Ultraliberal and right-wing opposition leader Andrei Illarionov lost his job at the American Cato Institute for supporting Trump in his LiveJournal post. If this post was on Twitter or Facebook, then the social network account would probably have been banned also ...

“I no longer work at the Cato Institute,” Illarionov himself wrote on his page in LiveJournal. "As the vice-president of the institute told me, the reason is the content of the postscripts attached to my post on this blog, The Burning of the Reichstag -2021."

According to him, when invited to work at the Cato Institute, he was interested in the organization's position on various issues. “The management's response has always been the same:“ The institute has no other position than the protection of individual freedom. On any issues there is not the position of the institute, there are different positions of the staff of the institute, which they have every right to express. "

But now the norms of overseas democracy and freedom of speech have changed...

Very sad

Good quote on situation

Look, kid ... You are an orc. You are kept here so that an honest orcish voice can reach the people when necessary. For this they give food. Therefore, it is necessary to be very precise about what and when an honest orc voice should speak. And for this you need to constantly watch all the news ...

Victor Pelevin

Quite long time ago capitalists decided that they need to sell more children beds and also sell special children mattresses.

So they got to scientists, paid them and things started to turn.

Various U.S. medical groups warn parents not to place their infants to sleep in adult beds due to serious safety risks. Bed-sharing puts babies at risk of suffocation, strangulation, and SIDS. Studies have found that bed-sharing is the most common cause of deaths in babies, especially those 3 months and younger. Because of the risks involved, both the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) and the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) advise against bed-sharing.

This guys just forgot to tell you that for small baby it is extreme stress to not have mommy around, touching him. As in nature it means almost certain near death, hence constant repeated cry if you put it even nearby. And issues with your own sleep as result. Not having mommy results in instant big hormones shift and affect development of brain and lot of other functions, including lack of good sleep resulting sometimes in organs defects.

Here strategy had been to use scaring - you can suffocate baby (real thing!), but issue is that by doing that they ask you to not make things much better but to make things worse. Can read some statistics on autism, multiple research show that major cause of this can be lack of physical closeness with mother. Btw, working mother before around age 4 add big part of issues also. But I never saw any of this paid researchers or press to ask for mothers to stay with children as long as possible, as their owners won't like this, but I saw tons of such research results during socialism.

With modern tech you much better to put some sensor on baby with alarm if you are afraid instead of this shit.

SIDS is any sudden or unexpected infant death that occurs during sleep within the first year of life and that cannot be explained after thorough investigation. Most SIDS cases occur within the first six months of life, and babies between the ages of 2 and 4 months are at the highest risk. SIDS remains the leading cause of death among U.S. babies.

Note here same tech as used during COVID early hysteria. If you look at statistics in 1990 they put almost 70% of any baby death in sleep as death from SIDS, as it is some fuzzy and totally undefined thing - no one cares. A babies sleep 19-20 hours a day and some babies obviously die due to health defects and such - you can get nice numbers. Lately they just asked doctors to change statistics and put same cases under different death categories. And now they cite numbers of ALL, 100% deaths during sleep, as such number is more impressive.

Suffocation from a soft mattress, memory foam, waterbed,

For almost 100% of real babies your soft mattress is NOT soft, it is hard, as baby is light. So this guys lie openly. They use games with words to cheat you into spending money.

And to make you pay they offer you to buy extremely hard mattress (as you need to feel difference to spend money, not because it must be such hard).

Why they want to sell you so hard thing? Because 99,9% of people don't buy such mattress for themselves, and your don't want your baby to suffer on your subpar mattress don't you, you want best for your baby, you want to check advises from best professionals.

Note how they put it:

Consumer Reports notes that if the mattress feels good or even okay for you, then it is definitely not a mattress your baby should be sleeping on.

This is how paid criminals get their salary.

Babies should always be placed to sleep on their backs on a firm mattress without any pillows, blankets, toys, stuffed animals, or other items.

Baby physically is not much different from adult, so sleeping without pillow on the back and on extremely hard mattress is not the thing baby likes.

Also if you open up any medical papers on suffocation you'll see that almost all of cases happen during.. sleeping on the back and with some issue with pillow - too high head position or too low. Such way you can have tongue blocking the airway.

Ideally manufacturers want to sell you thing like (feels similar to a brick):

And separate expensive bed.

In Mordor they did not have SIDS being promoted by media, so here reasons for same type mattresses usage are totally different. Media tell you that children spine is completely different and by making them sleep weird and with deformed spine we make stuff better. Money always make wonders in presstitutes heads.

Silicon Valley tech giant Google revealed that the company removed some local news content from its search results in Australia as part of an “experiment.” Critics have called the situation a “chilling illustration” of the power that Google holds over the internet.

Google had tweaked its algorithm to bury links from major Australian news providers. Google confirmed the tweak and downplayed it, adding that it conducts “tens of thousands of experiments” every year.

A company spokesperson commented: “Every year we conduct tens of thousands of experiments in Google Search. We’re currently running a few experiments that will each reach about 1% of Google Search users in Australia to measure the impacts of news businesses and Google Search on each other. In 2018, the value we provided to publishers through referral traffic alone was estimated at $218 million dollars.”

Google reportedly plans to end the experiment in February.

Actually you can't prove how many users are affected by "experiment", as only Goolge know this.

This guys made big tweaking for years before today, just made it all silent.