Plenty of proud Ukrainians are ethnically Russian. Plenty of Russian nationals, ethnically Russian, do not support Putin

Defending your country from invasion is being a puppet now?

Ukraine will not win this war. But neither will Russia.

The point is to get rid of gun culture. Guns should not be a normality, whether they are banned or not. Restricting access could certainly play a role in changing the culture

No, don't take out a loan. Just become a SpaceX TM AstroXplorer! For the small price of $5000 (and your human rights) you can get a free ticket to the planet Mars. There, you will be legally required to work a minimum of 24hrs a day, 668 days a year! Please note, your enslavement employment will be terminated if you do not meet the minimum expected workload. At this point you will no longer be welcome inside a SpaceX facility on the Martian surface, and thus you will need to relocate to an alternative premises, or buy a SpaceX Starship seat home for only $100000.

Advertising is by definition sponsored. If I tell you I think a product is good, and I'm not getting paid, that's just called advice.

Because it means there will be a fork, which will divide the development of the app in two and waste developers' time.

If people don't want it, it should be possible to disable. It should probably be disabled by default.

Sure, it's up to them at the end of the day, but I can still explain why I think it's a terrible decision

No they didn't. Not bothering to implement it because you don't believe it's important? Fine. Throwing away the work someone else has done for you? Pathetic.

Why not include a perfectly useful feature into an open source app? This just creates unnecessary division. By all means turn it off by default and hide the enable in settings, but don't just try to throw away someone's hard work.

It's nothing to do with capitalism. Marketing is not an area unique to capitalist economies.

Worst of all, driving people away from official releases puts them more at risk of downloading malware, and wastes the time of developers. By all means turn it off by default, but refusing to include a feature IS an anti-feature.

When we read the news, we care not just about accuracy but relevance. It's no good presenting a bunch of true facts and reporting nothing about the most important issues of our time. In fact, doing so is misinforming people.

Advertising is the same. Just because a company has the most money doesn't mean their products are deserving of our brain space.

Advertising is inherently biased. What you describe, "not made or paid by the seller" is NOT advertising.

Imagine I came to you and say "would you like this sandwich?". You might take it, if you felt hungry or liked the filling. Now imagine I come up to you and say "I'll pay you 100 (insert currency) to eat this sandwich". Suddenly, the sandwich becomes decidedly less appealling...

The sandwich is advertising, and eating it is exposing it to your brain. If it were really beneficial to you, no one would be getting paid.

They can have their beliefs, but once it's available I'll be switching straight over to the sponsorblock-enabled version thank you very much

It's unlikely that genetics play no role. One of the main factors is believed to be the conditions in utero. These are, of course, affected by the genes of the mother, at least in part.

unproved and unconfirmed

Sure, but it's not relevant. It's unlikely that genetics plays no role whatsoever, and impossible that it is completely determined by genetics.

Raising a person does not give them genes

Yes, I know. That's not what the article is suggesting at all. The gay uncle supports his siblings in raising children. Those children share genes with the uncle, therefore the "gay" genes get passed on.

Just because there isn't a gay gene doesn't mean genetic factors don't affect sexuality. It's believed to be a combination of genetic factors, conditions in the uterus (which are affected by the genes of the mother as well) and other factors.

Siblings share a lot of genetic similarities. A gay uncle who supports their siblings at raising children will improve the probability that those shared genes are passed on.

I don't disagree with your conclusion, but why does that phrase indicate it's nonsense?