Rich

https://www.capfriendly.com/comparables/pierre-luc-dubois-10335

I agree that there is a long long road ahead before we are off fossil fuels. Even look at EV's. While cheaper to run, there is still so much electricity generated by fossil fuels. So, no I don't think fossil fuels are going away in 30 years. That doesn't mean we shouldn't be looking to mix in an increase the use of renewables now. I think though, in 30 years, reliance and usage of fossil fuels should be in the decline. Admittedly though, I'm not sure that can happen without nuclear, and that is a whole different debate. Do you really think OPEC will start cutting prices? I think that ship has sailed at this point. If renewables continue to gain momentum and become cost effective, Western countries who have started making the switch won't go back. OPEC will start cutting production to maintain pricing. Also, OPEC is already investing in renewables. What I'm not sure about is if that is purely for press and show or if they are hedging their bets to still be relevant when a switch is made.

The countries that can need to pioneer and mature it. The others will follow suit once that happens.

As for pricing, it would have to remain free for most people. Their monetization would have to be around companies / corporations / internet influencers. Somehow charging based on people who profit off it based on followers and activity.

I like some of the suggestions he has made, including open sourcing the algorithms used to determine feeds for transparency give me a wait and see what he does. He thinks he can also get rid of the bots That I’m not sure is so easy

Looks like this is really close to happening https://www.reuters.com/technology/exclusive-twitter-set-accept-musks-best-final-offer-sources-2022-04-25/

Anyone can make a thread

I don't think it is insider trading because he is doing it all very publicly. So there is no inside information he is using to buy / sell. If he is doing this just to sell after the stock increases, it could be market manipulation, for which the SEC could still fine him if they can prove it.

Not claiming to have the answer to Twitter, not even saying Musk should buy it, or would do a better job at it. I don't think anyone can (including the state). Moderating a board like this, which is really a relatively low effort most of the time, is still a huge pain in the ass, and for the most part thankless. No matter what you do or don't do, there are people who aren't happy and complain, and think you are wrong. I couldn't imagine trying to come up with the rules and algorithms to try and moderate something like Twitter. Humans aren't evolved to have the ability to have faceless, anonymous communication with so many people that Twitter brings.

It is an interesting article, but also brings out the larger question of who should actually make the decisions on what is allowed and what is not on these platforms. There is no precedent for the reach and impact that social media has and I don't think we have at all figured out as a society how to deal with its impact.

https://techcrunch.com/2022/04/14/elon-musk-offers-to-buy-twitter-for-43-billion/

https://www.si.com/nfl/2022/04/13/dan-snyder-washington-commanders-financial-allegations Saw this flying around Twitter today.

We've drafted and developed more than 2 full time defensemen in 10 years, they are just no longer with the Jets. Think if you look around the league, you won't find the defence corps of other teams to be much different in terms of who is on their roster right now.

I'm in favour of more bike lanes and infrastructure, but this whole project was done very poorly to begin with. I can't even tell where the lanes are, where the turning lanes are, what half their new signage means when driving down the streets where they did this. Having this happen on top of that, feels like this is a big waste of money that has made the roads in that neighbourhood worse.

There was a documentary, The Corporation, that went on to say that if corporations are people, they broke down their behaviour, and came to the conclusion they were psychopaths.

Who decides the definition of left vs right? If a majority of people think and agree that the democrats are left, you can't just change that because you think they are right. It will just confuse the hell out of people in discussions.

https://3downnation.com/2022/04/06/bombers-have-talked-at-length-to-a-lot-of-kickers-to-provide-competition-for-marc-liegghio-ali-mourtada/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-joseph-goebbels-misquote-co-idUSKBN2492TD

It is interesting with the decline of people prescribing to organized religion, there has been an increase in fanatical worship of other entities to replace it. It is weren't so scary to watch unfold, it would be a fascinating case study of human nature.

Yes, Fox News is absolute trash, but there is no way that CNN is right leaning, and all of the 3rd party sites that try to classify news site basis' would agree. https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/left/cnn-bias/ https://www.allsides.com/news-source/cnn-media-bias https://www.allsides.com/news-source/cnn-editorial

There is a combination of many factors at play that have led to the current state of today’s media. A large contributing factor is the rise of the internet and the upheaval of their monetization model. The mass adoption of the internet and eventually social media, while vastly simplified distribution, also came with the expectation of free content (killed news print), and a plethora of news sites and ways to consume media combined with newer generations not even watching TV (killed cable news). This drove journalism into click bait. Everything is now geared to enrage to get eyes on content and grasp at meager online advertising revenue, and slanted to appeal to the base who reads their site. That slant is becoming steeper and steeper by the day. I don’t see a clear way to get out of this tail spin that the West is on right now with their media, but it continues to get more and more polarizing. There really isn’t even debate of issues anymore. All of that has been replaced with mocking and making fun of “the other side”. Just look at 95% of the posts and news articles in this forum as an example of that microcosm. Extremes are always highlighted to the point where people think extremes represent the majority, which only feed into the cycle.

Yes, the more both sides can polarize each side against each other, the more it keeps the American people focused on that enemy. And not how the elite and wealthy continue to enrich their own pockets at the cost of the average and poor.

There are a number of rules that all work hand in hand with the 3 downs. The field size, the clock in the CFL, the number of players. All of these things work together to balance out the game. If they are going to want to change any of those things, there better be a clear hypothesis as to why, then test it out in either exhibition or CIS before bringing it to the main game. Change like this for the sake of change will alienate existing fans and not likely bring in the flood of new fans they want.

Do they know how contagious it is when the only symptoms are gastro? Is it the same? Less?