FishFace

Sounds useful? Weird to imply the purpose of this is to expose people not in the office. The people who care about that already know.

It's not a meme, joke, banter, dumb comment or light-hearted observation. What's your idea of shitposting?

I'm trying to make "twinkle twinkle star-whose-angular-size-from-earth-appears-small" scan but it's proving a challenge...

Does the average republican believe the government's characterisation of this as the fault of the democrats? What about the average American?

Forbidden take

The title is implicitly responding to someone who thinks, "fashion is an important part of masculinity, and it's immutable," but has nothing to say to someone who thinks, "fashion is an important part of masculinity and can change."

Jesus.

As far as I can tell, you are arguing that it won't become impossible to use a VPN. But no-one has said that it will be, and what I and others are trying to point out, is that VPN usage will become more difficult and rare. The vast majority of people will be restricted from viewing the content that the government objects to, whatever that is.

If you have anything to say about that rather than repeating the point that, yes, for the knowledgeable, for the tech-literate, for the people with the will and the spare time and the energy, VPN usage will still be available, feel free to. Maybe you think that actually everyone will use a VPN - why? why won't a massive reduction in marketed options not reduce usage massively? Maybe you think that actually it doesn't matter - why? why does it not matter that the average person will be unable to get information censored by the government?

Göring would like a word. Closely followed by Arthur Harris, fighting for the title.

I thought this article was complaining about something that no-one used, but here you are recommending alternatives... alternatives that are not curl

You don't seem to be accounting for the strategic value of the car industry, which is what the person above was talking about.

Funny. And got you to post this!

Your reply implies the article is critical of this, but it isn't