[1] https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLjHf9jaFs8XUZ3azgCNyawIQ5... [2] https://youtu.be/GDzBE6vz5r0 [3] https://youtu.be/3ZTGwcHQfLY

Scroll down to the section that mentions Americans for Tax Reform and links to the presentation: Doing taxes keeps citizens aware of the tax burden imposed upon them by the government. A Return-Free scheme would allow the government to raise revenues invisibly

In case you're not aware of Norquist, https://gop-waysandmeans.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/1...: The paradox for taxpayers is that visible, painful taxes are the taxpayer's best protection against runaway government spending and taxes.

If you've opted out of netplan, then you need to configure one of systemd-networkd or NetworkManager manually (on server, NetworkManager is only present if you've installed it).

I personally used to be opposed to netplan but I had to do some very esoteric network configuration which was super easy with netplan.

Fumbling with your phone sounds like a silly statement but so did fumbling with your wallet.

I really don't know how you're linking MPG ratings and maintenance costs as some sort of collision. Maintenance costs certainly seem like they're increasing but I attribute that to cars turning into fickle computers that happen to have wheels and require specialized knowledge to diagnose. I do routine maintenance on my car but am terrified of doing anything that touches the 480V system.

https://www.justice.gov/usao-edny/file/1553496/dl

That being said, I doubt that's the core issue in this case.

Apple - consumers give the company for hardware which is locked into a closed ecosystem. Apple extracts extra revenue by enforcing this closed ecosystem. There can be no competition other than not purchasing their hardware in the first place.

Google - consumers sometimes give them money (for both hardware and services) which Google then uses to push their other products to the detriment of their competitors. Due to Google's size, the competition is at a massive disadvantage. Also, given that most consumers don't give them money, Google needs to make money off of their consumers and the most profitable method is to monetize PII.

Meta - consumers basically never give them money (excluding Oculus) so Meta needs to make money off of their consumers. The most profitable method is to monetize PII.

I have a little more sympathy for Google and Meta's situation as the EU wants them to maintain their free services while simultaneously reducing their ability to monetize their most valuable asset, consumers' PII (note that PII ultimately belongs to the consumer but it's still the thing that the companies use to make money). There needs to be some sort of happy medium here when people want something without paying for it but also don't want what's valuable about them being a user - their PII - to be monetized.

To be clear, these multi billion/trillion dollar companies don't need anyone defending them. However, it would be interesting to see what the EU's position would be if Meta started as an EU company.

Basically, hospital employees have reasonable access to patients/records as part of their care but CPS needs to go through a process for the same access. This particular employee wore both hats to obtain alleged illegal access to the children/records.