-7 karma · joined June 13, 2019
They are caught up in a legal dispute that is still carrying on.
Linking something to them is no better than a fortune cookie.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/kalevleetaru/2016/12/22/the-dai...
It's interesting that the link that was @ Harvard with a pdf of the results (that Harvard published...) is now a broken link.
Here is a working copy: https://www.garymauser.net/pdf/KatesMauserHJPP.pdf
Gary Mauser who is also a Candadian criminologist. Interesting indeed. https://www.sfu.ca/~mauser/
"Call it what it is: White nationalistic terrorism, don't sugar coat it and call it "extremists"."
My understanding is that QAnon does not march around and say "HERE WE ARE WE ARE QANON!" so to say they are 'white nationalistic terrorist' is an assumption. That type of language is very reminiscent of what Antifa spouts off, especially in the regards of "if you don't agree with me you are racist". There are far too many that have the spotlight of the media attention right now that follow this mindset.
It is possible to disagree with someone and NOT be a racist, a bigot, a xyzphobe...or even WHITE.
The majority of the media have lost the unbias and reporting of facts, and for everyone, this is a damn shame.
Data, give us the data. Let us decide. Don't cram an agenda down our throats. Regardless of what side of the isle you're on, weather you sit or stand to pee, or how close to the equator your were born.
Paraphrasing: "When things are good, a company likes young people. When things are bad, they want to see gray hairs running the show".
Again, I'm only seeing a snap judgement and a quick fired response made in haste while interjecting hyperbole.
Q Anon seems to be more of a 'think tank' or even an idealism.
How exactly do you make the jump to 'white nationalist terrorism'? Because they seem to be against the left? Against corruption? Can you link anything that would tie the two together? If you legitimately can, I'd love to read and research it.
I'm not pro-antifa or Q anon, but your comment seems to be mental hopscotch with no legitimate foundation on facts.
https://flashbak.com/product-genius-eulogy-sony-betamax-1975...
Don't forget they continued the same scenarios in DVD's + vs - R!
I think a better method would be to incentivize using a more environmentally responsible product ( glass? ) where applicable. Perhaps a tax break for companies that start taking new initiatives to promote this.
A good example would be soda: being able to fill up a glass container of even your own reusable plastic bottle. Just like many do with water at the grocery. I've often wondered why we don't do this as a society and it ( like many things...) boils down to cost.
Incentivize this cost and it will start happening.
Starbucks has done this with straws, and even their hot and cold cups. It would be great to start seeing others do the same in more areas.
Since it's not regulated like traditional markets, can it still be considered 'insider trading'?
I follow cyrpto very close and you can watch the whales moving in real time. They seem to leverage buy | sell orders and trading bots.
Profits jump from one coin to the other.
It makes their jobs (LEO) much easier. They are not going to shit where they eat.
Episode # 281 https://badcryptopodcast.com/2019/07/01/mcafee-281/
I'm not trying to peddle their wares, I just find McAfee to be quite interesting!
Times was hard for some of us!
;-p
Knyuck Knyuck
Problem solved.
So hipster.
If you don't want money for your games, or better yet, don't want a retailer making money from 'your game' then just give it away or sell it via the web only.
Don't be douchey about it.
Seems to have worked GREAT there!
You claim 'working with teenagers over the last couple of decades' while making the delineation of 'her generation of 47-year olds'.
Even if you began working with teens at 20, 'decades' would put you in your 40's as well? If that is the case, why try and separate your self from the same demographic?
For instance, our tax system.
The only real way you would ever have a true legit overhaul would be to burn the entire thing down. Now, while I'm not even remotely suggesting that, it seems the only feasible way to start from scratch.
I just don't see any incremental adjustments working that would not be thwarted in someway.
Now that I've typed this out and read it, a big part of the problem has got to be lobbyist. Get that out of our politics 100% and we might be able to see some progress.