![](https://lemmy.socdojo.com/pictrs/image/21e84b7a-1b1f-49f6-91d1-dfff589e0b16.png)
![](https://lemmy.ml/pictrs/image/gWmVEUZ94Z.png)
And the world was shocked, SHOCKED I say…
Some dingbat that occasionally builds neat stuff without breaking others. The person running this public-but-not-promoted instance because reasons.
And the world was shocked, SHOCKED I say…
Lemmy git right on that boss…
Nuking anything is never the right decision unless you’re heating up some leftovers. There is no such thing as a justified mass destruction weapon.
The concern here shouldn’t be are the acts ‘official’ or ‘personal’ but are they criminal. Just because someone does a crime in their official capacity is not meant to relieve them if liability.
Is there actually a way someone gets $12.5B that’s not fraud in some fashion?
Quick guess could = should, easy auto correct tweak but makes things make a bit more sense, at least if you cleanup up the surrounding a bit. AI written gibberish?
I’m guessing that they where looking at this from a supply side liability rather than consumption. All the largest ones are top oil exporting nations but what chance it there that the demand/consumption of the UAE outstrips the USA by 50%?
It falls into a place never envisioned by those writing the amendments. When you have defacto monopolization of the public media, or even a major portion of it under your control, then preventing commentary is functionally censorship equal to if the government outright banned it.
On the other end you have the desire to prevent harmful transmissions to the public space as well. Incitements to violence and propagation of blatant lies serves no good purpose.
Balancing the two has been the subject of countless lawsuits. The only justification I could see here, given the visual nature of Instagram, would be the potential for gore and violence content. Sometimes showing the ugly reality is needed to let people know the reality rather than a polished sanitized version. Instagram might not be the place for that though given the audience it has.
By comparison a tame subject, but the case involving George Carlin still holds some sway on matters of what’s appropriate for public broadcast.
Fair enough, sometimes explanations don’t need a purpose. I guess my mind is in a place of hoping they’re not expending some immense amount of resources on something like this when we have significantly more pressing matters out there to contend with. The world is a wee bit unstable these past few years and I’d be a lot more interested in avoiding some Mad Max / Dune outcome than adding another box on the periodic table.
Y Tho? Legitimate question, is there a perceived functional use or even theoretical stepping stone to some greater knowledge beyond the mere proof of it’s existence?
Plugging a modem into the POTS made them smart I say.