ha ha ha, flamebait? ) existance of ruzzia is a flamebait. Existance of ruzzians is a flamebait, a troll actually.
https://youtu.be/Jq2RTlhvqbc?s...

Probably. This is why encrypted messaging is banned:

https://mashable.com/article/r...

https://youtu.be/Jq2RTlhvqbc?s...

ruzzia is a scourge unfit to exist in the world

That's what indexing and string interning is for. You know, hashmaps and stuff.

That's nice and all, but where are the returns? If they don't start coming soon, the whole thing is going to run out of gas.

Pets.com was doing really well, lots of advertising too, until it became clear that nobody was buying anything from it. Building it doesn't necessarily mean they'll come, but the advertising industry made bank. Lots of economic activity around the gold rush too, problem is there wasn't any gold.

Construction companies and hardware vendors are doing well, but after a while people stop buying pickaxes and shovels. On the other hand, there might be a strong demand for torches and pitch forks after it's all over, problem with that is rsilvergun has no money, only a big mouth to better eat with.

Indeed. And the issue was detected by looking at the data, finding fault with it and that is perfectly fine. Now, if the MAGAs and other denier-idiot assholes were right, the correction would never have happened. But it did. And that means things work and deliver good results. The process is just a bit more complex and takes a bit longer than their tiny brains can handle.

You clearly have not the slightest idea what the problem actually is. Well done, you are an idiot.

Well, if that is your take-away here, you clearly are a dangerous moron and asshole.

And no, there are NOT the same people. You are just lumping idiots in the press and in politics together with actual scientists because you have no idea how things actually work.

Nice denier nonsense you have there. The problem, which you are clearly not smart enough to understand is that this basically a permanent reduction and it is one that will be getting worse. You seem to think that at the end of the century, there is one point, where there will be some reduction. That is not the case. The reality is that each year will see an increasing reduction and that will last for a very long time. The problem is that very soon this will overtake total growth and then we will have negative growth each year.

Not a surprise that somebody like you does not get what is essentially a simple school-level "interest over multiple years" calculation.

Science is not broken, peer review is. And no, Science is not religion. It is the very opposite of it. A Science-denier like you will never understand that though, you are simply not smart enough.

I see you have never been part of this system. Your claims are pure hallucinations. There is no "enforcing" of any "consensus". Peer review checks, if done right, whether arguments hold up, data is plausible, etc.

The problem with peer review is that it is entirely unpaid while actually getting the publication can be very expensive, and many do it badly, just so they can claim they are doing it. I still regularly get contacted by journals wit requests to review one paper or another based on my publishing history. If it is open access and I am qualified, I will consider it. If not, I universally reject there requests now.

Not really. Science works on facts and evidences and sometimes there are errors and mistakes that then get corrected at a later time.

The Deniers work on stupidity. There is no fixing that and they do not need ammunition. They will just make stuff up.

What's the topic again? Something like..."Is it worth the cost?" Do you see yet the difference between where this is, and where you're trying to take it? (And you can't even keep that consistent...)