someone had set money aside
That's a very nice way to say "embezzle".
someone had set money aside
That's a very nice way to say "embezzle".
There are money people?
That took seconds, listening to everything Jordan Peterson puts out takes hours and hours.
I know one woman who, from her 60s to her 80s, lived in a building that she co-owned with two good friends. Each one had her own full apartment. But, they were able to support each-other. I also know plenty of younger women who have roommates.
I don't think being single necessarily means being alone. Although, it's true that modern western society makes the coupling up option much more low-friction than other ones.
You don't need to stay with a devil at all.
Some women are apparently terrified of being single. I've known some who have never been single for more than a few days since they turned 15 or something. I know it can sometimes be more complicated than that, but it's a contributing factor.
That's also bad. You regularly hate-watch him? Don't you have anything better to do with your time?
It should only take you about 15 minutes of watching him to understand his gimmick. He used undefined and undefinable terms like "cultural marxism". He cherry picks out of context sciencey stuff to back up his point of view. He acts super serial all the time to make people think he's a serious person. That's it. You don't need to watch any more.
"A currency is a standardization of money in any form, in use or circulation as a medium of exchange, for example banknotes and coins."
It doesn't meet the requirements to be a currency. It's a commodity.
Gold isn't a currency, it's a commodity.
And, part of the reason for that is section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996.
No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.
If a TV station or radio station has a call-in show and the caller swears, it's the station that gets fined. If the station runs a late night informercial where someone is defamed, the station is liable. But, do it online and you're fine. The YouTube algorithm can pick out the juiciest, most controversial, most slanderous content and shove it into everyone's recommendations and only the person who posted that content is responsible.
Section 230 makes sense in some situations. If you're running a bulletin board without any kind of algorithm promoting posts, then it makes sense that you shouldn't be held accountable for what someone says in that bulletin board. But, YouTube, Twitch, Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, etc. have all taken it too far. They don't personally create the content, but they have algorithms that analyze the content and decide who to show it to. They get the protections of a bulletin board, while curating the content to make it even more engaging than a segment on Newsmax or MSNBC.
Luckily, they probably won't have any.
I assume that bunkers protect you from a chain reaction, but that at some point the explosion is big enough that a chain reaction is exactly what you get.
This definitely seems like it would have been big enough to cause a chain reaction (and/or big enough to show that a chain reaction happened). If so, I wonder what fraction of bunkers exploded. I'm glad we live in an age of civilian satellites, so it's probably just a matter of time before we get to see the damage for ourselves.