So you're okay with government censorship as long as there's a humanitarian upside?
Where’s the acknowledgment of the role of natural forces in the conversation?If there were two causes of a problem, with one being responsible for 90% of it and the other being responsible for 10%, what point is there in acknowledging the 10%?
Evidence of what? Did you miss all the links in the article?
LOL no. There is a causal link between modern industrialization and climate change, unlike the claims of Haidt which are only correlational.
Musk is free to tell Australia to go fuck themselves, but his refusing to take down a video of a knife attack because a government is asking is the wrong time to stand on what he believes is principle.
You are a many things, among them a liar, a gaslighter, but also a COWARD.Every single accusation, a confession.
The bill is not exclusively a Tiktok ban bill, because they knew bundling with a bunch of humanitarian stuff would make it more likely to pass. But it is still very much a Tiktok ban bill.
I'm sure Congress will get right on that. /s
If a hospital hosted that information on their public-facing website, then yes, it'd most likely be a HIPAA violation. But this study is just about which pages people visit, what they search for, etc..
Because the information isn't medical. It's website visit info.
Knowing him, his opposition most likely has more to do with self-preservation than principles.
The police department and their lawyers would do everything in their power to make it seem like it was.
I think you are being a little unfair here, Mike.*Tim.
I hope you’ll reconsider the contempt and derision you seem to direct at people trying to protect other people from the ills of social media organized and curated by the CCP.These people aren't trying to protect people; they don't care about them. They just want to make money from Tiktok's competitors.
Cutting that by 5/6th would have a noticeable effect on revenue and profits for a small company like that.Bell Canada employs almost 50k people and had an annual net income of $1.5b in 2023. It's hard to imagine they would piss off customers by reneging on earlier promises to save, what, $15m a year at best?
So using a VPN outside of California does solve that problemBut it doesn't solve the actual problem: link taxing.
When in California, just use a VPN outside California Problem solvedNo, it really isn't.
Yes, how dare they use their own website to criticize a stupid decision Musk made!
Right, because as we all know, there are only two things that can cause businesses to close: shoplifting and working against themselves.
The "outrage algorithm" is what causes people to believe that the internet is worse now, but as the study highlights, that's not really true.
You make it sound like this political tactic of smashing unrelated things together in a bill is unavoidable. Reactions like yours is exactly why they do it.