did check their profile before making my original comment.

This is exactly what I’m talking about. You have no idea who that person is, what correlation their posting has to their political position, or in fact whether they exist at all. And you’re drawing equivalence between that post and a recorded statement by the president.