You know what, I'll grant you that. I was thinking "post" and not "assertion", but that's not what I wrote so you can have that. Note that the sky didn't fall on me when I admitted to being wrong and that I didn't need to blame you or Biden for it. ;)

I'll correct my remark: "You made an assertion about Biden causing 'real damage' and used a claim from Alberta to support it. Yadda yadda yadda.

You made an assertion about "the 51st state" and used a claim from Alberta to support it. That claim fell apart under scrutiny. Your assertion is still unsupported. If anybody should be calling Alberta for help, it's YOU. Heh.

Claim being the operative word. There are claims that dispute it. You got nothin.

No, your original point needed to show significant damage. That's why you got yourself in trouble with throwing out unsubstantiatable numbers.

Good because the challenge was for you to support your claim. Still waiting for that.

You're dodging the question because you know the numbers don't jive. They don't include environmental cleanup, or take into account the oil's being sold anyway. You might have had a case that the stop/start of construction caused actual calculable losses, but since they don't add up to the eleventy-billion in perpetuity you're trying to claim you're now clamming up.

Don't blame me for your fuckup, I refer you to the government of Alberta for failing to support your strawman.

Are you standing by their numbers?

Then why did you need to inflate it with imaginary numbers?

It was. You introduced it and avoided the topic when pressed for details like losses caused by environmental damage.

Then answer my question so you can win, finally. I'll remind you of what I asked: "Did any or all of that add up to approximately $2.4 billion to Canada's GDP and an estimated $30 billion in tax and royalty revenues?"

You haven't really debunked anything. You COULD have... like you started down a non-hypothetical path, but then you walked away from it the moment I questioned the number. Now you're leaning on a number I actually have debunked because you hyperbole'd yourself into a corner.

You were close to potentially proving that, then you walked away from it. We both know why. Heh.

"I want the credit but not the blame."

Speaking of goal post moves, you're just now bringing up something that might be tangible... finally. My 'complaint' was actually about the lack of substance to your claim, trying instead to measure events that didn't happen. You're picking a hilarious time to be both obtuse and evasive.

Did any or all of that add up to approximately $2.4 billion to Canada's GDP and an estimated $30 billion in tax and royalty revenues?

YouTube's only concern these days is revenue and profit.

They breach their own community guidelines each and every day by running scam ads that continue to run despite hundreds or even thousand viewer-reports. Those ads run until the advertiser's spend is exhausted -- however if a creator (the life-blood of the platform) is falsely accused of "scams or deceptive practices" by YT's AI then they're gone in the blink of an eye.

They also allow AI spambots to post endless comments linking to porn pages/sites and claim that their AI can't automatically detect such things -- although that same AI, when unleashed on creator's videos, constantly demonetizes anything that is deemed to be unsuitable.

I hate the AI dross that is overwhelming YT as much as anyone but I really have doubts that YT intends to do anything effective to stem its flow. You see, so long as AI-generated videos are getting eyeballs on ads, YouTube will be happy because they'll be generating revenue and profits.

Let's face it, YouTube is actually *encouraging* the use of AI on its platform. AI suggests ideas for new videos and will create thumbnails for you. VEO3 will even create shorts or entire videos on demand. Google wants to sell its AI services and is pitching them at YouTube creators so they're not going to shoot themselves in the foot are they?

This is why I'm moving to self-hosting my own videos on an instance of PeerTube and I encourage other creators to do the same. When you self-host you have *FULL* control and you no longer have to worry about censorship or losing your entire community just because one of YT's AI bots has runamok and identifies your cute cat videos as CSAM.

Well, no, because you refused to answer my question you made it relevant. You want to claim something that might have happened is a loss, but don't want to consider that something else that might have occurred changes the value of that loss.

At the end of the day we both know their oil is being sold anyway and we also know leaks in that pipeline would be costly, ESPECIALLY that one. Good thing you strategically used the word 'probably', huh. It's a great way to say bullshitty things without the committal.