Political change is driven by 3% of the population. 1/3 voted for democrats. So 1% of the population would be incarcerated. Peak prison population was 0.7%. Doubling that capacity is possible, especially if prison camps can be used.

What’s the winning strategy? If violence is escalated until everybody is incarcerated not much will change.

hadn’t been held back by lazy MS et al.

MS is not lazy but working hard to maintain their lead.

edit: Just noticed that my phrasing is bad and could be seen as praise. OP is right, MS is holding everybody back.

I meant to say that they abuse their market domination to maintain their lead.

Look at MS Teams. It was free until Slack was done as a competitor.

MS did things but that’s inevitable. The crucial part are the things that they prevented.

It’s increadible that OP is even downvoted.

It’s two quotes. Miners don’t throw coal into furnaces.

My liberal friends were saying, ‘You can’t expect them to be able to do that,’” Biden told his New Hampshire audience. “Anybody who can go down 300 to 3,000 feet in a mine, sure in hell can learn to program as well, but we don’t think of it that way,” he said.

“Gimme a break! Anybody who can throw coal into a furnace can learn how to program for God’s sake.”

However, the only strategically significant rival we have that utilizes those shopping lanes are Russia, whom the administration wants to buddy up too.

If that doesn’t play out, Putin will be dropped like Saddam.

Better than being a hopeless doomer about everything.

How can any change happen if there is only a limited willingness to perveive reality and analyze it?

They’re clearly referring to when it became easily accessible to the masses.

When have you been to the moon?

I know the UK banned women’s orgasms

Why? To prevent British women from having expectations?