I agree completely its moronic, but I do imagine the law requires it

America was already largely prosperous, but it wasn’t the sole superpower. I am not sure if that was a worth it exchange(if it was an exchange)

Also my understanding is that as of now it may not be arson

That’s not what they did, they rejected people acting as if the cause is certain

Neither is particularly likely, but it being a random accident is about as likely as you actually being the person who did it.

No? This is an insane argument.

I found a random statistic online that a home has a 1 in 413 chance of a fire in a given year, lets round up to 1 in 1000. It may be not exactly right, but within an order of magnitude. Trump criticized this judge, any time within about a month would get people saying this- so lets say the stats are there is a 1 in 12,000 chance of any particular person’s house burning down within a month of when Trump criticizes them. But Trump doesn’t criticize just 1 person a year, lets lowball estimate he criticizes 100 people a year. So that’s a 100 in 12,000 or 1 in 120 chance that in any particular year someone Trump criticizes house will burn down within a “suspicious” amount of time. That is nowhere near impossibly low, and now if you add in all the other unlikely but bad things that could happen to them- it happening sometimes is increasingly likely.

Now compare that with the one person writing this comment of the lowball estimate of 100 million people in America who could commit arson(again assuming it was arson).

No its not? Fires happen all the time, Trump criticizes a lot of people. When you have a lot of opportunities for a relatively unlikely event it increases a lot in probability. Nobody is saying it wasn’t arson, just saying we don’t know.

I agree, but that also seems to be agreein with their claim

Saying you don’t know is not dismissing.

No?

Regardless of how people feel about the federal government, they seem to still see legitimacy in their local governments, and are increasingly using those local governments as vehicles for negotiation.

Yes this is a massive boon. Finally the first faltering of the trend started in the 40s towards massive federalization.

Yeah, the 60s had more violence and tensions than now. A civil war requires actually distinct combatants engaged in combat. That doesn’t exist as of now.

I mean largely for most of us I hope. But I feel like the tech sector was oversatured because of all the hype of it being an easy get rich quick job. Which for some people it was.

Tbf, the US government has a long history of accusing peaceful citizens of being terrorists. Both parties love to do that.

It depends if you have the time and/or mental energy for that

Then they just threaten to take you to court.

Since these devices seem to basically be VOC sensors it wouldn’t be that hard to do this.

To a non-technically literate judge/jury. Many people just trust “the data” or “the authority” or “the technology”.

We as creatures behave certain ways because of a result of biology and circumstances. How can you say anything we do isn’t a natural/biological impulse. When did we stop being a part of nature? And stop being controlled by biology?

Only if you don’t wash them and don’t clip your nails, or if you paint your nails that’s also nasty

Fish is not meat, but it’s also not vegetarian

Its not allowing the release, its requiring it.