Telegram used to be so darn satisfying to use years ago, but as soon as they started peddling a crypto"currency" it all went downhill. Deleted my account a month ago.

Horrible name choice though: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herpes_simplex_virus

What is the biggest confirmed prime number to this date?

Augmentation does make more sense indeed.

Kinda makes you want to try to pull off something like this doesn’t it?

With OnlyFans I don’t think I’ve a problem, yet. But lying about one’s identity they’re selling I do consider as immoral, so no.

I suspect it’s AI generated too. Look at her right shoulder after around the 30 second mark: https://youtube.com/shorts/Cks_9h9Nx_Q, it’s all jittery. Quite a cunning plan if that is the case though; carefully crafting a PhD persona and doing instructional videos for a year so men slowly fall in love, and then go full-bore on explicit content.

Crypto Cult Science
“Money corrupts; bitcoin corrupts absolutely. Disregarding all of bitcoin’s shortcomings, a financial instrument that brings out the worst in people—greed—won’t change the world for the better.” —https://www.arscyni.cc/file/crypto_cult_science.html

“Is email still relevant in the modern era?”

“I wish no one would assassinate billionaires.”

Thanks, adjusted the question.

The sacrifices we make for not supporting corporations.
Anyway, water is non-coke and it’s an alternative to coke zero. Therefore logically my answer is valid and true, but I can read between the lines and accept your rebuke.

Water.
Go run 5 ㎞ at a decent speed and water will be the best drink ever. No need for poison-water.

Virtue by default, Linux.

Microsoft Windows.

To me it honestly just seems like you want someone else’s stuff for free and are just brining up morally in a misguided way to achieve that.

The article clearly mentions my use of Z-Library is to inspect before I buy. Now, because of being misrepresented twice, the discussion ends here.

“I really don’t understand why people think they have a moral right to other people’s creations.”

That’s a straw man fallacy. That statement removes all the always important context you just alluded to, a statement which was never claimed.

I like that you brought it up though, the original remark, a bit sardonic but that’s okay. It keeps me aware of my own potential generalizations, assumptions, fallacies, and whatnot.

“I like piracy too but saying that banning piracy is immortal and comparing it to apartheid, slavery and ccolonialism is just ridiculous.”

When one puts it like that it sure does seem ridiculous, but to me it is obvious that the analogy I am making is purely the fact that something being illegal does not mean it’s immoral.