"Disorderly" protests are protected by the first amendment. No justification is needed. That is the law. Enforce that law and stop ICE from harassing people just for exercising their fundamental rights.

The extra precision is fake.

They might have measured precisely at the weather station, but local variation in temperature makes that extra precision meaningless unless you are located exactly where the measurement happened.

Even in a climate controlled room, there will be a degree or two of variation between different parts of the room.

for another example of this: a lot of people "know" that the average human body temperature is 98.6 degF.

that extra decimal point gives people false confidence about the measurement being more precise than it is.

because so much science (even in the US) happens using the metric system, the actual measured average [0] is 37 degC, and 37.0 degC == 98.6 degF. the nuance of the average being more of a confidence interval (37 +/- 0.5 degC, possibly larger) gets lost as well.

0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_body_temperature

It's a positive move, but too little, too late. These same publishers have already been available DRM-free from other stores for a long time.

No, these publishers were already available DRM-free from other stores.

Not taxing tips is terrible policy. Why privilege that one form of income over others?

Overtime is not taxed now either. There's a lot of good tax policy that will impact low and middle-income families.

Because practically all of the other browsers are based on one made by a company that makes its money through ads.

There's no getting around a fundamentally misaligned incentive like that.

International law is inherently more of a social contract than an actual law. That doesn't make it useless because it does have a real effect on how countries behave, but it does mean that enforcement looks more like getting ostracized than it looks like law enforcement.

> International law is inherently more of a social contract than an actual law.

Isn't actual law a social contract aswell?

I don't think it's a very common opinion in the US that immigration laws should not be enforced. There is a small contingent on the left that wants that on humanitarian grounds and another small contingent on the right that wants very loose immigration laws for the business benefits of immigrant labor.

There were an enormous number of deportations under previous administrations without much pushback.

What distinguishes this situation is that the deportations are proceeding with a complete disregard for US law and human rights. People are being deported without getting a chance to fight it in court, a violation of the constitutional right to due process. People are being rounded up as suspected illegal immigrants solely based on their skin color or the language they are speaking, a violation of the constitutional right to be secure from unreasonable search and seizure. People are being deported while it is still being determined whether they are eligible for asylum or refugee status, a violation of US statute.

The US is supposed to be a nation of laws where everyone can be certain that their legal rights will be respected. That is being grossly violated with the current deportation push.

Opinion polls are around 60-70% supporting enforcement of immigration laws.

That’s means a quarter to a third don’t believe they should be enforced. I’d call that significant.

And the US “disregard for human rights”? You mean the right to contest your deportations multiple times? That’s far more than other countries provide. It’s more typical for an officer to not find proof of legal entry being the sole decision maker. You’ll be on a plane the same day leaving the country.

There are people in the US who have been here for years awaiting a decision on their case. You feel that’s an abuse of their human rights?

People are literally being deported despite having a court order ordering that they not be deported.

People are being searched without a reasonable suspicion they are in the country illegally.

Both of those things are illegal under US law. What other countries do is not relevant since US law does not apply there.

These clearly aren’t happening on a broad scale, and exceptions don’t disprove the rule.

Aliens in the US get far more due process than most countries give. That’s the measure.

That is not the measure. The US must follow its own laws; not those of other countries.

No, that's not the point.

If you take a strong argument and through in an extra weak point, that just makes the whole argument less persuasive (even if that's not rational, it's how people think).

You wouldn't say the "Uyghur genocide is bad because of ... also the disposable plastic crap that those slave factories produce is terrible for the environment."

Plastic waste is bad but it's on such a different level from genocide that it's a terrible argument to make.

Departments are created by acts of Congress. Not because a wannabe dictator registered a domain name.

What's the difference between a wannabe dictator and an actual dictator?

I don't think it's what's on a piece of paper somewhere. I think it's what they're able to do, and get away with.

I don't see any impeachment proceedings from Congress. Looks like the wannabe dictator has their blessings.