FaceDeer

Yes. As I explained above, it would be trivial for it to masquerade as a normal instance. Allow real people to join and it would be a normal instance. How would you detect it as being otherwise?

If they're the one running the instance it won't matter.

Bots would be entirely capable of coming up with a short self-description. Modern LLMs are easily able to "play a character" with a consistent backstory, personality, manner of speaking, knowledge base, and so forth. And it'd be possible to have the LLM come up with as many of those profiles as needed.

Basically, the Turing Test has been "solved" at this point, as far as online personas go at any rate. These comments I'm writing to you right now could be bot-generated. I could literally be a bot. There's no way to tell.

And in any event, not all Fediverse instances are as picky. Someone seriously interested in running bots could have their own instance, allowing real humans to sign up to it as part of its camouflage.

So they are well within their rights to pass a law setting up the FCC to promulgate regulations based on the Telecommunications Act.

The Supreme Court apparently disagreed, both in this specific case and more generally when the Supreme Court overturned the Chevron deference doctrine. The Supreme Court basically said "if an agency is going to make a regulation it needs to be very specifically based on a law that says they can do that." So they're saying that Congress is going to have to pass some actual laws about net neutrality before the FCC can make regulations enforcing it. The fact that agencies have been making those regulations without laws backing them up is the problem here.

Iraq and Afghanistan were the result of Congressional votes in favor of an AUMF, as outlined in the War Powers Act.

That happened, sure. I'm saying it shouldn't have. The US went to war without a declaration of war, which is something that should be made by Congress. By passing generic "the President can bomb whatever he wants to" legislation Congress is shirking a responsibility that's supposed to be theirs.

If you want to have a government where the President is in charge of deciding when to go to war, go ahead and have one. By setting up a constitution that says that's how it's supposed to work. Don't have a constitution that says "here's how war is supposed to be declared" and then just go do something else instead of that.

Yes, and? Terrorism requires a particular intent. This could just have been a result of mental illness, or some other such motivation.

I'm not saying it is or isn't. Just that it's reasonable for it to be investigated as such.

I can see it being difficult to keep up with the law-writing given how much more complicated the world is now than when Congress was first established. To keep things working properly there should really be a whole lot more congressmen, Congress hasn't been expanded in a long time and representation is starting to get pretty wonky as a result.

When you get right down to it, I think the root of the problem is just that the American system of governance is just too old. It was one of the first big democracies so it was built without any prior experience of what worked well and what didn't, and the patches it's had since it was established have been too minor and are too difficult to apply for it to keep up with things. But a large swath of the American public have been indoctrinated that American democracy is the "greatest in the world" and that the US constitution is a sacred document, so major changes are nigh on impossible even if American politics wasn't in such a dysfunctionally divided state.

All in all, I'm glad not to be in their shoes right now. Though my own country (Canada) is having some political problems of its own these days they feel more resolvable than all this.

Discreetly, I suppose.

The problem is that it isn't a law, it's a regulation.

On the one hand, the Republicans are definitely playing politics by attacking the ability of agencies to come up with regulations. But on the other, it really is just another example of how various parts of the US government have been ceding or delegating their responsibilities around willy-nilly in ways that weren't constitutionally intended. Congress hasn't made a declaration of war since 1942, despite all the wars the US has entered into since then. The Supreme Court was never even intended to decide the constitutionality of laws, that's something they declared for themselves and everyone's just gone along with it since then. The debt ceiling limit is just plain incoherent, Congress allocates money so a budget they pass should automatically override previous legislation (like the debt ceiling limit).

I don't know what the US should do to resolve all this, but it's getting to be quite the mess.

The amount of wild speculation and misleading headlines about this is getting quite nuts.

You used the wrong word for "two early!" Worse than Nazi!

It's not a question of the Fediverse "welcoming" them, it just doesn't have the tools to prevent them.

Or the bots are posting human-enough comments that they're getting manually approved.