Fully offline is of course impossible. But it can be partially offline. Blockchain, for instance, doesn't require an internet connection to prove that a transaction is possible, but it does need an internet connection to submit and settle. So you would not need an internet connection to pay, the merchant does to accept payment. Similarly to how this works today with card payments.

Clean your own mess.

Anthropic said it was not able to agree on the deal terms over concerns that AI would be used to surveil Americans and be used in fully autonomous weaponry, which AI is not yet ready to do safely.

To add to this, Anthropic also said (in other words I do not recall) that even if AI could do it safely, there would be ethical concerns about oversight.

The only country bad at using nukes is the only country who dropped some. The US.

Nukes are a deterrence weapon. No one with a sane mind wants to use them.

What they claim to do and what they do is not necessarily the same. If done properly, the server does not need to be trusted.

I do mean "person with a huge setup dedicated to music listening". An audiophile who actually knows what they're talking about will tell you to get any cable from a reputable brand.

But of course you also have "audiophiles" who have no idea whatsoever.

Oh yeah, for sure. I didn't include that part because an audiophile setup rarely has a need for long distances.

I'd argue that this is a different scenario, as AI is a tool, not a being. At least at this point.

A complex tool, but really just a tool. Without the human input, it can't do shit.

I think there is a bit more than digital independence involved. Europe could definitely be a world power if we stopped trying to appease everyone.

I have my own gitea server and very happy with it!

As others have stated... The problem isn't the burner, it's that you tried to out spaghetti in... cold water?

1. You are conflating complexity and difficulty. But I'll argue it's both more complex and more difficult. It's more complex because rather than choosing your candidate, you have to express your opinions. You have a bunch of choices to make instead of one. That's complexity. But it is also more difficult, because it requires you to have a grasp of all the issues that are brought up. Not everyone is able to give their opinion on how to best fight a job crisis, for instance. And picking what "feels" best makes the choice pointless and dangerous. It also doesn't prevent lies, marketing and false promises at all, as a candidate could still be lying about their intentions just to get more votes.
2. It is very hard to find the closest match. I tell you that as a software engineer. Because what rules do you use to determine the "closest"? Do you consider every opinion as important? Do you minimise the average distance? Do you minimise the amount of extreme differences? Do you prioritise some "more important" issues? Who even decides what is important? There are so many ways to bias and twist a system like this.
3. Then you're probably better off advocating for a direct democracy, which is another topic and can be done in a much easier way than trying to adapt a representative democracy for it!