You couldn't know they didn't have data if they didn't have the ability to present it. Once censored, it's impossible to tell what media is, that's the point of censorship.
You can't know if what was censored was false information, if you don't have the data on what was said.
Questioning is the heart and soul of science. Doubting included.
To censor doubt is a demand for agreement, and an intimidation of dissent.
Is this website legitimate? The links seem circular?
The "help "x" make healthy choices" slogan has always been a painfully patronizing rationalization.
You take away a choice, you make the choice for them. Don't act like they agree with you because you took away their ability to disagree.
At some point, you picked Digg up, put it down, and never picked it back up again.
Regulation threatens innocent people with the guns of law.
Parents not monitoring their children's internet access is not an excuse to harass people.
That's not the only alternative. Even if you don't value human life above plant life, you can't say it's any less valuable.
Oh no, the art's fine. I mean Krokodil, the drug, is NSFL.
But at the expense of human life?
Beautiful light, but Yikes. Reminds me of Krokodil.
NSFL IF YOU DONT KNOW WHAT THAT IS DON'T LOOK IT UP. IRL FLESH ROT TO THE BONE.
Youtube Premium
I watch youtube near endlessly.
Criterion Channel
Their curration is quite good. They have collections of films together by sub genre, actor, director, film movement, etc. Which makes playlists of movies that teach the topic.
Lemmy-> lemon -> lemony-> snicket ->snicker?
Or a Fed for federated.
Spez editing comments again?
That's why it's called "brain dead".