This is the same service whose car Mike Pence wouldn't enter on Jan 6th because he suspected they were Trump loyalists.

No, it will get them to support preemptively shooting those in the out-group.

Officer Andrew Citriniti and Officer Patrick Husney were also in pursuit of Mway. While Officer Patterson was still on top of the subdued child, Officer Husney shoots Mway in the chest. The boy starts bleeding out on the sidewalk. One witness who recorded the shooting on her phone can be heard warning the police, “Careful, you’re on camera.”

When the shot rings out, the shocked and horrified woman yells, “Oh my God! He just shot him!” The police attempted, but ultimately failed, to take her phone after the shooting. The video soon became viral on social media. 

Eyewitness accounts and statements from Officer Patterson suggest that Mway was not a threat to the officers while he was on the ground. The body cam of the visibly shaken and stunned Patterson captures him telling other officers, “Ultimately the gun came out right next to him.” Still concerned whether or not he was shot, he stated, “I was on top of [Mway]. I don’t know how [Husney] got that shot. I was on top of him.” 

So even the officer who was on top of the kid was stunned that one of his colleagues just shot the kid anyway. American policing: even if they can catch you and subdue you without causing harm, they'll choose to execute you on the spot anyway, even if you're a child.

And then they tried to cover it up.

(Also it's a little confusing that there are two people called Patterson in this article, one a police officer and the other a critic of the police.)

The shooter is dead, according to reports, along with one spectator, and others wounded, some critically. The bullet clipped Trump's ear, he claims. There was blood on his ear apparently. If those things are all true it's hard to see it as a deliberate near miss. It looks very much like someone tried to kill him.

It may bring MAGA nuts a few steps closer to the violence they're eager for an excuse to unleash. If they believe they're under immediate attack they will feel entitled to attack back. That said, I'm not sure how much difference this will make in the end. Eventually they'll get violent anyway because they're fascists.

The corporate branding, the new “AI-powered developer platform” slogan, makes it clear that what I think of as “GitHub”—the traditional website, what are to me the core features—simply isn’t Microsoft’s priority at this point in time. 

Microsoft software is all like this: the features users want and would find most useful are never a priority, nor are the bugs that annoy existing users. The priority is whatever some unholy alliance of management and marketing have pulled out of their corporate bottoms as the focus of this month's promotion. It doesn't seem even to be about what would drive sales, since customers like things that work. It's some logic that only makes sense to the businesspeople who speak that absolutely vapid buzzword slurry that gushes from Satya Nadella's mouth. I don't get it, but it's very consistent with Microsoft.

I find avoiding Bill Maher is good for mental health.

Thanks. Russia has certainly helped undermine the UK, which has UHC. There was Russian funding involved in Brexit campaigns, some of the UK's right-wing populists (e.g. Nigel Farage) have apparent Russian connections and support, and Russian social media campaigns support the far right in election campaigns. Brexit was certainly a blow to the country.

How do you know you never had malware if you have no means to check for malware? It's not like it will announce itself.

The article states that the EU is objecting to a couple of particular things:

The EU said X's blue checks policy was deceiving and had been abused by malicious actors. The checks were initially created as as way to verify users like government officials, public figures and journalists, in efforts to limit misinformation, but Musk changed that policy, allowing users to buy blue check accounts. The new policy has been abused by fraudsters to impersonate U.S. politician Hillary Clinton and author J.K. Rowling, among many other celebrities.

The platform also didn't respect an obligation to provide a searchable and reliable advertisement repository and limited access to its public data to researchers, the Commission said.

This is not some amorphous campaign against disinformation, it's a challenge to two specific policies of X.

Sorry, what does UHC mean?

Going after platforms for the speech of their users,

The EU is going after X for selling blue check marks while marketing them as a sign of trustworthiness. They claim this is misleading. They're not going after X for anything the users said.