How would you decide what is legitimate ?

Better would be a "this site is suspiciously new" warning in browsers.

At $WORK, newly registered sites are blocked by default by the network appliance.

often they're trading things with externalities

Yes. you're thinking of https://www.wiz.io/blog/chaosdb-explained-azures-cosmos-db-v...

rather then ban, I would prefer posts/comments are labeled as such.

with features:

- ability to hide AI labeled replies (by default)

- assign lower weight when appropriate

- if a user is suspected to be AI-generated, retroactively label all their replies as "suspected AI"

- in addition to downvote/upvote, a "I think this is AI" counter

the "If you owe the bank 1M, you have a problem. If you owe the bank 1B, the bank has a problem" adagium scaled up ?

If you owe the bank $1B, the bank has a problem (they will work with you on repayment terms).

If you owe the bank $1T, the government has a problem (you're too big to fail and will get bailed out).

The 250bn figure is one pushed by the private owners, trying to defend their high yields. It's likely inflated with bonuses and short term schemes to juice returns. Meanwhile, they've extracted 85bn in dividends since privatization began. Privatizing them cost approx 7.6bn - that's a 12x return over less then 40 years. Pretty nice if you can get it.

Not if they might become a competitor, or thrive (proving that the sale was a good idea). Better to keep them weak and likely to fail.

Sweden is part of the expanded 5 eyes (now 14 eyes). As a workaround for restrictions on domestic spying, they subcontract their dirty work to each other. Hence, you can expect the US to assist in pressuring them (ostensibly on behalf of Sweden)

No, that's not right. Public health insurance in the EU does not use that concept. Participating insurance companies are not allowed to set rates that way, since it doesn't serve the public good.

They arent allowed to set rates that way in the US either, so it is an irrelevant point.

Only since the Affordable Care Act (“Obamacare”). Before that, it was common to not be able to get insurance with pre-existing conditions at all without being covered by your employer. And even sometimes your employer’s plan had a waiting period for pre-existing conditions. I got stuck without insurance for a long time after college (being able to stay on your parents’ plan after graduation is also an ACA provision) and still have nightmares about it.

Correct. ACA was passed 15 years ago and I was describing the healthcare system today

You’re implying the situation is as stable as it is in other first-world countries. It’s not. It’s brand new, and Donald Trump has sworn it’s going away.

With respect to pre-existing conditions, it is equal treatment. I don't know what you mean by stability. I'm just reiterating the current state. Policy in other countries is also contingent on government policy and subject to change. Any alternative would be new too.

Believe it or not, there is significantly more to the world than the EU.

presumably it has a semantic model of sorts, defining intrinsic relationships between entities (parent-child, composed-of, sibling-of, and so on)

A bit similar how certain joins in SQL can be very straightforward with the "USING" clause, or when it can rely on extra information such as analytic views to derive materialized views (vendor specific)