Sure, but also worth noting that some prisons are federally run, a state wouldn’t have the jurisdiction to ban something that the fed controls. That is why reform needs to come from the top, not just at the state level.

Agreed

Not a battery but sure, that’s what I was suggesting.

I think the text is pretty direct about permitting it. If it is listed as an exception to that which shall not exist, then it is explicitly allowed to exist.

It’s not a de-facto exception by omission, it is named as permissable within the text of the amendment.

So what other kind of battery would a pager be using that might explode if not lithium? Hydrogen cell?

Sadly the post-civil war amendments include a provision that allows prisoners to be used for unpaid labor.

From the text of the 13th amendment:

Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

Only argument is if the party has been “duly” convicted, which is a recurring issue we see with the US justice system.

Definitely any of the showerthoughts communities

Exactly. I remember early days of smartphones before a lot of the safety precautions we have today were implemented, where we saw tons of videos of batteries spontaneously combusting. They expand, there’s a pop, and then a small burst of flame that will ignite anything it touches, like your pants, tables they’re sitting on while charging, etc. You can get pretty badly burned if this happens while it’s in your pocket.

It’s just that the videos that have come out of these pagers shows an actual explosion, as if they had been packed with C4. Enough to instantly kill some people with them on their person and harm adjacent passerbys.

Seems more like globalism is to blame. They were from a Taiwanese company but manufactured in Hungary.

Guessing the source of the pagers didn’t matter at all and Israel probably intercepted a shipment to plant bombs in them themselves. Lithium batteries can ignite, but they don’t just explode like that. There were bombs put in those pagers, be it by Israel or whoever else, coordinated as a targeted operation.

Because Wikipedia doesn’t serve ads or pay Google, so Google doesn’t like to make them the top result for a lot of searches they should be.

You’re spot on that it wasn’t perfect, and it especially falls apart when you look at the politicization of science and objective facts. E.g. climate change should not be a debate, so there should be no obligation to humor a talking head with an R next to their name who is there to “refute” climate change every time a story is run about it.

So on principle, I can’t say I love the idea that the Fairness Doctrine required a good bit of oversimplistic “both sides” nonsense. But in practice, it wasn’t the media personalities spreading politicized pseudoscience who ended up deplatformed with the law’s removal—the opposite ended up happening. Having realized that sensationalism sells, the “alternative facts” crowd are now the only voice in the room for a lot of clueless people. And I think that’s the outcome Republicans wanted when they did away with it.

In the absence of a better system today, I can’t say I wouldn’t like to see it make a return. I’d prefer it if there was still a legal obligation for all of these media outlets to platform at least one sane person.

Also right that it wasn’t just the removal of the Fairness Doctrine that led to where we are now, appreciate the other examples (and for a bit of a twist, it was under the Clinton administration that the Telecommunications Act was signed).

Thank the deregulation of the 80’s and 90’s, coupled with the internet making it easier than ever to access anything and everything.

It used to be that spreading falsehoods or political bias on network TV or the airwaves via radio could get your station’s license revoked by the FCC. But Reagan killed the Fairness Doctrine, and with that out of the way, there were no barriers for Rush Limbaugh and similar ilk to make more money by saying whatever kept the hyper-conservative, over-religious pearl clutches tuning in.

But you are what you eat. Become the blahaj.

Ahhh, so they “mischaracterized” it. That makes it okay, then.

Banning an entire class of ads online and in media during peak hours? Sounds like a win to me, even if it doesn’t have the effect they hope for.

Ads suck, especially ads that are selling garbage no one needs. The fewer, the better.

But what about the Honey Badger?

Some Republicans, like all of the ones endorsing Harris, but Trump’s MAGA core voting base is still shielded by their reality distortion field where Trump “won”.

I couldn’t even watch 10 minutes because it was so painfully obvious they were just lying through their teeth, and it was so desperate sounding that to a non-R voter, it came across as them not even watching the debate.

I think that may be their strategy. They assume a lot of their base doesn’t want to watch the debate, instead they just tune in after the fact, and they get the bizarro universe account of what happened presented as fact and thus feel more validated in their beliefs.

During Cerny’s presentation, he specifically talked about the compromise between 60fps performance mode and 30fps graphics modes, so it’s to get 60 fps that people are typically enabling performance mode for.

Try spending a $2 bill at any register manned by someone under the age of 40.