Hatfort

Putin is playing his game of thrones. I thought he and Prigozhin were on good terms now, but nope, seems Putin was waiting for an opportunity to kill the man that defied him for a day. Now he'll take charge of the Wagner army too. Did he really need to do that? They were already under him. Anyway, it's done.

Our planet has been quite awesome for us since the Ice Age. Scientists say that climate has been naturally warming at a very slow pace since then, but the consensus is clear about humans having accelerated this since the industrial revolution. The course is not good, the warming may seem slow yet, but like an exponential progression, the curve could go crazy at any point. One important factor could be all the ice of the planet melting into the ocean, which seems unavoidable at this point. Some theories say that this ice serves as a natural cooler, and if we lose it, the temperatures will really grow then. The level of the sea will grow as well. There may even be a point of no return when the planet and its climate stop being as we know it and change, and it won't be for the better for us. Abrupt climate changes have happened throughout the natural history of Earth, and we could be writing the next one. We cannot know for sure what will happen, science acknowledges some level of unpredictability too. Let's hope it's not too bad, maybe we are lucky, it's a possibility too. Will we fix it? I don't think so. It's not only about fossil fuels, there's also animal agriculture. I'm only talking about the environmental impact of this, not other considerations. I don't see any way for people and politicians to address the importance of this. We are quite spoiled and we won't take a no, no matter what happens. We want our meat and we want it now.

Freedom of speech is one of the pillars of democracies, in contrast with fascist and authoritarian regimes that don't allow it. Governments shouldn't control media, that's what's understood with freedom of speech as a concept. Now, what also can happen and is happening is that powerful entities like corporations and banks get full control of the media and the mainstream narrative, which is not okay either. On the other hand, all speech cant be allowed. The easiest example to understand this could be pedophilia. It's also speech, but it can't be allowed, nor its promotion. Another can be incitement of violence or terrorist attacks, quite easy to understand that this should be illegal. You cannot ask for someone to be attacked or killed. Difamating someone with lies is speech too. Should it be allowed? No. It should be illegal. I could go on. Hate speech should be kept in line too, especially against minorities and vulnerable groups. That could be sexism, racism, xenophobia, homophobia, transphobia, aporophobia, ableism, and even fatphobia to some degree, attacking people verbally or physically for who they are, what they believe, or even their circumstances. Slurs can enter that category. I hate feeding the beast of hate with examples, but one could be comparing a race with animals. Homophobia is easy to spot, nobody is insulted for being heterosexual, but yes for being homosexual, even killed, that's a reality. Same with cis and trans. Also for discriminatory reasons, like women being historically relegated to second-degree citizens for their sex, which is still noticeable in society. You can say that hate speech should be allowed to be debated and defeated in the marketplace of ideas, but the truth is that it perpetuates, and innocent people end up being harmed or killed. Hitler used his speech, it spread, and then the holocaust happened. But it also happens on a smaller scale.

Running as a third party in the current US election system is a mistake, most people recognize that, so I don't think figures like Cornell or Andrew Yang end up causing that much harm. Don't some right-wing libertarians run as a third party as well? I think it happens on both sides. A healthier democratic system should allow multiple parties to get representation, I will say. I think primaries are healthy. In the end, the candidate with the most support runs, ideas are debated, and positions change. At least in the Democratic party. The Republican primaries are a joke right now.

If? This Kennedy has zero chances. The JFK files must be deleted out of existence by now, we will never know what happened. They didn't leave loose ends, they killed his supposed killer too. Then the brother, father of this one. Oopsie!

He attracts too many weirdos due to his conspiracy tendencies. There was a loud discussion about climate change at one of his fundraising events, which was interrupted by the host farting and saying he was farting, in case it wasn't noticed. I'd love a Progressist Kennedy running for office, but this one is not serious. He lacks charisma too.

- Stop the presses, we've got a story! - What story? - Candance Owens has interviewed Andrew Tate! - Don't stop the presses.

Made by aliens and they used bigfoots as labour to carry those heavy stones. Everybody knows.

Just one less minute? Oh, not much.

With that voice, he was unelectable anyway. They should have let him speak his damn 10 minutes, he's gonna play the victim now. The decision was fortunate for our ears though, that is a fact no one can refute.

I don't think he can make this everything app work. He wants the financial banking part because it's a very lucrative business, with millions of people paying small fees for millions of transactions. There are already others working on it. One is still PayPal, I still use it, but there are others. There's no way I would trust my savings or earnings to X, Elon Musk, or any other everything app either. For financial matters, it feels more secure an app that does this one thing right, and that's okay. The thing is, he is also killing Twitter in the attempt. Twitter was huge, only a fool would underestimate what it already was. It could have worked financially too, with some time and good management.

