trimethylpurine

They forced Teams on everyone and it played out well for them. Users not wanting it might not itself be a sign that it's bad for business.

A ruling belongs to the judicial branch.

Try searching "sanctions" on dictionary.com. Hopefully that helps with your question.

If you intend to engage "for fun" then you must actually engage by hearing the other side and rebutting. Otherwise you're not engaging, you're just trying to shout your assumptions louder than your opponent.

Your comment doesn't seem to exhibit any understanding of the opposing arguments.

Just offering my take of your comment as an impartial observer.

If sanctions become effective, the next best option for terrorists is gold. Logically the next step for them.

Tracking gold shipment is the next logical step for law enforcement.

So it's probably a short lived bubble, for anyone weighing investments.

You've misread then. I also recommend people don't give anyone a reason to deport them, especially now. Read back, you'll see that I'm saying exactly that.

My commentary is to advocate for staying factual. It doesn't help anyone's cause to charge the conversation with sort of true information, out of context, and mixed with a lot of opinion and emotion.

Panic isn't helpful. Understanding the reality of the circumstances is. I think we can all agree on that.

Are you saying that you think providing people with internet access should be classified as an act of war, or do you mean that you worry that other people might?

>This is not a restriction placed by the US government, is it?

Yes it is. The passport is not a permission slip for leaving. It's a letter authored by the US government on behalf of a citizen requesting their safe passage into another country [1]. When the US requests one person's safe passage they write "spit on this guy", but another doesn't get that negative language.

Country of origin is a constitutionally protected class. If my passport meaningfully and functionally differs from yours, based on that classification, then it stands to reason that my civil rights are being violated.

[1]: "The Secretary of State of the United States of America hereby requests all whom it may concern to permit the citizen/national of the United States named herein to pass without delay or hindrance and in case of need to give all lawful aid and protection." -Text of the US Passport

Naturalized citizens really are a different class.

* The US passport lists your place of birth, barring you from entry into certain other countries, if you were born in countries they don't agree with.

* Your citizenship can be revoked and you can be deported as we discussed above.

* You cannot be elected to certain offices.

> US citizens "can't" be deported

Source: I'm a naturalized citizen.

Naturalized citizens can be deported and their citizenship can be revoked in cases of violent crime or other immoral behavior. That information is provided when swearing in.

It's more accurate to say that US citizens who are law abiding and moral, or who are born in the US, can't be deported.

If you're building a business from the ground up, a new business, it's financially a better decision to build it as much as possible on agents, not people. It lowers your cost. And that's what people are doing because it's a new business and they don't have money yet.

Your competition, currently operating with high cost humans, will be forced to reduce their costs or fold.

So, if it's possible to run with fewer people, competition pressures everyone to do the same. You won't really be able to prefer humans soon.

The economy will dramatically change under unprecedented supply. Hopefully this happens slowly enough that we figure out what to do about it.

What's your major?

I minored in film/media around the mid 2000's and this was discussed in nearly every course.

I think you've overlooked some of Berger's claims.