Critical of sources? Okay, in that case the US isn’t the country that banned the phrase “Tianaman square 1989” from being spoken online. Nor are they the country that will prevent you from owning a house if you say it enough.

That’s China.

And it exists to silence criticism of them killing a bunch of protestors with tanks:

Then running them over with those tanks until their bodies became a bunch of organic paste, so they could wash their remains into the sewers:

http://www.cnd.org/June4th/massacre.html

(NSFW pictures: mascr014.gif to see what a human body looks like after being crushed by a tank)

There’s more pictures of the dead in that last link - go ahead and be critical of them, seeing as they died fighting for the Democracy you’re now critical of.

Want to be critical? Alright, why do you think the US is the only country that’s capable of bullshit propaganda? It’s so you don’t consider Democracy as viable, rather you’re raised from birth and educated to believe it’s ineffecient. Something I’m sure you fully believe with absolutely zero critical thought. (Despite most of Europe being a dang good example of its effectiveness).

Same argument as holocaust deniers. Good point.

I appreciate the clarification. But let’s give the dead the benefit of the doubt before it becomes another COVID that kills everyone’s grandparents. People like you desire to see death first hand before believing it only because you likely have not seen it yet yourself, so through sheer inexperience doubt such loss can be on such a large scale. It is. Whether these stats line up perfectly yet or not. It’s still happening.

And to be clear. This isn’t the first time Trump has killed this many people through sheer negligence.

He does not have the benefit of the doubt here. Nor deserves it. So you should not be giving it. Don’t be the guy that looks the other way from the mountains of dead until someone you know is in the pile. Looking the other way is how they get there.

The end of your previous post:

Yes, it’s better than other vanity projects, but it is still a wasteful vanity project.

The literal definition of a vanity project:

https://dictionary.reverso.net/english-definition/vanity+project

project undertaken for self-satisfaction.

Each one of the examples I provided shows very clearly this yacht was NOT made for HIS self-satisfaction. Rather, it was literally made to the satisfaction of the research team that uses the yacht.

Specifically:

“His” yacht being used to better the scientific community instead of just him.

1. Made quite literally for a large team of scientists as he is the second largest contributor to deep sea research on the planet. Nearly the exact opposite of being for vanity.

“His” yacht made to have the least environmental impact from noise or oil pollution.

2. Made for the environment. Not Gabe. So not for vanity.

Huge efforts were made to reduce noise and vibration, thereby creating a pleasant onboard environment.

3. Made for sensative aquatic life that engine noises can disturb and affect the research of. Not for Gabe. So not for vanity.

“His” yacht made to have little maintenance requirements so the crew can focus on science and research.

4. Made to be easy to work on for the hundreds of crew that maintain it. Not for Gabe. So not for vanity.

Every point of my last comment was proving your statement about this being a vanity project completely and unquestionably wrong. But I guess I just understand your last sentence better than you.

You are shitting on the best deep sea scientific research vessel in existence while implying you have the moral high ground. There’s nothing immoral about scientific research just because it happens on a yacht.

You are literally using the same logic as a cop saying a person with dark skin is a criminal. This yacht clearly isn’t a vanity project. It is for Inksea, and being used to help fight climate change and the affect that has on deep sea ocean currents.

But to you this yacht is just as criminal as a dark skinned person is to a cop. No exceptions.

Please understand: the point you are making is not incorrect. But the way you are making it very much is.

I completely agree that Billionaires shouldn’t exist, and in general most yachts are unquestionably vanity projects. But this one clearly isn’t.

So if you want to make your point heard, going about it through uncompromising bigotry is just about the worst way to make it.

It’s his vessel because he paid for it. That’s how money works. There’s no other pronoun that is appropriate.

Here’s the rest of the article that completely unwinds how far you want to stretch that term:

“His” yacht made through collaboration:

“Not only have we designed a very unusual yacht that leans into Oceanco’s strengths of innovation and design, but the team has also been willing to collaborate with us on evolving the process.”

“His” yacht made to have the least environmental impact from noise or oil polution (Diesel hybrid electric engine):

Huge efforts were made to reduce noise and vibration, thereby creating a pleasant onboard environment. The hybrid diesel-electric propulsion system is whisper-quiet, and the engine room is positioned further forward to reduce noise. The built-in battery bank also allows for silent nighttime operation.