His base is with him because...

Joe Biden is using her words in his official campaign.

They escaped the Matrix, now they have to escape the prison.

He is the superior Illuminati, and we can not comprehend his mind. That or he is stupid as fuck. He is so deep in his debt hole of bad decision-making since he purchased Twitter that he can't think straight. Brand names have value, Twitter's name was still quite valuable because it's known and used all over the world. X is not a good name, he tried that in PayPal too, and his business partners kicked him out for almost destroying the company's chances with his awful instincts. He got a good out deal, as PayPal succeeded so much and was sold to eBay for millions. Also, he says he wants to control with X, let's say a number, half of the world's online banking. He is humble, just half. Let's all invest in the visionary again. That's how he has operated for the last 20 years. I think he is closer to a con man than to a businessman. So he wants to eat all the currently working online banking competitors without a huge debt like him how? For example, by giving money to his selected blue-checked dickrider rightwing goons on Twitter. Sorry, X. Okay, Elon. This is fun as fuck. Continue, please.

Really? That's crazy. If it wasn't uncomfortable enough to watch a movie about this theme, they want to emphasize it that way. I usually watch what are considered controversial movies, apart from the cool blockbusters that I like, but I was going to skip this one. It's not the first one to cover this anyway. But since we are talking about this, US right-wingers have been going quite bonkers about these things with stuff like Qanon and Pizzagate. Do they want to fight the sexual exploitation of children and pedophiles? Fine, left-wingers too, but be serious about it.

So what would be the message of the movie? Let's find the criminals and incarcerate them? No objection, fine by me.

Oh man, did he do all that? She totally increased my support for the old man!

Putin probably wanted to break the grain deal before, but now he got the excuse. The counteroffensive is going bad as fuck for Ukraine, they are not regaining any territory at all. I think what Russians are doing is letting Ukrainians erode themselves because they are seeing their losses are being big, and then they may force a treaty or go with a new offensive. I hope it's the first one.

It's not silly, it's business. Mastodon sucks, it has not a good system to interact in, and an awful uncatchy name. Bluesky is kind of okay, but it's hardly taking off, with still invite-only policy, very slow growth, and the train is not waiting. Threads has had a good launch, even if it may be a bit inflated, but it's the most likely to attract influencers, celebrities and companies as followers are automatically imported when they join from Instagram. That's a huge advantage for them, and for the platform, because they will bring users. I'm from Europe, so I can't really investigate much, but I've read of celebrities already having big numbers in Threads for this reason.

But that's what it's supposed to be, like a place to follow what and who is interesting for you, and read, write, and interact with short messages, replies, and reposts. It's not trying to be something new, it's competing with Twitter for the same slot, no secret.

So you haven't been forced. Well, that's a relief.

Maybe he is, is that not fair game? Okay, maybe not. Zuckerberg owns Facebook and Instagram, they are his assets in social media precisely, so it's understandable he uses them to a degree to promote Threads. Elon did ban links to competitors at some point, which I would also understand, the problem is he announced himself as a freedom of speech absolutist, which doesn't fit with that discourse. The question is if enough users stay and engage in Threads in the future. My instinct tells me they will, but, as said, time will tell.

Well, I can't say for sure, but where I read the news it says this number is in fact organic demand, here the link. https://www.cnbc.com/2023/07/10/twitter-traffic-is-nosediving-as-metas-threads-hits-100-million-users.html Time will tell if it success or not, there may be some time when both sites compete. But one has a huge debt and the other hasn't.

Threads is getting quite an attention, it seems. So many people and companies were disgusted with Elon Musk's Twitter, but with a lack of alternatives, they had to stay. For so many was a matter of promotion and business, and hard to let go. The sentiment that I'm hearing is that Zuckerberg is not great, but preferable to Musk, who has been so abhorrent in running the popular social media platform. It can crush Musk, in fact it should, according to capitalism rules, investors take risks and can win or lose. So now what? Twitter was not financially well before him, and he added 44 billion to the hole. Someone explain to me why Musk should not be bankrupted after this huge failure. It's also funny how he complains about ex-employees of Twitter he fired getting into Zuckerberg's bus, if they really did. What are they supposed to do according to him? Stay unemployed and die of hunger? Are they not allowed to get new jobs? What is wrong with him? They totally should find another job and offer their knowledge and skills for a wage, not to screw him, but because they need to eat and I don't think food is given for free in the supermarkets in this economy. Is it wrong to find a new job now? Threads has already hit 100 million users, and is not available in the EU yet for legal reasons.