s.

So if I said to you reparations would be going along strongly in 2021, how many of you thought that would happen? It's actually happening. And now we see that the agricultural secretary wants to make unequal grants to farmers who are Black to give them more money than if you're a white farmer. Now the reason for this is historical discrimination. Is it true that there was historical discrimination against Black farmers? I don't know, but I would think so, right? I mean you don't have to stretch your imagination to imagine it was probably terrible like everything else during that era and up to the current. So yeah, probably.

So whether or not you think it's a good idea or a bad idea, I'm making the point that it is happening. It's reparations. So in a bunch of different ways, reparations are actually happening now. I don't think that they're being done in a way that makes me happy. You know, it seems like it could be done a better way, in a way that helps all poor people specifically. But it's actually happening. I'm actually surprised in terms of my own predictions. I'm going to mark this one as a failure because I didn't see all the side doors. I kind of imagined reparations as we're going to mail you a check. And I thought, well, there's no way that's going to happen, right? But they don't have to mail a check. They can just carve along the edges and get there.

Here's a new story. I tried to look at a story in the news and the news was referring to a Facebook video. And so I started to click on the Facebook video but I couldn't because DuckDuckGo, which I've been using as my browser, told me that if I clicked on it — which I could actually, I could click on it, but it gave me a warning and it said that if I click on it I would go to Facebook and they track me. And if I didn't want to be tracked, don't click on this link. So how great is that, right?

Again, I didn't see this coming. But in a world in which Facebook can block Trump and our social media platforms can block people talking about ivermectin, can block talking about hydroxychloroquine — which by the way I don't have an opinion about whether those work — and they can block the election fraud claims. So the social media companies can be the deciders of what to block. Why doesn't that work the other way? Is there any reason you can't get a browser extension or just a browser that would work the way DuckDuckGo has worked in this case, which would block you from seeing harmful things on the social media platforms according to your own requirements?

Here's what I'd like to see. I'd love to see a browser or extension which gave me a checklist of what things are lies, and I can decide which ones are lies because there's no credible source to tell you what's a lie or what isn't. You have to decide on yourself. Could you start blocking videos that appear on Facebook and other social platforms because those platforms are not trusted? It's kind of interesting, isn't it? Because what is the response to the social media platforms having so much control over you? One possibility is that the public will use one platform to block the other, and they'll use each platform to block the other. It could be they're all being used to block everything until everything is blocked that's considered a lie. And almost everything is considered a lie by somebody. So where does this end up?

All right, I just thought it was fun that I got blocked from Facebook instead of being blocked by Facebook. That's maybe baby is healthy.

Here's another story where the headline doesn't match the story. This is a CNN example, surprise. And here's what the headline said. No