“His” yacht made to have little maintenance requirements so the crew can focus on science and research:

Leviathan is also incredibly low-maintenance. The off-white exterior and synthetic handrails require less cleaning, for example. That means the crew can spend less time on routine maintenance and more time on more important tasks. “We adopted a crew-centric approach that really digs into how Leviathan is operated and maintained,” explains Newell.

“His” thoughts on “His” yacht being used to better the scientific community instead of just him.

“Yachts have great potential to serve as platforms for scientific research,” adds Newell. “It’s about recognizing that you’re part of a broader community and ensuring the yacht’s presence adds value to the communities around it.”

How about you ask yourself how many scientists and engineers HE paid to have a job to work on this?

How about you ask how much he pays their research salaries still and provided them a better vessel to do their job on than anyone else?

Why do you insist that you know how to better spend his money when it’s already going to people that need it for a cause that’s needed?

Just because you want to claim his money could be used better doesn’t mean it currently isn’t being used well.

You just see a yacht and think the worse. Worlds far less black and white.

Like the 3000 scientists, engineers, and designers that helped him build that yacht for research?

That collaboration started with the design and build. Newell joined forces with YTMC, Y.CO, the Oceanco Design team, Lateral Naval Architects, Mark Berryman Design, and thousands of designers, engineers, and other experts to bring his dream vessel to fruition. The names of the nearly 3,000 contributors are listed near the main staircase, in fact. “It is this level of collaboration that sets Leviathan apart from anything we’ve built before,” Oceanco CEO Marcel Onkenhout said in a statement.

Is there more efficient ways to spend this money on research? Sure. But don’t equate this effort as meaningless just because it’s not perfect. It’s a great place to be a researcher, but it’s still for research.

Your assumption all his yachts were for pleasure has already been proven wrong. Now you’re just moving the goal posts.

As I said, he’s the second largest doner to marine research on the entire planet, and the burden of proof for proving his yachts are ALL for personal use is something you’ve never provided, only assumed.

I’ve proved 1/3 were for scientific research. I’m not going to do the other 2/3 just for you to ignore and move the goal posts elsewhere.

Prove your point, and I’ll believe it.

Until then, he’s still a billionaire instead of the trillionaire he could be, so I’m not going to think poorly of him just because he’s not fitting some arbitrary number of currency tied to his worth that magically makes you think he’s moral.

Instead I will judge him based on his actions. The ones that I have detailed have unquestionably made the world a better place for many more people than him.

How about you actually tell me something he’s done wrong that’s worth your judgement, instead of basing it entirely on yachts you won’t research?

What have I said that isn’t true?

https://robbreport.com/motors/marine/billionaire-gabe-newell-oceanco-gigayacht-leviathan-1237360429/

The 364-foot Leviathan was designed for billionaire gaming visionary Gabe Newell, who acquired the Dutch shipyard this past April.

Leviathan is the latest addition to Newell’s Inkfish fleet and will be used to further scientific research in the marine sector. Occupying the place of the standard beach club is a fully equipped dive center, laboratory, and a hospital. There’s even a 3-D printing workshop where the crew can create spare or replacement parts. “Yachts have great potential to serve as platforms for scientific research,” adds Newell. “It’s about recognizing that you’re part of a broader community and ensuring the yacht’s presence adds value to the communities around it.”

You are just continuing to make assumptions based entirely on the assets he owns instead of his behaviour.

Something I keep pointing out, and is why I have also been responding.

I am completely on your side and feel that anyone with over a billion is an ethical and moral burden. However, I’m also wise enough to recognize that as a goal to strive towards not a destination to judge against. So I’m not going to chastise those actively working towards that goal, even if they are a billionaire.

I see granting access for anyone to make games for Steam as a good cause.

The opportunity cost for what profit could be made by closing that is multitudes of yachts worth.

Just because you do not value this as a good cause does not mean it is not.

Does Gabe have more yachts than are needed? Yes. But again, you can’t just say he’s greedy because he has them. That’s being incredibly biased.

