relevants

TIL it's entitled to ask that software you use is either compliant with the law or clearly lets you know that it isn't, especially when the developers have no idea what the law is

I'll throw in Griddle, where you have to find high-scoring words on a grid

The city I'm from has more bridges than Venice and Amsterdam combined.

ich warte immer noch auf ihr "unabhängiges Gutachten" u dem was da hinter den Kulissen so abgehen soll...

This is what REAL analysis looks like, done by REAL undergrads

1. From the way you use the word, it's clear you don't know what enshittification means
2. You sound like the kind of person who dislikes anything that's too popular. Chill

While I believe that nobody should be able to wield that much wealth in the first place, arguably being a world-famous artist is among the least unethical ways to become rich as long as the artistic work isn't bought from ghostwriters. It takes $10 in net profit from 100m fans to make a billion, and I could easily imagine a sizable crowd of her followers genuinely wanting to give her money like that (whereas, for example, I never would have willingly agreed to give Nestlé's leadership money, even when I used to buy their brands still).

I don't care about her specifically, but from a "owning the fruits of your own labor" perspective, I think it makes sense for the art itself to be a big part of that.

Because I'm just interpreting the statement as it was written while you are reading an additional argument into it that the comment plainly does not make. I suggest you brush up on argumentation theory if that is too difficult for you to understand

The statement I was addressing was where they were called "exactly the same."

You are the one misinterpreting a statement here, by insinuating that the OP's assertion of "exactly the same" was referring to Russia and US as a whole. It wasn't, and so the point you're arguing against is one that OP never made.

You're arguing as if they had said Russia and the US are morally the same; what they actually said was that they are guilty of the same aforementioned crimes.

The [US] is actively and purposefully destabilising multiple countries and are basically terrorists at this point

Tell me how that sentence is wrong.

Are you basing this rant on your personal (anecdotal) experience of it working out for you, or actual statistics?