mthoms

62 ms·

691.
by mthoms 5y ago
Walmart doesn't know where I live/lived, what I've purchased for the past decade, what I might be mildly interested in (searched for at one point), what movies I watch, what books I read, etc, etc. Walmart cannot cater it&#x2
692.
by mthoms 5y ago
> The brick and mortar equivalent of pushing search results to page 2 is to just stop carrying the product—considerably worse than being on page 2. But no plausible deniability.
693.
by mthoms 5y ago
As I said, I'm not interested in word games. So far you've needlessly conflated using the healthcare system with overwhelming the healthcare system (then denied it), implied that the health care system was comparably overloade
694.
by mthoms 5y ago
Oh I agree completely. I think at the time many of us could read between the lines and see what was really happening: They were preventing a run on masks, and medical professionals needed all they could get. I don't like being lied to,
695.
by mthoms 5y ago
I noticed that too. I found it very distasteful and grossly misleading. It says: When iPhone was developed, PCs were the world’s primary computing tools, and they were riddled with viruses. Okay, but Macs managed to buck that trend becaus
696.
by mthoms 5y ago
I've thought about this too. Here's how my (admittedly half-baked) idea might work: 1. All apps are reviewed and hosted by Apple. 2. Third party app stores act as a layer on top. They pay a commission to Apple on sales (lets say 5
697.
by mthoms 5y ago
I bought them right around the time officials started admitting they were helpful. $120 for a box of ten N95 masks.
698.
by mthoms 5y ago
Nobody will. You're being ridiculous. Did you actually read the legislation? Do you understand under what conditions officials are allowed to enter your property?
699.
by mthoms 5y ago
No one, outside your anti-vax group would describe an everyday needle as an "invasive medical procedure". But go ahead and keep using it for oh-so-dramatic effect. The rest of us will just keep rolling our eyes and laughing at you
700.
by mthoms 5y ago
Anyone who shamelessly changes their debate opponent's quote from " might kill" to " will kill" as a form of gotcha is either an asshole or stupid. If, after it was pointed out to them they don't even acknowl
701.
by mthoms 5y ago
I've identified so many traffic lights for Google (via reCaptcha). Probably hundreds. I'm surprised they haven't integrated that info into maps yet. The free labor I've provided them is probably enough to cover an enti
702.
by mthoms 5y ago
Where have I seen this before.... oh yeah: Bell [0] brought the home telephone to tens of millions of people. They made it affordable and reliable. They laid millions of miles of wires, provided tens of thousands of high paying jobs, and ma
703.
by mthoms 5y ago
> overwhelmed You know very well the load on the health system is not the same now as it was pre-covid. Just stop with the word games, it's embarrassing (as is the whataboutism for that matter). For example: My dad's cancer tre
704.
by mthoms 5y ago
Nothing you just said changes the fact that no-one, not-ever, considers a needle an "invasive medical procedure". It's silly. Good rant though. Complete with childish swearing even!
705.
by mthoms 5y ago
You changed the threshold from "overwhelming the healthcare system" to "using the healthcare system". and think you're being clever. That won't work here. >See, what you're saying is: I don't belie
706.
by mthoms 5y ago
What you’re describing is a loophole - an oversight. Not a grand political conspiracy. I’m not sure the asymptotic part is correct or not but consider that people can lie about not having symptoms.
707.
by mthoms 5y ago
It’s an article about scientific papers. It reports what they reported: The strategy worked out. Bringing up the politics of the CBC in this context is an irrelevant distraction. Claiming the article is intentionally misleading is outright
708.
by mthoms 5y ago
The vast majority of Canadians would disagree with the characterization of simply getting a shot in the arm as an "invasive medical procedure" . Please, stop the over dramatization. It's embarrassing. Children, babies and p
709.
by mthoms 5y ago
Paraphrasing your comment: "ok, you're right... but that could change one day!" Thanks tips.
710.
by mthoms 5y ago
That's blatant and shameless fear mongering. And your description of - > the government has given itself vast power to perform warrantless search, confiscate property and conscript any person Is entirely misleading if not outright f
711.
by mthoms 5y ago
>This is about how to treat people who make choices that the government disagrees with I hate to tell you this. Putting restrictions on non-vaccinated people is not some Government conspiracy. It's literally what the vast majority o
712.
by mthoms 5y ago
>In one province, the government has given itself vast power to perform warrantless search, confiscate property and conscript any person to the cause of "managing the emergency" I've not heard of that. Which province?
713.
by mthoms 5y ago
Source? Most reports indicate that Canada spent more per person than almost everywhere.
714.
by mthoms 5y ago
What part don't you buy? https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/canada-has-reserved-more-vaccine...
715.
by mthoms 5y ago
>Unlike the US and Europe, Canada dragged its heels on pre-ordering vaccines. The truth is the exact opposite . But don't let that get in the way of a good jab, eh? Headline from Dec 7, 2020: "Canada has reserved more vaccine
716.
by mthoms 5y ago
Sigh. This article is based on scientific evidence. Please leave your politics out of it. Anyways, the vast majority seem perfectly happy with the CBC. Fewer than 1 in 5 Canadians want CBC funding decreased: poll https://ipolitic
717.
by mthoms 5y ago
I think they might have interpreted it as "please give this money to the Cubans". Which, AFAIK is (was?) illegal in the US.
718.
by mthoms 5y ago
I hope you realize the irony of posting smears of a whistleblower to the comment section of an article that decries smearing whistleblowers. Do you have anything to say about the substance of the revelations? Or just want to interject irr
719.
by mthoms 5y ago
Wow. That was some hit piece. Nothing was spared — They even managed to "casually" reveal her sexuality. For some reason. Absolutely disgusting. I can't believe intelligent people read, let alone cite, this Enquirer-level gar
720.
by mthoms 5y ago
Err... even in that context, it's blatantly false. https://web.archive.org/web/20210712060426/https://www.teleg...

More ›