I know it’s a meme but can somebody set me straight? I swear I read somewhere that this narrative started with the research community saying, essentially, “we know a number of ways in which they might have achieved this feat but we aren’t sure which one they used,” but the entertainment/conspiracy communities heard “there is no explanation for how these people were able to achieve this feat.”
Forget the bills, why does she clarify no real kids?
You have shown me the truth
Because the idea that your success and well-being might in some part be down to luck is too big a pill to swallow for some people. Folks love to flaunt success despite the disadvantages they faced, but are so quick to reject that they had any advantages. In this case maybe not everyone wants to be just like you (not you you but them you lol). Maybe they don’t want your friends and your lifestyle, or somehow don’t have as much access to those, but they still want a halfway decent support system.
What gets me is that it feels like whenever you try to express, in person or online, there are a lot of people looming to say “Well I feel fine and I have friends I can talk to, so it’s actually not that you’re a man that is the problem here. You should work on yourself instead of blaming others.”
Thanks, wish I’d found this earlier.
Did some searching. You’re referencing a podcast in which known propagandist and liar Tucker Carlson claims that an anonymous source of his implies the NSA broke into his Signal messages. Wish you’d qualified that in the post because that’s important context.
Don’t you think it’s way more likely that the guy blew his cover some other way? Googling hotels near the Kremlin or something? You know, because he’s a dumbass?
Is there any reason to believe the message and sender can be read from the data sent to the push service? From my understanding, that should still be encrypted.
Thanks for the list! Sharing this with lazy friends.
Would you elaborate on this? Encrypting your traffic and not accessing sites from your actual IP address sounds pretty vital to privacy for me.
Thanks, this is the first explanation that’s actually clicked for me.
Get 'em!
Destigmatize the race car bedframe!
I think this is an unfair article, and it reads like someone who’s obsessed with right-wing talking points substituting their political allies and enemies with Texas and California.
The real relevant section is the one right before you posted the chart. Texas is bringing people building data centers, Bitcoin mines, and has a high demand for air conditioning, therefore it has a massive power demand that California doesn’t have. It’s unreasonable to expect Texas to compete with California on a metric of Clean GWh per Total GWh when California has less than half the power demand. The fossil fuels infrastructure is already established so of course it is going to be relied on in a place like Texas to support their ventures into data centers etc.
I think a better perspective is to notice how, despite a reliance on free-market forces (and as another commenter mentioned, a relationship between politicians and oil companies) Texas’ clean energy scene has grown to be the biggest in the country. It clearly indicates that there is an apolitical nature to the inevitability of clean energy. Anyway I prefer that conversation to getting swept up in whatever Matt Walsh has to say.
Ah, that makes more sense thanks
So I am uninterested in them, but we are disinterested in each other? Do I have that more or less right?
Elaborate please?