As much as I was hoping it would have just been something awkward taken out of context, I don’t think there’s really any other interpretation. He does it twice, even.

From TFA:

The law banning TikTok, which was scheduled to go into effect Sunday, allows the president to grant a 90-day extension before the ban is enforced, provided certain criteria are met.

Also:

After the Supreme Court greenlit the law on Friday, the Biden administration issued a statement saying it would not enforce the ban, leaving that responsibility to Trump.

Though some Senators contradict that.

Sens. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., and Pete Ricketts, R-Neb., also issued a statement celebrating the ban, and saying they don’t see a basis for an extension like Trump has proposed.

"Now that the law has taken effect, there’s no legal basis for any kind of ‘extension’ of its effective date. […]

So, we have to let the law play out. It doesn’t yet seem like we’re abandoning the rule of law at this point.

He was apparently one of the victims in the New Orleans attack.

Eliminating the entire drivetrain is the benefit. That’s a ton of complicated heavy wear parts you immediately don’t have to worry about. Even if you take more wear on the motor, fixing that would be as simple as just swapping out a wheel.

I’m sure 6yos are really spending time thinking about corporate structure and gender roles.

But whatever, this isn’t worth an argument. Just a low effort joke about people making shit up on social media.

The point was that no 6yo ever said that.

Same energy.

I have similar, but I turn my display on/off with HDMI-CEC based on time.

References the rule a lot without elaborating on what it actually says. Most detailed part:

Indeed, the White House states in its fact sheet that the rule prevents the import or sale of connected vehicles “by entities who are owned by, controlled by, or subject to the jurisdiction or direction of the PRC or Russia – even if those vehicles were made in the United States.”

Really wish this rule would just prohibit “connected vehicles” from sending data without explicit opt-in. And inform users of exactly what happens with said data.

But alas, that’s all pretext for what they really want, as usual.

SoundHound AI’s In-Car Commerce Ecosystem powered by its Automotive AI

Catchy name.

Yeah, I couldn’t really tell. I made a guess.

I don’t know what to tell you. I’ve never seen this trend where I live.

Looking at the bill text for HB-121. Looks like the “covered entities” can be sued if they even grant permission to someone to use a restroom that doesn’t match their sex. Or if they don’t “take reasonable steps to prohibit” them from using the facilities, whatever that means.

It also doesn’t mention how one might determine another’s sex. Should get spicy.

His gross side is exactly what allowed him to shamelessly do his advocacy work.

Nope, never seen it.

Bet it would still make me age you up if I were to guess your age.

That sure looks like grey hair to me.

I know this is a heavy situation and all, but I still found this photo funny.

Seems to be some civilian training:

Civilian women hold weapons as they take part in a military training given by a former Ukrainian serviceman (C-L) at a civic centre at an unspecified location in the Kharkiv region on September 13, 2024, amid the Russian invasion in Ukraine.

Someone needs to teach grandma how to handle that weapon.

Bad link. Axios is confusing and it’s format should feel bad. Should probably be: https://www.axios.com/2025/01/09/trump-panama-canal-house-republican-bill

The bill authorizes the president and secretary of state to “initiate and conduct negotiations with appropriate counterparts” in Panama on buying back the canal.

Well, at least it’s not a military option. Would be pretty dumb for Panama to sell it for any price though.

And, Pornhub can probably play the waiting game in those states as well. Enough people in those places will probably get pissed off enough eventually to pressure their legislators into walking those laws back.

Nobody’s going out to protest this shit. There’s too much stigma around it. Even though I’m sure this frustrates huge swaths of the population, it’s politically shameful.

I imagine Facebook or someone of similar size could do the same in Aus. All they have to do is refuse to serve anything to Aussie IP addresses except a message that says, “Sorry, we can’t serve your country anymore because of a law passed by [legislator.] Remember, this is all his fault.”

Why would they do that though? Large sites like Facebook are the only ones with resources to handle ID verification. They can do it and let their competitors die.

I don’t really have a positive outlook on how this is going to play out. Shy of big money flooding into free speech orgs that can legitimize the fight, or a polarizing leader like Larry Flint, I don’t see this going well.