As I recall hearing some lawyers talking about defamation, they will have to prove their allegations are true, while he has to prove they had intent to cause issues for him.
It's probably easier for his defamation claims to win, unless they actually have proof of him cheating, but if they had that, they'd have already used it to get him banned and his wins revoked.
Now to me the claims of $100 million is insane, and I can't imagine that even if he wins if he'll get a judgement anywhere near that. But again, just a reminder not only is it true that ianal, but that applies to probably everyone that's posted a comment on this thread.

The lawyers I listen to most often on youtube are LegalEagle, and Lawful Masses. So far, they haven't said anything about this case. (Legal Eagle seems more likely to cover it.)

$8 for half the ads.
When it gets to $4 for no adds, I might think about it, depending how much worse twitter has become.
As it is, the only reason I even have twitter is because of the places that require to you have twitter.
Overall I find it a useless unstoppable scroll feed of trash.

Companies have been doing that scummy routine for a long time before I was even born.

But in no way is trying to intentionally make people so miserable until it induces them to quit so the company can avoid their legal responsibilities is anywhere near equivalent to working the job you were hired for at the hours and duties specified by your contract.

The inflation is happening world wide, almost as if something has been screwing with the world economy and productivity, but that would mean that no one nation, much less politician, can be solely blamed for it, if at all.

I'd buy that for a dollar.

The original of course, not any duplicates.
Maybe put it in a display with a synopsis of it's history, especially of the stupidest parts, mostly the Spice DAO

Sounds caring, but it's no more effective than pacifism when they really do want to hurt you.
The "tools" are essentially indivisible from the people wielding them in the conflicts of war, and even civilians can get caught up if they are part of the support of the military. Working in a warehouse the ammunition is being stored while shipping? You're building is a target, even if civilians are in it. In a fuel depot, especially one close to the front that the tank divisions are getting their fuel from? Well expect that to get hit for being a military asset even it's being staffed owned by civilians.
Don't like that kind of thing, keep your civilians out of all military locations and support positions, and that includes keeping the military out of the civilian things as well. But more than a few countries like having lots of military assets in civilian locations so when they inevitably get attacked during a conflict, they can pretend it's the enemies fault for the civilian casualties. It's plain and simple an attempt to use the civilians as a shield for the military.

Overall this whole thing is screwed, and the best case would be if russia gave up immediately and paid reparations to Ukraine, as well as return the part they stole recently if Ukraine wants them to. But we all know that putin is far to egotistical do that, and in fact will never admit that he was wrong. So I sincerely hope they get their asses kicked all the way to arctic sea by the Ukrainians.

I'm sure this can, and will be taken to the international courts, in which I expect russia's b.s. laws to be declared a load of b.s. .
Unless of course Google just laughs at them and refuses to have anything to do with them until they rescind their b.s. fines. In that case, if russia tries to go to international courts to take the money from google, I expect the court will laugh at russia.

Actually it's much harder to justify the russian invasion of Ukraine in comparison to the US invasion of Iraq.
I am NOT saying one of them was right, but there's a difference between stepping into the water, and doing a cannon ball while hanging onto an anchor.

Perhaps, but most Americans don't know a lot about other allied countries, and the subject of the article, and thus all posts that aren't screwing up and going off topic, will be about Russia, and/or Google since they are the topic.

Also people on the right that aren't part of 45s cult of personality.
You see, it's not that he spoke, it's what he did that violated laws that he's getting in trouble for.
Sure, some of that was just words, and free speech has never allowed people to get away with certain things, like whipping up a mob, or talking that mob into an insurrection.
"Who shall rid me of this meddlesome priest", when outside of a play or other literature, that get's someone to try and actually kill somebody, is considered ordering telling them to kill the "priest". You know mobsters like to talk indirectly like that to try and avoid getting arrested, and yet they still get arrested and successfully prosecuted for it.
Of course, our justice system has lots of problems, and money can give a lot of leverage to change the odds. We'll see what happens with this, but trump is and has been a criminal for many decades, he's just not a convicted one.
If you don't believe me, check the legal records in NY State on him and his companies. He's been able to protect himself with arbitration, influence, money, and hiding behind corporate laws so fines are paid instead of the one responsible (aka trump in these cases) going to jail.
Remember, someone who commits a crime, is still a criminal, even if they haven't been convicted.

Sounds like the vagueness of quackery to me.
There were a lot of phrases in there that set off warning flags in my mind.
Let's see how the peer review goes.

For as far as we know, it had nothing to do with the lovable childs toy/storybook character.
It could have been a reference to Russia (Long known as the Bear), and indicating that it should stop invading Ukraine (stepping down is a term used to indicating backing from a conflict.).

Of course, we only have third or fourth hand knowledge of what actually happened and it's relevant context, so it's just speculation on our part either way.
(And I never put it past censors to go beyond their borders and attack things they never should have.)

Solar is pretty much useless beyond Mars. Out there it's like night time on Earth, but with even less light available.

So they're going to spend a metric butt-ton of cash for a system that's little more than techno-voodoo because b.s. reasons.

I love tech, and facial recognition is rather cool, but don't fool yourself, despite what marketing tries to tell you, it utterly sucks outside the lab. Actually it's not that great in the labs yet either, but nobody is buying it for a laboratory.

False positives, false negatives, and a system that's either too tight on parameters that it increases one or so light it increases the other.
It's a crappy system that's worse than useless as it causes laziness in security people, as well as reliance on it despite it being wrong more often than not.
(Both false positives and false negatives are the system being wrong. And we haven't even brought up the massive biases due to faulty AI creating racial based issues.)

That's actually capitalism at work there,
Also, for a lot of us, a months salary might just only cover a weekend in our normal residence, especially in New York City, so what's your point?