If what’s coming out now about Bojo’s time as PM is at all true, I wouldn’t doubt it. He was a looser cannon than I imagined at the time. Dr. Phibes was quite right about Bojo’s ineptitude as a PM.
I know Serhii Plokhy from when he was at the University of Alberta Institute of Ukrainian Studies back in the 1990’s. I have regularly corresponded with him as a member of an informal email group of Canadian Russia watchers that tries to get together via Zoom every quarter to sort out the world.
Serhii knows what he’s talking about.
@George-K said in The Invisible Hand:
The interesting thing is that some are interpreting Musk's comment this way:
"You think your dollars can influence what I display/say on MY platform? Go fuck yourself, you just admitted that. Spare me the sanctimony."
I'm not sure how that interpretation differs from the obvious one, but the fuller context of what he said was "do you think you can blackmail me with money? GFY...". The obvious interpretation being that the richest person in the world can't be influenced by money.
He goes on to say that advertiser boycotts could kill the company, though. And if X died, that would affect even Musk's money.
Somehow he considered it important that the public would decide whether the advertisers would be considered at fault for the destruction of X. I didn't quite track the meaning of that. I don't think the advertisers have anything at stake if X dies. Something else will spring up to take its place, and the diffuse responsibility for X's demise would not land heavily on any one company.
Hint for Tablo users - do not try to use it with a Roku Express, not powerful enough to handle the throughput. Off, because it worked fine with cable. I had to buy an Ultra but it works great now.
@Axtremus said in And you thought BoJo had weird hair:
I look to a day when people will not be judged by the stylings of their hair, but by the content of their character.
That wouldn't really work that well for BoJo.
As one analyst recently put it:
The logic of the Kremlin regime is completely different [than the logic of NATO]. There is no "acceptable" or "unacceptable" price, there is only victory or defeat. The Kremlin has decided that winning the war is the only way for the current regime to retain power, and for the people at the top to stay alive and free. Thus, defeat in the war is a "point of no return" and any price of victory is acceptable.
Problem is, at a SEC school, especially LSU, Alabama, etc., football pays for a lot of the other sports. Especially women's sports and more obscure men's sports (golf, anyone?). And at a LSU, football also pays for some academics.