Instead, how about you tell me what actions of his has made him greedy that don’t involve his assets?

I can name hundreds of ways Musk should be drawn and quartered based on his actions that have nothing to do with his wealth, but rather his actual documented choices.

What choices / actions / or anything of actual greed has Gabe done that you can point to?

It’s like saying anything with a swastika on it is for Nazis without realizing Hindus have been using a right oriented Swastika to represent good fortune for hundreds of years.

Gabe Newall has done the following with his 11 Billion fortune:

• Co-founded “The Heart of Racing” car racing team that raises money for Children’s charity.

• Donates heavily to the Seattle Children’s Hospital and several others around the world.

• Founded Foundry10, a non profit education company that helps neuro divergent kids learn through new methods of education

• Started InkFish to expand the scientific study of our oceans and is now the second highest individual donor towards marine research on the planet.

https://80.lv/articles/gabe-newell-reportedly-plans-to-invest-usd300-million-to-marine-research

That’s why he has those yachts.

Same reason Hindus have their swastikas.

Their actions speak louder than the symbols they use suggest. Even when those symbols are Yachts.

He has 11 Billion. Everyone else even close to his level of market control has several magnitudes more. Why does he have so little when he owns a virtual monopoly on digital distribution?

Because he’s not in it for maximizing his bank account.

The dispicableness of billionaires is measured by their actions not their worth. And despite being of high worth, Gabes actions are unquestionably not greedy. He’s doing almost everything he can to minimize his wealth in favor of equality to access Steam as a game dev.

If he wanted to, he could charge far more than $100 to develop for them, and buy several more yachts.

But he hasn’t.

Which makes his platform more popular. And in turn brings him even more cash to buy more yachts.

His yachts aren’t indicative of his greed, but his benevolence in the face of it.

Show me a single other company the size of Valve that has chosen to forgo profit over access to something like Steam to make money yourself. That’s basically non existent in the year 2025 aside from Valve. I’m not going to judge Gabe as a bad person for profiting from that. He could be profiting much much more and is choosing access for nearly everyone else instead.

I agree with this sentiment, but given a choice, I believe Gabe would make the right one and spend his wealth to lose billionaire status.

His supposed exploitation was not by his own design, but rather by luck - the sheer benefit of riding a privately owned and benevelontly steered surfboard on top of the waves of a collapsing capitalist society.

Basically, there’s a meme about all other companies shooting themselves in the foot so Gabe always benefits, and part of that is in the way those companies fucked and manipulated their control of capital and markets. Gabe benefits just by being one of the few that can afford to participate in that system others rigged.

So he simply rigs it the least, and wins by providing the platform with the least greedy problems. Far far less than he could given his position.

IMHO, despite all controversies, Steams cut of profits from providing equal access to game visibility despite creator, nationality, background, etc, has legitimately opened the door for nearly anyone to be successful on their platform. For all the tools and services they provide, they ask for literally the smallest cut compared to any other publishing platform.

Gabe could destroy that to his benefit on a whim, and instead he over designs it to make it possible for nearly anyone to try game dev if they do the work needed to develop for them.

To hold so much capital simply for providing some form of equality to access the same in a system that overwhelming benefits others with more resources is in no way greedy imo. It’s being the person with the only fire extinguisher who knows how to use it in a burning building: popular.

So you can’t explain or define what genius is, yet judge anyone as an idiot who asks for that context?

Genius and brilliant are synonyms btw. Something pretty obvious.

So unless you want to explain the difference between those two terms, they mean the same thing.

Being pedantic about that doesn’t make you right. It very much implies the opposite. You just look like someone that ate billionaire PR bait, and forgot what reality tastes like.

You are not saving face by refusing to go into the details, you just look like you don’t know what you’re talking about.

Something you could easily disprove if you did. Because Geniuses can go into those details. Idiots can only pretend.

So makes sense why you look up to Musk so much. You can only pretend to be smart like him.

I reject your claim Musk is a genius.

Prove it to me.

You read two of his biographies, so you should know. (Unless those were both fanfiction he paid someone to write about him.)

Musk has indeed been in close proximity to several large companies and their origins.

But genius is not something achievable through osmosis.

