It wasn’t about video length, it was about the Twitter leadership at that time being categorically incapable of monetizing any of their products.

Combine that with the orders-of-magnitude higher cost of running Vine compared to the bird, and it was always either going to be sold off or shut down.

It’s easy to forget that this was back in the time when these companies thought they were changing the planet for the better and drinking their own Kool aid by the gallon.

Now listen here you little shit

Yes it’s called ‘You left your carbon footprints on my heart’

Plato’s Rust cave base

Comparing a car to a private jet regardless of passenger count is disingenuous in the extreme

Full of people… Who only need to be there because of her.

This is like arguing it’s more efficient to put wheels on your house and drive it to work every day

The duality of man

The duality of man

Well they haven’t mass murdered me so how can I be sure?

Do you have any samples of their design work?

I’m hot on this case.

Er, yeah, I agree with that. Nothing to do with my point, but you are correct.

Sorry for a second comment but, by agenda, are you implying that I’m anti evolution?

The original comment I replied to made a definition of evolutionary success and I made a counter-definition. I’m not sure what conversation that you’re referring to before that. There was only one other comment above it in the chain and it had little do with defining the evolutionary success of chickens or what that might entail.

If you’re perceiving an agenda where there is none while also not understanding the point being made then, not to be rude, but thats a comprehension issue.

It’s possible I’m explaining it poorly, but I’ve run out of ways to approach this so I can’t offer you anything more.

You’re implying that I’m making a case for evolution achieving some sort of perfection, and linking that to a definition of success, which, again, isn’t what I said.

If you can’t have an honest conversation about it then I’m not interested. I don’t doubt that you understand evolution, you’ve said enough to demonstrate that, but you certainly do not understand the point I’m making.

And billions was an autocorrect.

Then call it reproductive success instead of dishonestly causing it evolutionary success. And I didn’t state that evolution requires or doesn’t require anything, you brought that up - we’re talking about whether it’s considered successful, which is a philosophical question.

Artificial selection is not a reflection of a species’ ability to survive in the natural world and to me that is not an example of success over the longer, think-billions-of-years, term.

Can you describe where natural selection occurs in a battery farming process?

Twice that many chickens are killed a year. It’s not what I’d call a roaring success in terms of evolution.

web 1.0 best web

I don’t know the answers to any of the other questions but the final one is Epstein island

Yes, you have correctly inferred my use of the term generational

Bingo. Capitalism has thus far rejected the blockchain, which is generally evidence that it doesn’t solve an important problem either efficiently, safely or cheaply.