Skiluros

That’s a fair point, but with software platforms, I don’t think you can make a seamless migration tool without Google’s cooperation. And there a lot of roadblocks and malicious compliance type strategies that US oligarchic institutions can adopt. There is also the issue of monopoly-like network effects.

Considering their administration’s behaviour and the current course of American society, I think it’s better to make a permanent break with US. I do not think they will be able to address corruption and criminality. Even if the centre-right comes to power, it will be some variant of Obama, perhaps competent, but with zero desire to reign in corruption, oligarchs and prosecute criminals. Just like Obama refused to prosecute the financial industry oligarchs, a hypothetical centre-right leader won’t address Meta’s $16 billion raised via conscious enablement of fraud.

Then there will be another election, they’ll seed in some more propaganda about “freedom” and “destruction of America” and you’ll have JD Vance elected or perhaps someone even far worse than Vance or Trump.

To hell with that.

I’ve lived in the US for several years and travelled extensively, I feel confident in what I am saying. A large portion of American society is obsessed with ostentatious posturing about how they are the biggest supporters of “freedom” in the world (and similar self-aggrandizing polemics), that they cannot be engaged with in good faith.

Blacklist of senior US regime collaborators is also a must.

Would help if Russians were banned too.

Sometimes it’s best to deal with an issue early rather then letting it simmer.

Not to mention they could always a implement a Fediverse based foundation (for every country) before implementing a ban. Literally re-direct instagram.com to pixelfed.nl (if you are in the Netherlands). Move all government accounts and let businesses know that it’s in their interest to setup Fedi accounts or other non-US networks (and help them with it).

They should start with banning US tech services, first insta/FB/Twitter/Reddit and then slowly kicking out MS/Amazon/Google and other enterprise providers.

From what I remember Biden won with a small margin in 2020 (I remember messaging my American friend about this before the votes were fully tallied).

Trump is a symptom, the cause is American society (not only the far right, much of the centre-right voting public too).

The US is comically corrupt!

Did the thugs at the Blackstone criminal gang decide to play hardball with the recent demand to increase the size of bribes?

Not an expert, but this seems relatively reasonable. If anything one would think Roblox will eventually fall under this process, that being said, I am just thinking out loud, I could be wrong.

It should be challenged by Australians. An American oligarchic organziation by definition shouldn’t be able to have any influence on national policies. If the Americans ever clean up their act, which is unlikely, then one should at least consider whether they should be allowed to file such challenges.

I wouldn’t be surprised if Roblox gets blocked too. Although this is complete speculation on my part.

Is there anything specific around why Roblox would not be banned?

Almost none of them are morons. They are all cunning, sophisticated and they spend all their time on work and their goals.

No need to underestimate them.

If anything their weaknesses lie in arrogance, ignorance (not the same thing as being stupid) and low tolerance of dealing with challenges they haven’t encountered. As things stand today, this weaknesses haven’t really caused them any problems, but that doesn’t this will always be true.

This is honestly really funny in an absurdist, black humour kind of way.

That’s of course a free speech issue. But the contrast between the alleged deep commitment to free speech claimed by many Americans and the fact that this issue wasn’t that much of a deal-breaker in support for the current US administrator suggests that theatrics and ostentatiousness are a significant driver of free speech polemics.

When I was living in the US I didn’t find local polemics about free speech to be convincing.

It honestly felt more like a theatrical way to highlight one’s alleged “independent” mindset and virtues. It just didn’t seem genuine.

Recent development have largely proven my thinking on this issue. Many Americans who claim to support “freedom of speech” don’t understand the concept and don’t really care about it (beyond theatrical repetition of phrases that they’ve heard other locals use).

While I too am skeptical of the true commitment of large section of the US population to freedom (in the real sense not in the American “I support free speech!” sense), I would not underestimate the fundamental unpredictability of history.

Not a fan of Lenin, but the notion that “there are decades when nothing happens; and there are weeks when decades happen" is a powerful observation of human history and behaviour.

Not saying this is going to be a inflection point, but there are always steps to reach a given inflection point.

Even hunting DEA agents is a massive stretch.

On a purely cost-benefit analysis basis, hunting for DEA agents is simply not worth it, it makes more business sense to take the loss and focus on the fact that drugs will continue to be profitable until there is full decriminalization (of any drug consumption) and legalization of less harmful drugs.

Sounds like propaganda.

Cartels tend to be relatively cautious on US soil and make a genuine effort to avoid generating heat. There is limited benefit for them to get engaged in something like this especially considering the politically sensitive nature of targeting ICE specifically.

It’s not impossible for one or two individuals to “take matters in their own hands”, but I can’t see this being a blanket policy implemented by senior leaders of multiple cartel groups.

79 is not that young. Life expectancy for women in the US seems to be ~82 (I thought it would be higher considering how rich the US is). And at that age even somewhat minor medical issues tend be more demanding and impactful.

I honestly wouldn’t be surprised if Trump can’t tell the difference (initially) between X2 step by step 45% increases (which would result in ~110% increase from base), versus two 45% percentage point increases (which would be 90% from base).

From the few articles I read, Trump was refering to percentage points, not actual step by step percentage increases.