![](https://startrek.website/pictrs/image/d1dfc6ea-8cfc-49d6-b703-1454d36b30cf.png)
![](https://lemmy.ml/pictrs/image/d3d059e3-fa3d-45af-ac93-ac894beba378.png)
I wouldn’t willingly live anyplace else.
Seer of the tapes! Knower of the episodes!
I wouldn’t willingly live anyplace else.
It will vary by state, but generally:
When only one of the two parties is unwilling to continue the employer-employee relationship, it is obvious who is the moving party. If employment was still available to the claimant and the claimant refused to continue working, then the claimant is the moving party. If the employer will not allow the claimant to continue work, even though the claimant wants to, then the employer is the moving party.
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.
https://www.uscourts.gov/judges-judgeships/code-conduct-united-states-judges
Not that SCOTUS is held to the same code of conduct that all other federal judges are held to, of course.
Flowering and fruiting plants generally need bees, birds, etc. for pollination and seed spreading.
It’s also an English expression.
It doesn’t have to be addition. It could be a hash function, etc.
All participants select their own random whole number and publish it to the group. All participants add all the numbers together. The result is either odd or even (heads/tails) and everyone arrives at the same result independently.
Annual commemorative pastry observance
It’s the second largest multi-ethnic democracy on Earth.
Not only is it normalized, but it’s being weaponized. See, for example, the recent XZ backdoor which was equal parts hacking and a psi-op against the maintainer.
When in doubt, shut up.
The best way to make money in Vegas is to sell light bulbs.
Not exactly the same problem. In the same way that gun control doesn’t address the problem of hostile foreign militaries. Yes, both involve guns, but the laws and policies that address one are inapplicable and inappropriate to the other.
The law in question addresses the problem of foreign adversaries having easy access to manipulate US public opinion. The law you suggest addresses the problem of advertisers having that access. Both are serious concerns, both need to be addressed, but they are not the same problem and the solutions are markedly different.
This part:
a desperate attempt to keep young people from discussing Joes pet genocide where they can’t be censored by the us govt.
suggests that users are being censored by the US government. Doesn’t it?
require every company operating within the US to show users exactly what data is collected and allow them to delete any or all of it as desired
That would be a very different kind of law from the one we’re talking about.
That’s the opposite of what the court said.
Well, no. The courts struck down Trump’s Tiktok ban because he used an executive order that overstepped his authority.
He seems to be confusing “freeware”, which is basically a license for copyrighted work, with “public domain”, which is the absence of a copyright.