What has he, as a person, done with any skill, to suggest he’s a genius? Aside from osmosis.

Let me drop some really basic logical observations your argument will need to overcome to be truthful:

He’s not a productive man:

• As evidenced by his near average of 100 tweets a day. Confirmed by AI. Which is close to 2 hours a day tweeting, not doing anything of value or skill.
• As also evidenced by his character in Path of Exile, one played in hardcore mode, with the best gear available, that would require nearly 10 hours a day of play to achieve.

There is no difference between this behaviour and a jobless NEET or internet troll. They get shit on for this bevavioir due to how unproductive it is.

It’s just as unproductive when Musk does it.

He’s not an accountable father:

• As evidenced hy his 14 children with 4 different women.

This is literally the punchline of a Jeff Foxworthy “You might be a Redneck if…” Joke.

It’s just as unaccountable of Musk to have this many kids with this many people. He would need to spend a lot of time with each to raise them well, and instead he’s playing video games and tweeting almost all day.

Logically, if Musk actually wanted to go to Mars, it would be a 3 step process:

1. Rocket a person to Mars
2. Terraform and settle Mars
3. Migrate to Mars.

He’s focused on 1, and telling you it’s for the good of Humanity.

But if instead he focused on step 2, he would be fighting climate change right now while developing the tech needed to Terraform Mars, as they are the same tech. That’s what a genius would do.

Instead he’s trying to replace NASA with Space X because money.

He doesn’t use his money to improve society. He just uses it to improve himself while lying to you that it’s for the greater good.

It’s not. And it’s never been.

As evidenced by his Hyper loop being a lie to convince legislators in California to cancel plans for a high speed rail. Something California would now benefit from if not for his interference.

All Musk does with his money is use it to buy PR and good will so he can continue to be someone that uses Twitter and play games all day instead of being a good dad. That’s not genius. That’s greed and stupidity.

He could, even now, solve the world’s problems with his wealth. He literally asked for a plan to solve world hunger, and when presented with one that could have done it for like 8 Billion a year, he refused. Then purchased Twitter for 5 times that amount. Because he wanted to be popular.

Yet solving Wolrd hunger would make him worshipped by the people he fed. More popular than anyone. Families would praise his name. And communities would erect statues for him. This is something he certainly wants, yet his way of achieving that goal is to spend even more than 8 billion on PR to convince you he’s a genius.

That’s not very genius like behavior. It’s still just stupid and greedy.

Imagine, for a moment, you’re a Trillionaire. What would you do with that money? Solve the world’s problems? Help your family? Help your friends? That’s what 90% 9f people say when asked.

And Musk does none of that. Just plays games, shit posts on the internet, and convinces you through biographies and large well paid PR teams that he knows what he’s doing and should be worshipped.

His wealth, unquestionably, would be better used if it was in the hands of thousands instead of his. He wants you to think he deserves it, that he’s a genius. When the most casual look at his approaches to problems immediately reveals he’s not. He just a wad of unspent money that wants to use it to take credit for other people’s work instead of fixing the planet.

Time to prove why you think that makes him a genius.

I’ve worked for him by the way. He’s not a genius. He just has good PR to make you think he is.

Dude. You aren’t even talking about Musk. You are entirely talking about what his well paid PR team has made you think of him.

The dude hasn’t done fuck of shit. Just used his money to help others build shit he never bothered to acquire the skills for. Reusable Rockets? That was Tom Mueller you should be thanking. Not the person writing his paycheck. That could be literally anyone.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Mueller

Musk uses his money exclusively to get his name on things to take credit for other people’s work. Tesla, PayPal, Space X, now Twitter / X. All the same. Musk lacks any actual talent or work ethic. He just has money to attach his name to those that do, and money to pay PR teams to make his image appear as someone that has skills to create instead of wealth to take all the credit from those that do.

IF you want to respect someone that has enough wealth to solve almost all of the major problems in the world but uses it instead to purchase a social media platform to shit on others and warp elections, then you go right ahead. But don’t expect anyone else with a sense of reality to agree with you.

Thank you! These are fantastic details, and I appreciate it! The correlation between having extra free time, and therefore having more time to see and report UFO’s is really practical. Great study.

