You fail to mention that studies of the antiviral properties of Ivermectin showed that the dosage requirements were proported to be higher dosage than what was considered safe and was likely to be toxic. Sure, maybe it can act as an antiviral medicine, but the other thing a medicine must do is, you know, not kill the person using it.

As an edit upon further reading, not only were some of the early studies suggesting dangerous dosage being required to see the affects, laterore rigorous studies showed little evidence it made a difference at all.

The worse part, that only too 2 minutes to google to see dones of papers on the subject, so maybe look into things before you parrot randos on the internet

I definitely think Microsoft is going to abandon Xbox because I think the see the writing on the wall in so far as why they are in this market. I think there will always be a place for dedicated gaming hardware like the PS5, but I think it will become more of a niche purchase as time goes on and I think Microsoft does too. I think they don’t like the numbers they are predicting for future console sales, but they do like the ones they are predicting for cloud gaming, since, in theory, anything with a screen and an internet connection could be a console these days. I have no clue if it will pay off for them (personally I hope not), but as technology gets better, the more space for people to settle throughout the wide spectrum of compute power. Microsoft I think wants to try to fill as much of the space as possible.

Just as a final note, that is a touch on my more personal opinion. I hope cloud computing is seriously considered as a huge source of the carbon footprint of the world with how much power it consumes.

A community is not something you can “migrate”. You are not migrating a community, you are migrating a community space and in doing so, you are alienating said community. If you are unwilling to provide a safe space for said community, the community will either find new space or take their space back.

deleted by creator

RIP Antonio, you were a real one

I agree with you, but who is suppose to be the one who does something about it when these individuals try to do awful things? The government shouldn’t attempt to rely on good faith from individuals and should instead leave no wiggle room for this kind of behavior.

Lol

👀

deleted by creator

No it doesn’t because a person chooses to get intoxicated. One does not choose to be a child or be mentally impaired.

Justice Lindsey Miller-Lerman, who ruled with the majority, criticized Evnen and Hilgers for attempting such a massive rollback of voting rights right before a major election. “Why now?” she wrote. “Why not take the opportunity to challenge the laws long ago with available remedies, rather than creating uncertainty at this time?”

We all know why

Take my breakdown with a grain of salt, as I did not dig into all of it, owing to the quantity of citations. Picking some at random, I found a mix between sources contemporary to the time period and ones that are secondary. I did not check the relevancy of the wiki quite, this was just 15 minutes of snooping around.

This one was interesting as it claims it was minutes from a meeting of a contemporary society called the the American Philosophical Society.

[103] Ord, George (1840). “Minutes from the Stated Meeting, September 18 [1840]”. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society. 1: 272.

They still seem to be running to this day, and sound like they have a long history in the US. Not to say they are trustworthy, I know nothing about them.

It will not, because those laws already largely exist. It has been quite well established I’m the US that inciting violence is not considered protected speech. The laws just don’t apply the same to wealthy people like Trump as they do to anyone else.

Lol

Be mad then I guess lol

I really hate the idea of saying corrected in this context. There is really no right and wrong in language iself. Standardized language is not some “correct” way to speak, but a common guide to try to help an individual be understood by more people. Someone not following standard is not wrong, just maybe difficult to comprehend due to not following convention. I think in one off mistakes that are hard to understand, it is better to thinking in terms of asking for clarification. In more consistent problems of understanding, I think explaining (which is not the same as correcting) to them a more conventional way of speaking to easy future communication is the best path.

Also equating individuals unique linguistic quirks to cancer is gross.

Had a dude come around in my neighborhood a few times. It was the middle of the summer and it can get above 100 where I live. Gave him pbj and some water because if was all I had at the time. He only asked for food and water. Haven’t seen him in a year now though.

As opposed to your evidence based approach of using divination to determine the person you replied to in your original comment was in some sort of minority of opinion?

Something that always gets me is when people lump in anti-religion with these others. Reglion in any country with freedom of religion is a choice, these other things are not. Someone doesn’t choose to be a particular ethnic group. Someone doesn’t choose to be disabled. People don’t choose to be gay or have gender dysphoria People do choose to believe in things that I think are ridiculous and saying that I cannot call that out is just religious people saying you can’t call them out. If you can tell me I am burning in hell because I don’t believe in your pie man in the sky then I can tell you that you are stupid for believing in a pie man in the sky and comment on absurd actions that are caused by those beliefs.

Idk, Maybe instead of avoiding nazi spaces, people should take a page from their book and just invade them and overwhelm them. Idk about you, I have to put up with hearing and seeing bullshit daily, so my tolerance is high. A lot of these fascist can’t even handle a picture of a catboy lol