bedwyr

joined 5 months ago
[–] bedwyr@piefed.ca 8 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

It doesn't make long term sense, they are driving away the new big content creators, and will lose market share.

They have no competition to speak of so they feel comfortable squeezing their creators, this is only the start.

[–] bedwyr@piefed.ca 6 points 2 weeks ago

idk, pornhub brings google into your porn habits, I don't want to deal with google at all.

[–] bedwyr@piefed.ca 19 points 1 month ago

The majority of americans would not support the means by which they restrict social media use.

Neither does the 1st amendment.

[–] bedwyr@piefed.ca 2 points 1 month ago

I want to troll the UK government for many reasons, not the same ones as these douchebags I am sure.

[–] bedwyr@piefed.ca 12 points 1 month ago (20 children)

2026 is not the year of the lord, but of the devil make no mistake.

Gangsters are in control, which is not cool even though you might think it is. It's not. Gangsters are parasites, making things more expensive.

Kill the gangsters.

[–] bedwyr@piefed.ca 13 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

It's not arbitrary, as your second paragraph suggests there are other reasons. Someone didn't pay off the administration. It really is like that.

[–] bedwyr@piefed.ca 3 points 2 months ago (2 children)

To be fair, Chinese EV's should have tariffs also because they use virtual slave labor.

[–] bedwyr@piefed.ca -1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

That was a joke not an insult, that you tried to play the victim there shows your nature, not worth talking to, now piss off. I won't respond further.

[–] bedwyr@piefed.ca -2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Actual money is not theoretical money as such, don't conflate the theoretical nature of money with the subject at hand. Kind of discredits you that you made that argument.

[–] bedwyr@piefed.ca -2 points 2 months ago (3 children)

Is that the vag of some chick you know? Doesn't seem to be applicable here.

My point is undeniably true, no matter how many half wits vote with you.

[–] bedwyr@piefed.ca -5 points 2 months ago (1 children)

500 million is a fraction of their stated wealth, it's not semantics to recognize that they are one downturn away from seeing their wealth evaporate, and possible margin calls against that money they did realize tax free by borrowing against their stock.

[–] bedwyr@piefed.ca -4 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (5 children)

The intrinisc values of his companies, and others, are a fraction of their current market value.

When you borrow against it, when the price falls back to intrinsic value, in Musk's case 1/100th or so of Tesla's current valuation, they get margin calls.

My point is not hard to understand and undeniably true. Owning theoretical money you can't realize in full is not the same as owning assets that can be realized. Musk is not trillionaire, never was.

view more: ‹ prev next ›