Misinformation and radical-right populism: This paper analyses 32 million tweets from parliamentarians in 26 countries, spanning 6 years and several election periods, and finds that “radical-right populism is the strongest determinant for the propensity to spread misinformation”.

Gender segregation in polite society. Creating separate spaces for men and women, and clearly defined rules and boundaries when dealing with the opposite sex helps maintain order and reduce unwanted and uncomfortable interactions.

Pri nas v vrtcu imamo kar nekaj mešanih parov, kjer je eden izmed staršev japonec, brazilec, američan, britanec...Mnogi izgubijo svoje državljanstvo, če sprejmejo slovenskega. Radi pa imajo možnost volit župana, ker tako lahko vplivajo npr. na to kakšna otroška igrišča imamo.

Ja. Saj lahko @BorutRoncevic glasuje še zanjo. Vse ok.

Genuinely don’t know how Europeans afford to live Restaurants / grocery stores are only marginally cheaper than America Cars fuel are much more expensive Rent is rapidly rising to the nearly the same prices as tier 2/3 cities in America for comparable locations The average wage here in Poland is ~1500$ a month genuinely don’t know how you would survive on that nevertheless raise a family If you are an American you should be grateful

why does Belgium even exist as a country what’s their purpose in this life

Za vse modrijane: tako so videti volilni plakati na Tajskem med volitvami. Kako naj se jaz kot tujec odločim, komu dati svoj glas?

And yet...

Ne morem verjet, kaj berem na medenih tednih. V @Delo in @SlovenskeNovice pišejo, da je moj oče Boris (na sliki) nek sporen duhovnik, ki mu očitajo spolne napade. KAJ TAKEGA PA ŠE NE. Resno razmišljam o tožbi, ker tole je pa čez vsako mejo. Kakšne laži! Da vas si sram! In to je na Delu zdajle glavna novica!

Žiga, na podlagi česa pa ti pričakuješ, da bi klima morala biti stabilna bistveno več kot 10.000 let? Jaz, ko gledam te podatke, bi rekel, da je zadnjih 10.000 let stabilnosti zelo velika in nepričakovana anomalija glede na preteklost (ko se je temperatura planeta tipično spreminjala zelo hitro, ali smo bili pa globoko v ledenih dobah).

Some people suggest that while green is expensive, the benefits are much greater Well, no: The benefit of net-zero is $4.5 trillion/year, but the cost $27 trillion (much larger costs and benefits, because we're currently only doing a bit of net-zero currently) x.com/BjornLomborg/status/17… You can see all the references in my Twitter thread: x.com/BjornLomborg/status/19…

Bill, this is the billionaire-defense brief in its most polished form. It works because it begins with truths. SpaceX created real value. Launch costs came down. Reusable rockets are real. Starlink is useful. Satellite communications matter. Rural broadband matters. Military communications matter. SpaceX employees becoming millionaires is good for them. Nobody serious has to deny any of that. But your argument then makes the leap from: “SpaceX created value” to: “therefore Elon Musk becoming a trillionaire is a civilization-level good and any objection is socialism.” That leap is propaganda. The issue is not whether SpaceX should exist. It should. The issue is not whether SpaceX should be paid. It should. The issue is not whether employees should share in upside. They should (and more of them should). The issue is whether public-private industrial achievement should produce private sovereign-scale power for one man. SpaceX was not built in a vacuum. It was built inside a state-created space economy: NASA contracts, defense demand, Space Force procurement, launch licensing, public launch infrastructure, spectrum policy, public research, taxpayer-backed demand, national-security urgency, and capital markets willing to capitalize strategic dependency into enormous private valuation. That does not mean SpaceX did nothing. It means SpaceX succeeded inside a public-private system. Public mission. Private contractor. Public demand. Private upside. State dependency. Founder mythology. That is the structure. You say Elon is not sitting on a pile of cash. Correct. He has something more powerful than cash. Ownership. Control. Collateral. Voting power. Political leverage. Acquisition power. Media power. The ability to fund candidates, influence regulators, shape policy, pressure governments, and become indispensable to the state. A trillionaire is not merely a rich person with a large brokerage statement. A trillionaire is a private sovereign. That is the democratic problem. And saying “his companies do not pay dividends” does not answer it. Reinvested capital can still become concentrated control. Stock appreciation can still become collateral. Paper wealth can still become political power. Ownership claims can still shape the future of labor, technology, defense, communications, AI, and public policy. You also say SpaceX will help poor communities, educate children, expand medical access, improve communication, lower compute costs, and advance humanity. Maybe some of that happens. Good. But product benefit is not the same as ownership justice. A peasant benefited when the lord built a better mill. That did not mean the peasant owned the mill. A tenant benefits when a landlord renovates the building. That does not mean the tenant owns the building. A rural household benefits from Starlink. That does not mean the public should ignore who controls the satellite network. Consumer access is not democratic accountability. Lower prices are not public ownership. Useful technology is not immunity from political scrutiny. And the “socialism would never allow SpaceX” line is just Cold War theater. Nobody is arguing that NASA should run SpaceX like the DMV. The actual question is how public contracts and public dependency should be structured. The government could use fixed-price contracts and still require public upside. It could take warrants. It could require profit-sharing. It could require worker ownership. It could impose limits on political spending by major public contractors. It could enforce antitrust. It could prevent national infrastructure from becoming one billionaire’s private sovereignty. That is not socialism. That is republican governance. You want the public to celebrate when public power, taxpayer demand, engineering labor, defense urgency, and capital markets produce a trillionaire. I want the public to ask why the upside was structured that way. That is the difference. The magic trick is turning collective achievement into one man’s moral biography. Workers built. Taxpayers funded demand. Engineers solved problems. Public agencies created the market. Capital markets assigned the valuation. Ownership captured the claim. So yes, celebrate the rockets. Celebrate the engineers. Celebrate the workers who became millionaires. Celebrate the useful technology. But do not confuse technological achievement with political innocence. SpaceX may advance humanity. That does not mean humanity should be governed by the cap table and a few trillionaire's funding American voter's illusion of choice.

This morning at the White House...

Bilijon dokazov je, da so ljudje, ki si to želijo in to pokazejo z denarnico, ne z jezikanjem na Iksu.

The European mind cannot comprehend this

To bi pa res lahko uredili. Namesto, da zapnjejo glede Apple Siri.