Whats interesting is that result implies that there’s a fixed amount of UFO’s to be seen. If numbers go up or down according to the amount of time available in a population, it certainly implies there’s a fixed amount of UFO activity that we are or are not aware of depending on how often we’re looking. Granted, it’s likely this activity is explainable as false positives: drones in the sky, kites, etc have all been mistaken as UFO’s. So it could just be a fixed amount of human made things that are misidentified.

But the same result would occur if it wasn’t false positives. And that’s facinating. I would have assumed the amount being reported would stay relatively fixed, or just vary greatly regardless of income.

Thanks again!

This is an interesting take I’ve never heard. Can you better explain?

Believe it or not, there used to be a time when companies weren’t invading every part of your life with ads.

Ads were 6 minutes of garbage between TV, and between the pages of magazines and newspapers.

People would talk to each other on the phone. No ads. Mark their calanders to get together if they felt like it. No ads. Then actually meet up. Some ads.

Now, when you talk to anyone you know on Facebook? Ads. Any social media? Ads. Opening Google calander? Ads. Twitter? The person you’re talking to is an bot /ad. I don’t even have to be watching an actual TV show now to be served ads on my TV. Just turning it on gives me an ad.

These ads are from organizations trying to spin you a narrative urging you to give them money. The strategies they use for this are fear, uncertainty, and doubt. Things like: “Don’t miss out on that Lububu!” “Make sure to book your tickets for the movie opening next week!” “Make sure to buy this pillow before liberals take it from you.”

People now believe these narratives simply because they’ve been shoved into every aspect of our lives via social media.

These ads, collectively, are not something that ever existed in any society to the amount they do now. So it’s absolutley no surprise that the “narrative” these ads are telling us is completely warping people’s minds.

People still think Fox News is news. Simply because that’s how it’s advertised.

The fact that Frank Frazetta is basically the most hetero man you could imagine IS proof that a maximum on the spectrum is nearly attainable.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Frazetta

I spent a lot of time reading the time cube guys rants, and I’m like 90% sure they just never understood that if you rotate a cube enough on both axis it resembles a globe.

He just didn’t understand that the earth has multiple times zones because it’s a big old globe, instead of 4 timecube-zones, because he couldn’t understand how surface area stretches over a globe, just a cube.

Anyway, my two cents. Sometimes ranblings are just a misunderstanding of basic math or scientific concepts.

Sorry 2D /3D OP, but you’re a great example too.

You want to claim 2D or 3D aren’t “real” when what you’re simply trying to say is that we, as humans, with limited and dull senses, are incapable of perceiving dimensions / universes that exist outside our own.

No shit.

That doesn’t mean they don’t exist. For that, it requires tools that exist outside our perception, but are universally sound. Aka Math.

So yeah, we can prove other dimensions exist with math, but can’t perceive them because we’re meat.

That doesn’t mean math is bullshit, it means you need to read philosophy enough to understand our existence isn’t centered on human perception.

We’re monkeys that have harnessed self awareness to the point we can prove there’s a reality that exists outside our limited perception. But simply because that’s only doable through math, doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist.

It means your feeble human body is literally only capable of understanding extradimensionality because of the meat in your head, and it’s ability to comprehend math.

You are meat. But math is universal. You are limited in perceiving the universe to what your meat has given you. So doubt your meat, not the math.

It’s what the time cube guy should have done imo.

Show me as many pictures of this journalist with terrorist leaders as Trump with Epstein and maybe you could consider them close friends. Until then, you are exaggerating at best, or spreading clearly fake propaganda about a dead Pulitzer prize winning journalist at worst. If you aren’t state sponsored, grow the fuck up.

Yes, that is indeed what a good journalist looks like.

Especially one who won a Pulitzer for covering Palestinians. You know, the people in all those pictures. Almost like he needs to be around them to journal what’s happening. You know, for good journalism.

How fucking cooked is your brain on propaganda to think this indicates anything to the contrary?

You think someone taking a picture in front of a Ronald McDonald statue means they work at McDonald’s?

Propaganda is easy to spot when it is this incredibly stupid. What’s your excuse to not spot it?