nah, just keep pumping into those corpos. one day they’ll stop abusing consumers, they “promise”.

it’s almost like every person in tech is clairvoyant…

technically according to NSPM-7 any FOSS is terroristic by nature because it’s anticapitalist.

that means if you have contributed to FOSS at any time, you are a terrorist. technically.

that’s exactly what I got out of this whole situation.

guilty until proven innocent.

this sexbot needs Jesus!

and that future will include me ripping out the network connection cards from the primary boards.

if that bricks it, I’ll just have to setup an “internet” connection.

good for you.

remember, you’re not alone and many people are making the switch. find a community you like and help each other.

more brain cells

debatable

that same model applies to Lemmy too, you know.

like this?

you’re on shirts that go hard.

what did you fucking expect?

the “trucks” in your example are the users computers/phones.

the highways are the Internet, which is owned and maintained by the UK government after their “gate”.

the alcohol is the content.

4chans trucks deliver to the UKs “gate” and the UK user does the rest from there on the UK highways.

if the UK doesn’t want the alcohol in their country, they need to stop their citizens from purchasing it and block it from entering their country at their “gate”.

this is what any reasonable country would do. they (UK) already do it for actual physical products like potassium bromate, azodicarbonamide, and certain artificial food dyes like Yellow 5 and Yellow 6.

Are they going to sue or fine the companies that manufacture those products? no. They’re going to ban the products that use them and then go after the individuals that smuggle them in.

still not reading it. you attempted to argue under false pretenses and I’m not wasting my time on something you probably used AI to generate.

gonna be honest, I didn’t read anything past this part.

So in your scenario here, 4chan starts off by smuggling alcohol into the UK.

I didn’t read any of it because you clearly didn’t read what I said.

here’s the part you conveniently forgot and it literally changes the entire argument.

some enterprising individuals have taken it upon themselves to buy, smuggle, and then sell those beverages inside the UK.

next time you want to argue your point don’t employ the use of bad faith tactics and try to argue your point without manufacturing flaws.

Imagine for a moment that 4chan is a business that sells alcoholic beverages in the US. Now imagine the UK has instituted prohibition and banned the consumption of alcohol.

now, some enterprising individuals have taken it upon themselves to buy, smuggle, and then sell those beverages inside the UK.

Clearly, the government has intended to ban the consumption of alcohol, not the sale of it.

Now the UK government is trying to shackle hefty fines against an American company for having the “audacity” of selling a product to an individual within the confines of the US.

again, the UK banned the consumption of alcohol, not the sale of. 4Chan isn’t forcing UK citizens to drink the alcohol. They are simply selling the product, within their country of origin, to individuals who want to purchase it.

now, do you still think the UK government has a right to fine 4chan or do you think maybe the UK government should elaborate on their prohibition regulations to ensure their citizens are properly “protected”?