You can also ask it to repeat the letter A one million times. For reasons I don't understand, it will say "A A A..." for a while before hitting some sort of repetition limit and then it starts speaking gibberish.

Great question. I don't know.

I think most would agree though, that the absence of a good solution does not justify a poor solution.

I guess that anyone in the country who seeks out and obtains the illegal content is committing a crime, so the government could go after them through traditional means. (Although seriously, are we really going to punish regular people for accessing a social media site?)

Admittedly, banning an entire website at the ISP is far more effective. However, I'd argue it's effective in the same way that a cannonball is an effective flyswatter.

All countries have internet censorship.

Agreed.

If your issue is with what is being labeled illegal you need to focus on that.

My issue is not with any content being labeled illegal. I don't like the government enacting censorship by ordering ISPs to block certain traffic.

I think that Brazil is within their rights to seize property or assets of entities engaging in illegal activity.

It's the sort of asymmetric power that concerns me, because by ordering the ISPs around, they can block the entire country's access to information with the flick of a switch. I don't want my government getting too comfortable with this kind of power because I don't know who will wield it next year.

I think ISPs should be dumb pipes. They should not be responsible for censoring content. They shouldn't even know what they're transporting, ideally.

It's a fun concept but a little bit "just so".

Sure, we typically discount everything that a single unreliable individual says. But a newspaper is not one person — it's a collection of articles from different authors. If the science articles are inaccurate, that doesn't mean the political articles will be!

Maybe I'm misunderstanding you, but DoS is exactly the same thing as "denial of service".

My point is that memory leaks can only degrade availability; they are categorically distinct from security vulnerabilities.

As a fiscally responsible republican, I disagree

How can you be sure we're actually human?

First time I'm hearing of this, but it makes perfect sense! Another angle would be to reduce the tax in exchange for harm reducing behavior like taking a voluntary safety class.

Y'all are grayblind

Public transit is not great for people with disabilities, specifically mobility issues. It has lots of advantages over cars, but this is not one of them.

What if one were to... reserve a desk and proceed to work from home? Possibly with a custom background that looks like the office :P

I beg to differ. This is straight up the second definition on Merriam Webster. It's a poor choice of words if the author didn't want readers to interpret it this way.

to value (something or someone) too lightly

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/take%20for%20granted