Maybe similar flavor, but they can’t possibly be as bad, because much of what FOX does would be illegal.

Yes, which is really stupid, some people seem to think that freedom of expression means that sites have to allow their stupidity. Which is far from the case.

I guess my mind was elsewhere, it’s not that the thought is completely alien to me.

Yes you are right.

I agree, and It’s all because of the distorted form of freedom of speech they have in USA, we generally don’t have that problem in European democracies.
For instance FOX News is simply illegal by European standards, because they lie and distort reality.

Ah she’s a lesbian then? I didn’t consider that.

?

IDK why, but that’s actually funny. 👍 🤣

If true we wouldn’t have free will, but god does not exist, anymore than Harry Potter exists.

Also the concept of an all powerful god is moronic.
Can god create a rock so heavy even he can’t lift it?
So theologians have changed it to god is the maximum powerful implicating: That is possible.
But clearly that means there are things god can’t do, because there is a limit to his power.

EDIT PS:
That also means that god can’t know the future with free will existing at the same time. Because that is impossible.
And although free will is debated philosophically, and we don’t know exactly how it can exist, after 40 years of pondering the concept, I have reached the conclusion that we actually do have free will. Because our consciousness build on abstractions that are more than the sum of the parts of the physical brain.

Evil is a subjective perception, that is only possible because we have consciousness and free will.

No it’s not random, it is a very well known idea, here it’s also called if a tree topples in the forest, and there is nobody to hear it, does it make any sound?
The idea is moronic like a weak form of solipsism, and is an obvious thought that can be derived from Descartes I think therefore I am. But where Descartes actually made a valid point, any derived ideas like this lead nowhere.
It’s completely irrelevant and does NOTHING to help understand reality.

That’s like solipsism, raving mad and irrelevant.

Yep, doesn’t work in my country at least (Denmark). And since that clause is illegal IDK if that alone can invalidate it?

Not here, as I understand it, it’s pretty general that if a contract has an illegal clause, it invalidates the entire contract. As in it removes other special clauses even if they are legal.

Do they have more money than you?
If they do, chances are you would somehow lose in court, and even if you have the spirit of the law on your side.
I wouldn’t bet on consumer protection in USA, and I’ve seen many TOS documents that were CLEARLY illegal in EU, but legal in USA. But that was back in the 90’s where I worked with parallel import of software and hardware from USA.
We were occasionally contacted because the import of software at way cheaper prices than they were available here in EU, was against the TOS.
Usually we were not contacted again after my first response to them, that they could shove their American legalese shit where the sun doesn’t shine, US law has no bearing in Europe, and the TOS containing just 1 illegal clause invalidates the whole thing here. 🤣 🤣 🤣

Luckily clicking a checkbox is not legally binding with regard to such terms of service.
What is hidden in these terms is of course their abuse of your personal information, which probably is enough for plausible deniability.
But there’s a reason these companies are regularly fined in EU, and that is that their practices are often illegal, despite they “allow themselves” to do it by their own terms.

I don’t see why not, the problem is probably more to make it profitable, as the product would have to compete in a market of cheap palm oil from developing countries.
In greenhouses with artificial light, you can create whatever conditions you want, including a subtropical climate.

Not the right climate I suppose.

Good point.

Excellent point, compared to lard it’s probably more like 30 times more efficient in the amount of farmland needed.
The problem is not palm oil, the real problem is that the global population has increased from 5 to 8 billion in 50 years. Without palm oil, deforestation would probably have been worse.