fllsdf

Not that hard, Marco Reps, an excellent maker YouTube channel has a video on how to create one https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PCB8nv4fatc

But it is true, in fact that is part of the core ideas of representative democracy, and also the basic principle behind the monopoly of violence that any democratic state has to have

Some people cannot be trusted with certains ideas so a more superior indivdual or organisation must control what they can do

Or must we abandon policing since we can all exchange on the marketplace of ideas ?

My idea is since i control 40 gunmans and you control 0, you owe me money despite nothing having ever happened between us. No violence was ever implied.

Not saying that speech = action, but i cannot see how you can argue for police to exist but speech to be free as speech in itself must lead to actions, or why else would we speak in public ?

It is effectively impossible to reason people out of positions they have not reasoned themselves into.

The market place of idea struggles in my close friend group where we have sort of a tradition to do these kind of debates, despite us being very close since almost a decade, and educated above our national average.

It's a nice enough idea, but i dont see how to make it work in a space where money amplifies speech, and some types of speeches have been a negative to specific groups of people throughout history.

The obvious long term solution is more education but that requires money, so the obvious short term solution is censorship

You can get 2u modifiers key for 2$ a piece on PMK [1] Sure they're not alps but if you're buying in any capacity i'm 100% sure you would pay maybe 1/10 to 1/100 of the price, case in point [2], even if you had to buy a set of 24$ you could extract 5 2u each for ~5$ a piece,given 16 modifiers that's 80$ in keycaps while being extremely generous about the price they would actually pay about them. Even if you're paying 5$ a piece for every single key that's ~450$ in keycaps, which is not even half of the price. And i just discovered that they are making you pay 150€ for the privilege of having a qwerty layout, which can be found in [2] for 24$, it's a nice keyboard but unless the case itself is worth 800€+ it's a ripoff

[1] https://pimpmykeyboard.com/sa-2-space-pack-of-4/ [2] https://mechanicalkeyboards.com/shop/index.php?l=product_det...

Inal either but the way the court phrases it in the press release is that google negociated a free use licence with everyone, regardless of their financial situations, using their dominant position on the market to "force" everyone.

A way of seeing this is that it might be fine for the big players for national and international news (Le monde, Le figaro ...) , but probably has a much bigger impact on small news outlet, because if they dont agree they are at a disadvatage obviously, so they cannot afford to say no, but at the same time they might already be in a difficult financial position, and that revenu might have helped.

The key part is that google had no real justification according to the court to treat everyone the same way, and that consitutes discrimination.

It seems a bit weird to me too but you could make a parallel to a school that has a set meal price for every student, regardless of parent income.This would obviously be discriminating towards the poorer students.

Now whether google is a public service the way school lunches are is up for debate but i think it basically comes down to equality vs equity