I don’t think either PBS or NPR has been “bought” by anyone. They’re both still non-profits owned by their member stations.

Why would this make PBS and NPR sad?

It becomes useless as evidence unless you can establish authenticity. It just makes audio recordings more in a class with text documents; perfectly fakeable, but admissible with the right supporting information. So I agree it’s a change, but it’s not the end of audio evidence, and it’s a change in a direction which courts already have experience.

Schopenhauer? I dunno. Maybe Friedrich Hayek.

Has there ever been a repeat mass shooter? Is the risk of recidivism really the right theory for understanding the incarceration of mass shooters? Even if we broaden the question to whether juvenile mass shooters are likely to commit other crimes, is that even true?

It would be nice to have some opposition, though. Even if most “conservative” media right now is little more than xenophobia, or cult worship, there do exist sound arguments against the typical internet-left positions. I don’t have a solid enough read on what comes through New in the fediverse to say whether any of that is being submitted and just downvoted off everyone’s feeds, or if all that’s being submitted is the average conservative media junk.

Still, political spaces without opposition/diversity invariably degenerate into purity contests, and circle jerking.

Sure I guess if there’s a fire, or at least believe there’s a fire. Hard to figure out who’s deliberately lying to start shit, and who’s just gullible and vocal on social media.

I think in the context of legislation, interpreting “let pass” to mean “allow to be signed into law” is understandable. But I see you just meant it chronologically.

“let pass”… . is there some major confusion about how presidential vetoes work here, or what do you even mean?

Lmao what is this edge-lord shit?