The value of twitter isn’t its revenue but rather its userbase. Which is still extremely strong.

It actually would be pretty easy to ignore him but this place is absolutely obsessed with dissecting his every move.

supervised injection sites are very controversial and do not solve the problem of addicts moping around shitting up public areas. Some argue they will attract them even more. Stop pretending like it will somehow solve all the issues, when we both know that is not anywhere close to the case.

No where in either of those links you posted exposes it as an “astroturfing campaign”. While I’m sure some people are posting these videos with political motives in mind, does it occur to you that maybe locals are fed up with it? People are watching their cities turn to shit with open air drug markets that many thought were a thing of the past. Just because some retard on twitter with an agenda reposts the video doesn’t mean that it’s an “Astroturfing campaign” lol.

do you think buying a company with debt makes you personally liable for said debt?

I would buy one of the most popular social networks for 50k in an instant. you would be stupid if you turned that down

It’s 38 million doses, not people.

in one city, Ontario. And it’s measured in doses, not people. Meaning that assuming people got duplicate doses, the complication rate would be much higher. I also imagine myocarditis is not always formally diagnosed.

Just 5.5 per cent of adverse events linked to the vaccines were considered serious and included conditions that required an admission to hospital or resulted in death.

5% of adverse events requiring hospitalization is not exactly what I would call safe

curation can still skew towards one side. you know this, everyone knows this. just saying wikipedia used to better before it was taken over by ideologues.

Go look at some of the most active wikipedia contributors, they are mostly hyper political nerds. Wikipedia is heavily reliant on the social consensus of it’s contributors. It’s not a far out idea that there could be a slant among them.

Nah wikipedia has been taken over by politically motivated actors. I really enjoyed it when it was relatively agenda free. If you don’t believe me go check the talk page of any controversial article.

He’s saying gay people will go to hell. Not hate speech but rather an accurate reflection of what he believes.

imagine thinking this is an own. you aren’t special because you are gay, and don’t get to dictate how the world works either.

It’s okay for people to express their opinions even if you consider them bad opinions

Yeah it’s making fun of people. That doesn’t make it hate speech. Most of the world believes there are two genders, people are allowed to make fun of people who disagree with them.

saying “there are two genders” is not hate speech. You are allowed to make fun of people in a song, that doesn’t make it hate speech.

Making successful choices is not by itself sufficient to determine the “value” created. If I choose winning lottery numbers and win 100 million dollars, that doesn’t mean my decision on those numbers is worth 100 million dollars, it was luck.

I would argue this is exactly what makes successful CEO’s so valuable. It’s a very valuable skill to be able to take educated risks. it’s not a lottery. CEO’s don’t get paid how much they do because they’re lucky.

Then I sell the software to another company for 10 million dollars, take 9 million of it for myself, and give the rest of the developers 100k, is that fair and right? When without their labor, I would have zero dollars? My idea and leadership isn’t worth anything without the labor of the people I am leading and who make my idea reality.

Their labor is replaceable. The developers just did the work on the ground, which is honorable and should be compensated, but being in leadership to bring a development project past the finishline and into profit is a lot more scarce a skill than being a developer itself. And developers almost always make out like bandits if they have a decent package.

Sorry you haven’t really made a convincing argument.

I’m not talking about porn stars who happen to stream video games. I’m talking about the explicitly sexual streams where they do suggestive things for donations. It’s basically cam site lite with a direct funnel to their adult content. It’s still extremely prevalent in just chatting.

Then don’t watch pornstar streams?

your original words.

You can pretend like they’re not pornographic but its pretty undeniable these streams are sexual in nature intended to funnel people to their platforms where they can be explicitly sexual instead of skirting the rules by doing “hot tub streams” etc… I wish people wouldn’t be facetious about it.