UT Austin graduate here. Nowhere in this article does the word "censorship" appear. But that is the only way to describe this new policy. In recent years, UT Austin has suppressed peaceful protests and demonstrations on campus concerning the war in Gaza. Now the university is censoring "unnecessary controversial subjects," and although the new rule does not define what qualifies as “controversial,” it should be obvious to everyone what is prohibited.
Ironically, the state of Texas in 2019 enacted a law aimed at protecting free speech on public university campuses, a measure that was ostensibly intended to reinforce the First Amendment rights of students and faculty. The law designated common outdoor areas as traditional public forums and required policies for disciplining those who interfere with free speech. Back then, conservative legislators were trying to ensure that so-called "woke" or "politically correct" instructors and administrators did not suppress the articulation of conservative opinions.
It is time to change the school motto for UT Austin from "Disciplina Praesidium Civitatis" to something more appropriate for the institution: "All Students and Faculty Are Equal, but Some Students and Faculty Are More Equal Than Others."
Something else you might try is changing your diet. After I became a vegetarian and eliminated refined sugar and excess sodium from my food, my health improved, as well as my sleep. I am no longer pre-diabetic. And the food that I eat is wonderful, many different ways of preparing beans and lentils for protein instead of meat.
I couldn’t believe how much more alert and awake I would feel after lunch when I quit meat and dairy. Also highly endorse avoiding refined sugar and reducing sodium. Wish I had switched to this diet earlier in life
> The peninsula was captured by Israel during the 1967 Middle East War and only returned to Egypt after the two countries signed a peace treaty in 1979.
It seems likely that the Egyptian government is trying to promote migration and development projects in the Sinai peninsula because they fear they could lose the territory again in the event of another war.
WTF? The FAA announces a ban on all flights at an international airport and then withdraws the ban within a few hours of the announcement? What kind of insane police state would try a stunt like that? Even for the Trump administration, that is setting the bar at a new low.
You should have been here a month ago. The FAA halted all air traffic to and from the Caribbean region with no explanation (well, duh) and no announcement of a resume date. Then it was lifted 24 hours later with no notice.
What kind of government would use their statutory authority to shut down an airport when there is a risk to the planes?
Why do you think the FAA doesn't have this authority? Or, why do you think the FAA shouldn't have this authority?
In other words: This may have been needed but poorly executed; this may have been incompetent planning and response. But I wouldn't call the FAA shutting down an airport "police state".
>> What kind of government would use their statutory authority to shut down an airport when there is a risk to the planes?
It could be either an incompetent government or an authoritarian government that is trying to militarize certain institutions of civilian life.
>> Why do you think the FAA doesn't have this authority? Or, why do you think the FAA shouldn't have this authority?
The FAA does indeed have the authority. The question is simply: why did the FAA choose to exercise its authority in this case? If there was a real danger to the public, then the FAA should be honest with the people and tell them what is the danger. That is what citizens should expect from a democratic government.
>> This may have been needed but poorly executed; this may have been incompetent planning and response. But I wouldn't call the FAA shutting down an airport "police state".
The reason why I ask if this is an example of police state behavior is because in this case the government apparently took drastic measures without explaining to the people why it was doing so.
To add context to the discussion, it is important to recall that Discord was reported to have recently filed paperwork with the SEC for an IPO [1]. Thus it seems likely that the real reason for the age verification (i.e., user identification) policy is to boost its perceived earnings potential among Wall Street investors. According to this theory, Discord is the new Facebook.
Switching to Cloudflare DNS solves archive.today problems? That's strange. archive.today is known for having problems with Cloudflare DNS[1]. Switching to Google DNS should solve it. (This isn't because of a bug in Cloudflare DNS, but rather that archive.today dislikes that Cloudflare DNS doesn't support EDNS.)
Disclosure: I work at Google, but not on the DNS team.
For a detailed discussion about phones, personal data and anonymity, there is a good book written by a former police officer: Michael Bazzell (2024) Extreme Privacy: What It Takes To Disappear, fifth edition.
An article published in Saturday's edition of the Mexican newspaper La Jornada provides more details about the cause of the crash. The article is in Spanish; here are some of the main points, translated into English:
1. According to the CIAF, the break in the track was "practically undetectable." The fracture on the track was not noticed by the trains that passed over it, or by the technicians responsible for the maintenance of the infrastructure.
2. The damaged train, which belongs to the Italian company Iryo, is heavier than other trains running on the track; the additional weight of the Iryo train may have been a factor, or possibly even one of the causes, of the derailment.
3. The CIAF said that the notches registered in the wheels and the deformation in the rail are "compatible" with the fact that the track was broken before the Iryo train passed over it.
4. Spanish Transportation Minister Óscar Puente rejected criticism of the delay of the rescuers; according to the Minister, rescuers arrived within "18 minutes."
Ironically, the state of Texas in 2019 enacted a law aimed at protecting free speech on public university campuses, a measure that was ostensibly intended to reinforce the First Amendment rights of students and faculty. The law designated common outdoor areas as traditional public forums and required policies for disciplining those who interfere with free speech. Back then, conservative legislators were trying to ensure that so-called "woke" or "politically correct" instructors and administrators did not suppress the articulation of conservative opinions.
It is time to change the school motto for UT Austin from "Disciplina Praesidium Civitatis" to something more appropriate for the institution: "All Students and Faculty Are Equal, but Some Students and Faculty Are More Equal Than Others."
reply