Re: concerning gmail and that
https://www.kaiostech.com/the-birth-of-the-smart-feature-phone-revolution/
On Sun, 5 Jun 2022 01:49:50 +0200
deboer007 <deboer007@caiway.net> wrote:
> They even used cotton for mineral extraction from healhty individuals.
>
> I can tell: hemp clothing is FAR more comfortable to wear.
>
> The capitalists even used slavery for the profit.
>
> And now they are even using a search engine google to help the rich in the medical world by making humanity sick.
>
>
> Arne
>
>
> On Sun, 5 Jun 2022 01:17:53 +0200
> "sp007@caiway.net" <sp007@caiway.net> wrote:
>
> > Google search:
> >
> > I use
> >
> > https://searx.org
> >
> > and you can switch of the google results.
> >
> > Happy searching that way.
> >
> > Arne
> >
> >
> > On Sun, 5 Jun 2022 01:10:54 +0200
> > "sp007@caiway.net" <sp007@caiway.net> wrote:
> >
> > > Other examples:
> > >
> > >
> > > The kapitalist know the medicine CBD is very healthy and very cheap.
> > >
> > > So they are selling it for the highest price for the smallest dosis.
> > >
> > > Even public health is used for profit.
> > >
> > > Ukraine has plenty of CBD
> > >
> > > So they make war in Ukraine to prefend it entering the market too soon.
> > >
> > > Ukraine
> > >
> > > #
> > >
> > > They still have vaccins to sell,
> > >
> > > The Australian gouvernement and industrials are free from vacination obligation.
> > >
> > > Doesn't that ring a bell?
> > >
> > > Arne
> > >
> > >
> > > On Sat, 04 Jun 2022 23:14:44 +0100
> > > mick crane <mick.crane@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > There was that Gernman guy who worked out how you could do images with a
> > > > 360 view
> > > > and he was jumped on by copyright lawyers.
> > > > This computer, internet phenomenon, industrial change, is meant to be a
> > > > communal effort.
> > > > I saw that there are Requests For Comment which try to establish
> > > > protocols how things work best.
> > > > My gripe with these bandwagon jumpers like gmail is the taking of
> > > > community concepts, monetising them and ignoring these RFCs.
> > > > mick
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Reply to: