Guess we will find out.

What led you to believe this is the solution presented in the article? Much less try to pass those statements off as quoting or paraphrasing.

> Maybe let's just ensure that everyone gets the same due process?

That is the actual solution presented in the last two sections of the article.

[0]: https://youtu.be/RSlOY39ynaY

> Sanchez was charged following a search that ICE proclaimed on social media turned up “literal insurrectionist propaganda” he had allegedly transported from his home to an apartment, noting that “insurrectionary anarchism is regarded as the most serious form of domestic (non-jihadi) terrorist threat.” The tweet also said that Sanchez is a green card holder granted legal status through the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program.

> The indictment claims Sanchez was transporting those materials to conceal them because they incriminated his wife. But how can possession of literature incriminate anyone, let alone someone who isn’t even accused of anything but being present when someone else allegedly fired a gun? Zines aren’t contraband; it’s not illegal to be an anarchist or read about anarchism. I don’t know why Sanchez allegedly moved the box of documents, but if it was because he (apparently correctly) feared prosecutors would try to use them against his wife, that’s a commentary on prosecutors’ lawlessness, not Sanchez’s.

> If the galaxies are turning red, you are in the future.

Aren’t these statements saying the same thing?

1. The bill shown for July 2024 was for about $100, which includes $65 of supply charges.

2. The bill for July 2025 was for about $129, with supply charges of $84.

3. Despite actual usage being lower for July 2025, the total cost increased by 29%.

The point being raised is that energy costs are higher for individuals because the cost of building infrastructure to support data centers is being subsidized by individuals. Even if her bill was for $65, it is inconsequential to the main point. I don’t understand why people make comments like yours other than to muddy the waters and obfuscate the issue. Or truly failing to understand what is being communicated due to some bias or ideology. A sad microcosm of what passes for discourse in our time.

> Behavior may be different if participants had earned their points rather than simply received them, or both Proposers and Responder shared a common identity or wider goal.

> "Still," Dr. Gordon continues, "it is a reminder that we should be mindful of attempts to limit the ability to hold power to account. For example, through anti-protest, anti-strike, and voter suppression laws. In an era marked by growing global inequality, this study offers critical insights into the psychology of power, and the mechanisms that can promote more equitable societies."

> I'm presently in the most oppressed group -- I'm a white heterosexual male.

The group you are in is the perpetually seeking victimhood group.

> All the DEI training materials claim that I'm "inherently racist", which is a ploy to punish me unjustly.

Right, the problem is not the actual racism rather it’s pointing out things that could be racist and making racists feel bad about being racist.

https://www.moonshot.ai/ https://moonshotai.github.io/Kimi-Researcher/

> Every five years, surveyors fan out across Bhutan measuring the nation's happiness. The results are analyzed and factored into public policy.

Or are you asking whether the results of the survey can be trusted?

> Bhutan, which is about the size of Maryland, was largely isolated from the rest of the world for centuries. The kingdom was so protective of its unique Buddhist culture that it only started allowing foreign tourists to visit in the 1970s and didn't introduce television until 1999.