The FBI uniform crime report is fairly authoritative, but you should prepare yourself that this person can’t be convinced by reality. https://www.politifact.com/article/2024/sep/27/whats-behind-recent-false-claims-about-immigrants/

Yeah I was being hyperbolic for effect, but the point is that he owns the WaPo so that he can use it for his own personal social and political gain, not to make money off of it. I doubt the WaPo readership will substantially drop from this. And I have many questions about the people who still read his rag

The Post could lose all its subscribers and Bezos could still easily cover costs. He isn’t in the newspaper business for the money. He bought it for exactly moments like these. 8% is how much he just paid to hedge his bets

This was productive and I’m sure you convinced a whole lot of people

They’re suing him for copying scenes shot for shot from their movie after they told him explicitly not to

That depends on where you live. Most places in the US, yes it is legal. It’s legal to keep almost any data for any reason in most of the US

It’s literally discussed in the Wikipedia definition…

Talkativity is a defining feature of extraversion

Hot take: This is gonna sound conceited to introverts but “shutting the fuck up so others can talk and contribute” IS society forcing extroverts to do exactly what you said. When an extrovert isn’t talking they are probably deliberately holding back because it’s socially polite

16gb and a number less than 16gb both not being big enough numbers is making me crack up

I assume taxing the rich is obviously impossible so the only solution is squeezing the poor \s

You’re moving the goalposts. Before it’s fully sufficient for a billionaire to say it, then it has to be billionaires and the media, and now they have to also be proposing specific types of solutions for it to count. I’m just curious exactly what counts as US national policy and what doesn’t. And last I checked “circlejerking about what Palantir says” isn’t working out great either.

It’s pretty clear that large portions of the ruling class do in fact want cheap drugs. That’s why you see the oligarch owned media constantly drumming up support for lower drug costs by reporting on how expensive they are, and Mark Cuban has a website he says is cheaper.

Is that what all billionaires want? Is it accurate? It’s the same standard. It’s not that you’re wrong about what a lot of rich US ghouls want. It’s that your argument is lazy and dishonest. You can be right AND not tout Palantir as a source of anything other than bullshit!

I mean this is completely irrational. Obviously US policy is disproportionately impacted by oligarchs but is what Palantir wants the same as what all billionaires want? What if they want different things? You can’t just pick the dumbest or most egregiously ghoulish thing a rich person said today and say “there! That’s the us policy!”

So anything any billionaire says is the official policy of the US? What about all the shit they say that doesn’t happen? I get your point but it’s over generalizing

it’s certainly on brand but this isn’t the official policy of any country, it’s a billionaire who owns a defense company trying to gin up business. Again, on brand but acting like this is tantamount to or evidence of the US actually doing these things is kind of silly. It’s Palantir, they aren’t a reputable source of anything other than RFPs.

Wait sorry, Palantir saying this somehow reflects upon the US? Like I’m not saying that the US is good or bad but Palantir is definitely fucking bad

People are attracted to people who are comfortable with themselves. Take the time to learn who you are, and friendships, romance, and relationships will follow.

It’s impossible to do without signing the with the valid cert. I think destroying the anonymity is the point

No you’re right. The ARF just ignored that constraint and intentionally built in a back door here. From the linked article:

However, the current ARF stipulates that law enforcement authorities can retroactively trace pseudonyms back to their legal identity. The provisions therefore „strongly contradicts the legal requirements,“ epicenter.works writes.