gian

It includes “compliance with EU regulations” which in this case is soon going to involve redirecting and tracking visitors to sites such as thepiratebay.

Which are already required, in a form or another, for every EU member, so ?

That depends on what you mean by integrate. There are many clear examples where it makes no sense to enforce homogenous legislation. Europe is a big place, and it makes sense to have different systems in different places.

No, there are no place where it make no sense. Granted that you need to write a more complex law, but in the end it is nothing impossible.

Take tires for instance - in the Scandinavian countries we require winter tires for the season, something which would make no sense in Italy for instance.

Just for the record, even in Italy the winter tires are required for the season (but we can just have chains on board and we are good).

you just defend his right to run spacex on specialK.

Is not the US "the land of the free" ?
Obviously he has the right to run SpaceX, like you have the right to try to build another one.

But obviously you seems to not understand what are the implication of setting this kind of precedent and all the implications that will arise. But that's ok, after all the only important thing is to hate Musk.

I strongly suspect NASA can manage spaceX better than the ketamine kid. Why don’t you give a fuck about those astronauts who have to put their faith in his hardware? why don’t you give a fuck about the kids who are growing up in an age where that drug addled prick is put up as an icon of success?

ROTFL, SpaceX managed 259 launch in 2024, show me how many launch managed NASA, if they are more than maybe you are right, else...

The only reason SpaceX exists is because Boeing and Lockheed managed to compete so badly the only solution was to merge their launch businesses.

To compete even worse

Then make it work.

What people seem to be missing is the precedent this would set. It’s all well and good when we empower the office of the president to seize a private company we don’t like, but after we give them that power what’s to stop them from seizing other businesses?

XYZ company refuses to get rid of their DEI policy because the shareholders voted to keep it? Well now the orange man can seize it.

The problem they don't see is that once a precedent is set, also the other party can do it. What you point out is valid also like "XYZ company refuses to establish a DEI policy because the shareholders voted agains ? Well not the democratic president can seize it".

Let’s not forget that previously it took 2/3rd majority to confirm presidential appointments, but the Senate under Obama decided to change that rule to 50% to get past Republican objections. The result of this is all these shit appointments Trump has passed with 51% of the Senate, none of them would have gotten by if the Democrats hadn’t made a precedent for changing the rules.

Tipical case of not looking beyond one's nose

Right. Now go back to live in a cave.

I don't think that the US currently can go back to the times when Kennedy announced that in 10 years they will put a man on the moon, by a long shot.
To have someone in power that give a shit about science, you need a revolution to wipe out the current political class and radically change the mentality of the population.

Who doesn’t hate Musk these days?

Probably the ones that don't always speak about him

He’s pissed of everyone except the ones who want to be ruled by a technobro king.

No, he pissed off everyone that think that the world is black and white: the US. The rest of the world is indifferent about him

I would suggest that maybe you should leave SpaceX alone, if you want to still have a space program.

Maybe think about to nationalize healthcare insurance, it seems to be something more usefull

Yes, but don"t say it to Musk's haters...