I'd be fine with us just having the USA navy operate them we build them for carriers and subs just double or triple the order and plug em into the grid.

> Europe are randomly unknowably illegal for no reason

I mean they absolutely are especially as EU regulators categorically refuse to review anything in advance just in-case their get a budget shortfalls and need to go looking for fines.

> even in public spaces

Even in a two party state public spaces are fair game. The Constitution supersedes state law.

The Constitution has nothing to do with this. It constrains the Government, not private actors. And there’s no Constitutional right to a translation service.

You’re probably thinking about warrantless recordings of conversations and the reasonable expectation of privacy requirement. This doesn’t apply here.

The Constitution can definitely restrict the ability of the government to pass laws regulating behavior, and two-party consent statutes are definitely laws that regulate behavior. Whether the object level question is true is a different matter, but I would assume so given that you can point a camera that records audio at people in public at all.

Also, the US Constitution does constrain private actors, all the time. It bans slavery for a very simple example.

The Constitution does not forbid laws that require two-party consent to record a conversation. That’s what we’re talking about here.

The constitutional view of the 13th Amendment is that it withdrew from government the power to promulgate or enforce laws that allowed slavery to exist. If a slave escaped after the 13th Amendment passed, the government then lacked the power to assist the former slaveholder in capturing and returning him. Similarly, without the power to enforce property rights, there became effectively no property interest in a slave.

I’m finding a lot of literature from NGOs specializing in US jurisprudence saying the first amendment has been interpreted to protect public, obvious recording[1].

If I tried to draw up an indentured servitude contract, what federal or state laws would explicitly forbid enforcing it myself? If state laws, do all states have equivalent laws?

[1]: https://www.freedomforum.org/recording-in-public/

The First Amendment protects you against prosecution for filming the actions of law enforcement in a public venue. AFAIK it hasn’t been interpreted to void state laws that might forbid someone from recording a conversation between private individuals who don’t consent. The link you provided says as much.

How do you self-enforce an indentured servitude contract? Or any contract, for that matter? Only a court can compel performance or restitution for a breach of contract.

I mean the sitting president was shot on the campaign trail.

California other then LA, SF, and SD is as Red as it comes. If stuff starts getting cut up 80% of California is going to the "red" side.

How? If we split by political grouping all the major population centers go Blue everywhere else goes Red? Unless we have a very polite split (unlikely in this case) the Blue side is just signing up to starve to death.

Blue population centers have a lot of money, and though expensive, importing food from other countries is always an option.

But not in a timeline fast enough to prevent them from starving.

There are plenty of places to buy food from if you do t have a xenophobic anti-trade president running your country.

No there really isn't, especially not in the timeline needed to prevent a city from starving. Seriously New York, Chicago, LA are all 2 weeks of supply chain disruption from foot riots. It takes a nation to supply mega cities like those.

You may not know this, but you can buy food. You don't have to grow it yourself.

> Keep in mind that schools in predominantly black areas are typically significantly less funded than those in white areas.

Spending per student is not partially predictive of education outcomes in the USA.

Dude the USA runs the whole Euro Dollar system. The idea the USA really really "controls" it's own currency is a bit of a pipe-dream at this point. We might as well go for full global control.

Ah. I think currency controls might have been a new term for you. Or I should have said ”capital controls” to be aligned with wiki. [1]

Currency controls is what for example Argentine has been doing with set exchange rates and limits on conversion while mandating that all local businesses must be done in their currency.

It is not about controlling the currency, it is about creating hinders for capital movements in and out of countries.

[2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_control

I mean very good job staying on-top of new tech but you're not actually trying to imply your not the anomaly in that regard right?

He was certainly on top of new technology movement but signs were there the whole time.

I wasn’t aware of ChatGPT in 2022 but I was aware that we could not keep data scientists hired long term because several faangs like meta were just dropping 100% increases in salary as the opener to our people for some mega project related to machine learning based on the skill set of the people being hired

Correct. We didn't know chatgpt would be huge but we knew big data and ai were the next big thing and we're investing heavily in that space. The funding for this came from sre teams, pms, etc.

Not for people paying attention to the entire AI space. GPT wasn't the only thing going on at the time. AlphaGo was a big deal for anyone paying attention.

> Google also bought Motorola for 12 billion and Microsoft bought Nokia for 7 billion. Those weren't success cases.

A lot of that was patent acquisition rather than trying to run those businesses so it's hard to say a success or not.