The mix of "Guardian of the Pedophiles," "These people are sick!" and "These people are stupid." is really coming through.
While nothing can stop what is coming, it is a shame that we the people / general public allowed it to get so bad and that we needed help from Q and team to correct this.
More detail in the video below. The diet approach requires that there be no cheating or missing anything. I recommend testing blood levels to be certain. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lEzPt-sRmAc
For the anonymous limit, they might be limiting network segments, not just individual IPs. So if you are on a VPN that shares an IP address with other users, or the limit is on the VPN's pool of IPs, then you might be sharing that quota with other users and/or bots. YouTube does this.
The limit on non-paid users seemed reasonable for casual users. This theory assumes that obsessive non-paid users have significant influence on the platform. It might not be a bad idea to make the amount of influence that people have more equal with each other. For example, why should a NEET online activist have more influence than someone working a full time job?
Some of these non-USA users will include troll farms with human users, whose job it is to push a narrative. A captcha will not affect them. AI is fairly new. I expect that less advanced despotic regimes are still using old fashioned troll farms, which were heavily impacted by this.
I found this reply insightful:
This isn't for us. This is for their base. Maintenance of credibility to keep relevant, and reliable sources of income flowing in. Our reasonable outrage actually helps them raise money and keep their name in the news.
Good question. I am not sure how broken BGP, or DNS can go unfixed for 10 days, unless some of these companies were cooperative.
Regardless, people within the same backbone should still be able to communicate with each other. For example, within a major cable network provider. Run your own Matrix server and share the IP with friends on the same ISP.
The Internet is mostly run by private companies. It will be hard to compleatly take it down. Maybe the will just take down DNS. In which case, learn how to manually set the IPs of your favorite websites in your hosts file. You can test by manually breaking your DNS server settings. Just remember to disable the hosts file entries when it is over, as they sometimes change and you want to be using DNS to get these changes.
Yes. I have thought a lot about left vs. right over the years. Looking at the problem from different points of view: Political systems, politicians, powerful corporations, the voting population, etc.
When a politician's political power depends on grievances, they are incentivized to ensure that those grievances continue to exist. A political system that allows for reelection creates a disincentive for solving the problems that are required to exist to get them reelected.
I think that we need to take the word "progressive" away from them including when there is a choice between "left" vs. "right." They actually do not make progress. It sounds too nice for what they actually do. These things have 1 thing in common:
- Prohibition of slavery
- End of child labor
- Women in the workforce
- 40 hour work week
In the past, people's work was spent just to exist. As technology replaced hard labor and allowed people to pursue new and specialized (often easier) labor, the progress above was made possible. Before technology simplified domestic labor, a homemaker was required. These changes were not the result of a political party with better morals, it was possible because of technology (including new forms of energy, such as wood to coal to oil). The biggest problem was not making responsible social progress when technological progress happens. So called "progressives" take a naive approach, and future generations pay a terrible price. They are not "progressives," they inject social degeneracy in with technological progress.
Right-of-center figures have periodically called to eliminate government funding for NPR almost since its founding. Proponents of the cuts argue that the government should not be funding a media outlet and that NPR tends to have a political bias towards the left. Defenders of NPR have argued that the organization provides an essential service and requires a relatively small annual subsidy from the government to survive.
Okay, NPR; here is the deal: Accept the funding cut, and the label might be removed if that is enough.
One observation: Most of these people did not recognize James, so most of them are out of the loop. Our opponents should be easy to defeat given our numbers. It just goes to show that evil prevails when good people do nothing. What James is doing is 10,000 times more effective than protesting or attending rally, yet so few go beyond that and choose a more effective strategy. All we have to do is be a little more involved, including getting involved in local politics.
Not sure. Maybe they still held power. Q did point out that using classification to cover for embarrassment or whatever made that kind of classification illegal, although I do not remember that being said specifically about JFK.
Part of the Q operation is to expose things so that the enemy has nothing effective to counter with, and that includes awakening the public in a way that gets to the majority of people, as opposed to being limited to forums like this. That is never going to happen on a timescale that will make us happy, but it will eventually succeed, unlike what people have tried in the past and failed. Exposing things too quickly ends up acting like a controlled forest burn. It wastes the opportunity for the spread to go further. The majority will not accept it, and it becomes old news. Q seems to be ordering and timing things so that progress keeps moving forward, however slow it is.