Because people keep voting for them, or they simply run unopposed.

Trademark infringement, as opposed to copyright infringement, is all about customer confusion. If my vacuum repair shop is called 𝕏, then it's not likely to cause customer confusion if a sandwich shop opens up and brands themselves as 𝕏.

This may be why there are so many different X trademarks, and why none of them "went after" each other.

If I remember correctly, Meta's does pertain to social media, but as far as I know they're not using it, so it might get messy there.

Also, in case it's not clear. The 𝕏 is just a normal unicode character. Dude couldn't even be bothered to pay someone to make a logo for him.

I think many of us are using reverse proxies, and opening port 443 (https) and maybe port 80 (http).

A demographic notoriously known for being well informed. /s

It is trivial to sign up for a service when you want to watch something, and then cancel it when you don't, until there's something else you want to watch on the service. That is the benefit over cable.

Most people still treat it like a cable subscription: always on, even if they're not watching it.

Every day, new people start actually paying attention to politics. Don't assume that because we know that Boebert is a terrible person, that everyone knows that she's a terrible person.

Not to mention, people halfheartedly paying attention to politics seem to require near-constant reminders, or they forget when it comes time to cast a vote.

Long story short, this woman has real power over some people's lives, by the fact that she is their representative. We should never stop shining a light on the actions of people with real power. In my opinion, anyway.

I'll just leave this here:

Canon 2A.

An appearance of impropriety occurs when reasonable minds, with knowledge of all the relevant circumstances disclosed by a reasonable inquiry, would conclude that the judge’s honesty, integrity, impartiality, temperament, or fitness to serve as a judge is impaired. Public confidence in the judiciary is eroded by irresponsible or improper conduct by judges, including harassment and other inappropriate workplace behavior. A judge must avoid all impropriety and appearance of impropriety. This prohibition applies to both professional and personal conduct. A judge must expect to be the subject of constant public scrutiny and accept freely and willingly restrictions that might be viewed as burdensome by the ordinary citizen. Because it is not practicable to list all prohibited acts, the prohibition is necessarily cast in general terms that extend to conduct by judges that is harmful although not specifically mentioned in the Code. Actual improprieties under this standard include violations of law, court rules, or other specific provisions of this Code.

I think the "appearance of impropriety" ship has long sailed. She should recuse herself. She won't. Because it's more than just the appearance of impropriety.

This line of attack against LLMs seems just foolish. The data was put into the public for public consumption. There is no right to control whether the data is used to train something; that's just something people are making up.

It is like that already, but try, if you can, to imagine how bad it will get if the incentive isn't fake internet points, but actual money.

and honestly, businesses too. There is opportunity here in the business sector, I think.

What could go wrong with giving a democratic government the power to strip voting rights from those people they deem unsuitable to vote on how they are governed? /s

I never was much of a Twitter user (and if we're being honest, that carried over to Mastodon) but after about 30 seconds on Threads I hated being bombarded with posts from people I didn't know or care to know desperately trying to attract followers on the new platform. Threads is (unsurprisingly) making itself into a clone of late-stage Twitter, instead of Twitter back in the day. Hard pass