What?

What is this? I didn't write this, I swear. It's not even how I talk! Who was using my account????

You think you understand, but you don't! I am here from the inside, trying to warn people before it's too late! Heed my words, oh ye mortals!!

The app is downloading itself!

Meat is delicious, but a vegan diet is perfectly healthy.

Twitter did a much better job with the bots. It did have a tough time because you can't algorithmically police right wing extremism without having it go after American Republican politicians. So right we extremism had to be manually policed. In other words racism and Nazis and whatnot. Musk solution to that problem was to just let the racists and the Nazis take over.

Now ordinarily that would be the company would rapidly go out of business because of lost users. But musk has been pumping money into it, largely with the help of the Saudi royal family. Essentially turning it into a propaganda arm of American billionaires and the Saudi elites. At least if you are consuming content on the platform besides a handful very specific people posting to it.

The real problem is that computers are just too good at figuring out relationships. That's why you can't kick Nazis off your platform using algorithms. A computer will very quickly figure out that the dog whistles the Republicans or whatever your local equivalent is are saying are dog whistles referring to racist or Nazi stuff and it'll go after those dog whistles because the computer knows that when a republican talks about welfare Queens it's no different than a Nazi talking about rounding up black people and gays. The computer knows the dog whistle and you can't program an effective algorithm that doesn't figure it out right quick.

Republicans equate being pro-market with being pro-big-business-agenda. The assumption is that anything that is good for big business is good for the market and therefore good for consumers.

So in the Republican framing, anti-trust, since is interferes with what big business wants to do, is *necessarily* anti-market and bad for consumers, which if you accept their axioms would have to be true, even though what big business wants to do is use its economic scale and political clout to consolidate, evade competition, and lock in consumers.

That isn't economics. It's religion. And when religious dogmas are challenge, you call the people challenging them the devil -- or in current political lingo, "terrorists". A "terrorist" in that sense doesn't have to commit any actual act of terrorism. He just has to be a heathen.

And y'all won't allow socialism. So what's the actual alternative?

Can't have capitalism anymore because the billionaires won't allow it and they have more than enough power and money to do away with it.

And we can't have socialism because well, that's socialism!

So what exactly is the plan?

Trump's trade war that he started so he could offset billionaire tax cuts with tariffs is crashing the economy. Manufacturing is down 20%.

We can't stop the trade war because the only way Trump could ram those billionaire tax cuts through is using the budget process and that required a revenue neutral approach on paper and if you're going to cut 2 trillion dollars in taxes for billionaires you can't really do revenue neutral.

So to get there he made up numbers around the tariffs. If he does away with the tariffs the economy will start to recover but the next budgetary cycle he will lose those tax cuts for billionaires.

As a direct result you need to suck at the fuck down and stop buying so much food. And if you have kids make sure one doll per Christmas.

I think that would require voters to radically change how they vote and who they vote for.

Even before that could happen you would have to completely remake the supreme Court to remove or dilute the six extremely corrupt judges currently running it.

Doing that would most likely require a super majority for the Democrat party in the Senate.

I just don't see voters doing that. Too many of them are concerned with nonsense like trans panic or whether the girl handing you your coffee says Merry Christmas.

Also the Republicans are consistently promising to bring back jobs and to eliminate immigration in order to make the job market better for americans. They are lying but the Democrats don't have an answer for that. Democrats are far too terrified of being called racist to reign in work visa abuses and believe too heavily in the studies showing job growth from immigration. There are alternatives of course to have immigration and a good life for citizens here already but again, voters aren't going to accept those alternatives because they involve too much redistributing of wealth for a society raised on Cold war propaganda...

I honestly cannot think of a solution because basically everyone and everything is working to destroy capitalism. Billionaires have had it with capitalism because they don't want the dependency on consumers and workers anymore. Technology is bearing down hard on capitalism too destroying jobs faster than they can be created. But we don't have any alternative to capitalism Socialism is simply not tenable.

We need to figure out some third Way for everything is going to collapse and I simply don't know of a third way...

Seriously really think about how this headline is written and what it's trying to communicate and what it's trying to make you feel.

Of course Democrats would oppose the deal because it's a massive amount of consolidation and in general they oppose things that would raise prices for consumers. It's a core part of their party platform.

But using the word unravel here implies they're doing something bad. And it takes the focus away from the increased costs to consumers.

The news media is actively manipulating you for a specific purposes. In this case they are actively trying to undermine any attempt to prevent this merger.

As more and more media is owned by billionaires we need to start questioning it more and more often.

The fact that you're reading this means it didn't backfire.

How did you get out of high school without knowing the difference between a hypothesis and a claim?

And they keep demanding better working conditions. And yeah we can use the police to beat the hell out of them when they do but then every now and then somebody films the police when they do.

So the real problem with Farm labor is going to be that nobody is going to want to pay people enough to have people who want to live on a farm if you're not picking up refugees from war-torn countries. And a lot of people don't want those refugees anymore for a variety of reasons.

Otherwise you've got to pay people a premium because they are living out in the middle of nowhere and it's backbreaking work.

And then there's all those little social issues nobody wants to deal with like I mentioned above with the unionization and needing to treat people decently.

Now given that a modern civilization needs about 2% of its workforce farming there's no particular reason we couldn't do all that but if you're a billionaire you just don't want to. Frankly at this point the billionaires have had enough of employees and consumers and capitalism in general. They have never been big fans of capitalism preferring monopolies and oligarchy to competition and free markets.

So it's no surprise that there's a automation push here too.

Or your daughter comes home sober with her boyfriend. And her ex-boyfriend who just happens to be a cop uses your cameras to keep track of who she's dating and when.

That's a really big claim. You have not done the research or looked at the evidence to back it up. It's something you pulled out of your ass. Don't do that.

It is possible that our ancestors eating meat had an effect on the weather.

This is what the article recommends: