Yeah, there should have been limits set on campaign costs, lobbying, media, etc. It’s at a point where it doesn’t seem like it’s even possible to have a middle-class focused campaign that can openly say its basis is on taxing the fuck out of the top 1%.

But all I know is this: the second Trump term will make the standard of life in America far worse for most people. There will be hunger in 2028 for someone to simply say “We’ll fix the middle class, and we’ll make Musk, Bezos, etc pay for it”. Hopefully by then what’s left of twitter will not be as relevant as today, so that the message can at least have a hope of spreading through social media successfully.

No, the people that voted for Trump in this election will never vote for a non republican candidate regardless of how much you try to appease them. IMO you’re more likely to lose even more voters than you stand to gain taking this approach. The democrats need to come up with a vision and candidate that is neither Harris, Biden, and certainly not anything close to Trump. They need someone that will make non-voters believe that there’s a good chance their life will improve enough to make voting worthwhile.

This is what irritates me the most. I can live with Trump being president despite how much I disagree with the idiot’s concepts. But this places him, as a very orange person, above the law that others have to abide by.

These are cases that were filed before his “president” status from the result of this election and before he even became a candidate in this election. For fuck sake, this should have stopped the whole ball from rolling.

No one is going to listen to your points if you come from a place of hatred.

72 million Trump voters embraced the hatred Trump spewed. Literally look at what you’re saying and apply it to what happened the other day and decide yourself if you’re wrong or right.

Listen, either what happened is OK or it isn’t. And when you say “these are humans who voted with concerns for themselves and their communities” it makes seem like electing a felon, rapist, insurrectionist moron to the highest office is OK.

So that’s why I’m here writing to you: to fucking tell you that it’s not, and to ask you to not try to justify it or make this shit sound reasonable. It’s not.

It’s one month later and I am back to reply:

I don’t want to replace HTTP, or the web. But, I also absolutely don’t want to build anything in greater complexity than what we have today. In other words, keep it for what it’s doing now, but having an isolated app/container based platform efficiently served through a browser might just be a good thing for everyone?

5 years ago I was writing rust code compiled to web-assembly and then struggling to get it to run in a browser. I did that because I couldn’t write an efficient enough version of whatever the algorithm I was following in javascript - probably on account of most things being objects. I got it to run eventually with decent enough performance, but it wasn’t fun gluing all that mess together. I think if there was a better delivery platform for WASM built into browsers and maybe eventually mobile platforms, it would probably be better than today’s approach to cross-platform apps being served via HTTP.

In my view you’re arriving at conclusions of how to act and think a result of being biased by the popular vote. The popular vote has no influence over the existing laws that are being broken nor the existing rights that are being violated. Furthermore, ask yourself, when has the other party ever given a single fuck about the popular vote? So, why do you?

Edit: Made some edits to clarify. Essentially, I’m making the argument that laws shouldn’t be broken and rights shouldn’t be ignored just because a majority is OK with doing so.

Trump getting the popular vote is a problem that needs to be understood. The majority of America voted for a moron that looks as if he smears feces on his face after getting out of bed - among worse flaws.

But what I find most painful is that this asshole wasn’t locked up for J6. Him even being considered as a candidate is blatantly against the constitution. The fact democrats went along with this long enough to actually have the orange shitler win is insane. He is simply and plainly not eligible to be President of the United States.

Edit: Ironically, this is the same clown that spent years nagging Obama for his birth certificate.

Ok, let’s try to narrow this down so our exchanges aren’t vague. To me going from propellers to jet engines would have been “revolutionary”, but to you it may have just been incrementally expanding on the concept of a wing that keeps aircraft afloat.

So for clarity, I’m not suggesting a complete replacement to HTTP. I don’t envision a world where the web as we know gets fully “replaced”. But, I do think that it has out lived its purpose and ultimately we should be seeking a better protocol for information exchange. Or, in other words, I don’t think formulating a solution that can provide privacy, integrity, etc should be restricted to being built on HTTP just because that is what we essentially consider the web to be today.

To keep a modicum of privacy and openness, the web is de-facto dependent on Firefox continuing to exist in the medium term. And it has to be paid for somehow.

The web today has no privacy or openness. It has gmail accounts, russian propaganda bots, and AI SEO article spam. Does it matter which rose tinted browser you care to view or interact with this shit through? I’m approaching 40 and the web has been a fundamental part of my life to the point that I am sometimes bewildered about what I’d do without it. It is a sinking ship though, and at this point I’m much more interested in seeing alternatives to HTTP rather than trying to save the mess we built on-top of it.