yip-bonk

To Lukoil, of course.

Not Gazprom, those wankers. Lukoil. Beacon of . . y’know . . freedom or some shit. When the state-managed privately-run petroleum conglomerate buys your country’s main search engine, you know it’s a bad day.

Two of these are not being pulverized by a nuclear power at the moment.

Exsqueeze me? What the amazon fuck, WholeFoods.

Wired. lol.

This is getting posted a lot which is too bad because it’s worse than useless.

Do people not understand how technically useless 80% of users are? They CAN NOT REMEMBER THEIR PASSWORDS. (No, they didn’t write them down. Password management software? lol.)

I’m saying the height of their technical ability is to remember their password. And we want them to switch platforms, away from a fascist right-wing brainwashing troll factory to- what is it called again?

Yeah. It needs a guide with this title, but actually useful. Well-written, with the context that people reading it are already well above and beyond in making an effort.

Why are so many people still on Xitter? I have a fucking idea.

If the title isn’t what the article’s about, that’s not our fault . . .

“roots as a protest tool” lol

“roots as a simple text repeater to harvest personal data for monetization”, yeah.

“Changes aren’t permanent.
But change is.”

-Stoner Headbang

What they said

If you refresh the page it usually fixes that too.

Passersby need only gaze into its mirrored surface, whereupon the device will scan their irises and generate a unique hash or numeric code attached to their particular set of eyes. In exchange, each participant will receive a World ID and a WLD token.

What th’ . . . are you kids on _dope?!_

Copy that.

Any they don’t have a key to, yes.

Clipper chip.

In light of Baker’s reporting, Stanford University opened its own internal inquiry into the matter. A panel of scientists concluded that Tessier-Lavigne’s work contained image manipulations in 2001, the early 2010s, 2015-2016, and 2021.

But the panel dismissed any allegations of fraud or misconduct on the part of Tessier-Lavigne himself. Instead, they conclude that the “unusual frequency of manipulation of research data” in the neuroscientist’s lab “suggests that there may have been opportunities to improve laboratory oversight and management”.

lol