Yep, and here’s the simple litmus test.’

“Do I trust any of the people who are collecting large amounts of data about a large number of people?”

No, and furthermore, hell no.

Yep, see, it’s 1 but it’s the prequel like Star Wars :P Battlefield 1.

Your ‘n’ key has been sleeping with the apostrophe.

“All of CrowdStrike understands the gravity and impact of the situation”

Here’s $10.

You call my claim wildly wrong and have only this to say?

You fundamentally misunderstand the nature of newsrooms. That you can point to the instances in which they were wrong does nothing to argue that they don’t do their best to verify sources, you’re missing the fact that it’s hard sometimes, missing the fact that mainstream outlets retract statements that turn out to be false later and hedge their bets with wording. Dan Rather lost his career over an unverified source. The NBC headline about the beheaded babies literally says “Unverified reports” in the title.

I think you should read this article about the difficulties of getting the news right in the 24 hour news cycle and educate yourself instead of spewing knee-jerk nonsense which your argument fails to prove. https://www.npr.org/2023/10/24/1208075395/israel-gaza-hospital-strike-media-nyt-apology

False equivalence between Twitter news and mainstream news. Mainstream news has to verify their sources and have a reputation to protect. They retract stories that turn out to be false. As you saw with Dominion, mainstream news has money to protect from slander lawsuits too. It’s not perfect and there is certainly bias, but on Twitter there are no guardrails for misinformation besides community notes.

On the one hand that’s good and on the other it makes misinformation extremely easy. Misinformation spreads like wildfire on Twitter and the corrections don’t. The corrections get buried in “nuh uh, YOU lie” bot spam unless it gets the community notes treatment.

Potato colored in my case.

Oh, apologies my good Lemming but you’re mistaken. We make affordable ones here but the auto companies decided they’d make more money if they artificially keep supply low to keep prices high. Car Graveyards

Don’t forget its fark, https://www.fark.com/

I was checking out Archer for streaming the other day and noticed the episodes were 22 minutes long, which means 8 minutes of commercials in that half-hour TV time slot, or 26.666% of the total time.

That’s why I stopped watching TV in the first place, they’re essentially offering to “pay” you 22 minutes of entertainment for every 8 minutes of ads you’ll watch and that’s just completely not worth it to me. Would you pay $2 to watch an hour-long show? If so, to watch ads instead, you’d pay them 16 minutes of your time, and your labor would be paid at a tad less than 8 dollars an hour in entertainment as currency. If you’d only pay a dollar, halve that.

I play games so that my entire 30 minutes is fun and I’ll pay for it with the money I make at my job rather than paying the TV industry in minutes of my time…the thing I have the least of. It’s this really weird setup that’s just become accepted where they pay us out in entertainment at near minimum-wage rates for time spent trying to program us.

(Archer aside…on shit that ain’t even that entertaining)

The whole fuckin thing isn’t worth it.

But he has a robot maid and nobody has to cook.