Ad-Hoc wireless networking. I miss it, was useful back in the day if you needed to share files with multiple people without a wireless router at a location. Most laptops don’t support this anymore. To be fair, I’ve only really wanted to use it maybe twice in the last 10 years.
I don’t use ad blockers on YouTube because the creators that I watch on YouTube are people who I actually care about. I watch content on YouTube from real people who I want to be able to profit off of me watching their video. Ad blockers are effectively piracy, your taking the content without the agreed upon price, in this case, the price of the content is the ads.
And I don’t make that comparison to convince anyone that they shouldn’t use an ad blocker, I just think the decision of where to use ad blockers should be made with the understanding that you are pirating any content that you consume while using an ad blocker. Are you willing to pirate something from some random mega corporation? I am. Are willing to pirate content from this niche 3D printing YouTube content creator that you enjoy? I’m not.
As a default, I do use an ad blocker, but I will disable the ad blocker for any website that I can trust enough to not have malicious ads, especially websites that i want to financially support. Because for me all it means is sacrificing a little bit of bandwidth to load the ad that I’m just going to ignore anyway.
We’re not talking about what holds power in a court, we’re talking about functional reality.
What you can get away with on a technicality in court is irrelevant to whether or not it’s piracy.
By a legal definition, no, ad blocking is probably not piracy. I’m no lawyer but I would wager that Piracy is probably more strictly defined than that. My point though is that it is functionally the exact same thing as piracy.
Ad supported content is distributed based on the advertising income paying for the distribution. If you are blocking that advertising in a way that prevents compensation to the content creator you are consuming that content without the creator getting paid the price that they set for the content.
The price was agreed upon in the same way that the price in the grocery store is agreed upon.
The content provider set the price, in this case, the price being consuming an advertisement.
To be totally clear, I absolutely advocate for piracy in some situations, I’m not going to get into the weeds and talk about the specifics when I do or do not advocate for it, but to extend upon the grocery store analogy, there are also some situations where I would absolutely advocate for someone to steal from the grocery store. And I’m not going to get into the weeds and talk about the specifics for when I do or do not advocate for that either. The point though is by calling ad blocking piracy I’m not making a moral judgment on whether or not it is right or wrong, I’m just pointing out that it is functionally the exact same thing.
You say you’ll disable the ad blocker for sites that don’t push malicious ads? I’ve reported half a dozen deepfake “investment” ads on YouTube in the last couple of months, and they have done nothing about it. The ads YouTube pushes are horrible!
People advertising shady things is not the same thing as a malicious ad, at least not in the context of the point I’m trying to make. By malicious ad I’m referring to those things that pretend to not be an ad at all, they pretend to be the download button or a notification of an unread message, or something along those lines.
I may not be using the terminology exactly right, but that’s the kind of thing I’m referring to. And YouTube does. A YouTube does a perfectly fine job at being transparent when something is an advertisement and when it’s organic content. They’re not maliciously being deceptive at what is an ad and what isn’t.
Are willing to pirate content from this niche 3D printing YouTube content creator that you enjoy? I’m not.
I cleanse my conscience by supporting many of them on Patreon.
Accidentally clicking on clickbait without an adblocker directly results in a spammer getting money, and that just makes me feel like crap. There’s so much spam out there that wouldn’t exist without ads, which makes it harder for quality creators to get attention and fair compensation. I feel I can only engage with the internet ethically by refusing to participate in the ad economy.
It sucks that alternative payment models like Brave’s “Basic Attention Token” (or a fairer alternative) never got popular. The idea was to track the creators of websites/videos/etc. you visit and automatically split your monthly donation between them. IIRC it was proportional to the number of ads blocked for each creator, but you could tweak creators’ multipliers to deny profit to spam and reward higher-quality creators. I’d also accept microtransactions for individual videos, news articles, etc. but no platforms for these exist because the big players in internet monetization are all so focused on ads.
2 people take the same dose of heroin, they repeat the experience 5 times each on the same time line. Lets say they both has the same surgery. One person stops easily, experiencing mild withdrawal that feels like a flu and goes on with their life without ever thinking about it again. The other feels a powerful compulsion to take more, they maintain their usage say initially through extending a medical script and later the black market.
What was different between the two? Maybe you think person 2 had terrible moral character but if they had never been given heroin this would never have manifested. We call that pathological difference a disease and try and treat it. What would you call it?
So you say the difference is some moral deficiency? ok well why don’t we try and treat that. After all we need pain killers in medicine and we want to make them as safe as possible.
Let’s call junkeyism a disease and see how we can stop it happening. Maybe by understanding if some people respond better or worse to different kinds of drugs, maybe we could identify a test we could do to work out what would be safe for someone?
Like what do you think it means when a doctor calls something a disease? People can make bad decisions and still get diseases. If inject yourself with the blood of everyone you meet you’ll eventually get a few, they don’t stop being a disease just because you gave it to yourself (and also we might ask why someone felt compelled to do something so foolish and could we have helped them).
Junkeyism ALSO isn’t a disease. It’s a bad decision. Tens of thousands of children die of cancer every year. Cancer- a REAL disease. A disease they never asked for.
Their cause of death shouldn’t be categorized alongside dipshits that chose to shoot drugs into their veins.
It’s very rude to just swear at someone who hasn’t done anything to you. You don’t seem very nice.
I’m still confused though, if someone ate some mercury because they bit down on a thermometer or something should their mercury poisoning not be diagnosed as mercury poisoning? should it not be treated the same way?
So you don’t care that the majority of people who abuse drugs are doing it to self-medicate something, be that pain, depression from the state of their life, or an undiagnosed neurological condition?
(Adderall is just a dilute relative of meth, and so has similar effects on ADHD brains, i.e. makes us more functional. Also, there is research showing that cannabis has a positive effect on autistic brains, which would explain why so many autistic people I know love their greenery. Plus, anecdotes from fellow ADHDers of “I microdose weed because it helps me focus better, and it’s easier to get than legal adderall”)
No. I don’t care. A junkie is a junkie. Having a neurological condition doesn’t give you an excuse to get whacked out on meth 7 days a week. CANCER is a disease. Addiction is NOT.
I say this as someone with ADHD and ASD, and as a person who lost a friend to addiction this year.
So, unpacking your worldview here, how do you feel about cancer brought about by smoking, or by prolonged exposure to materials that you know are radioactive and/or carcinogenic? Does that change with the knowledge that processed meat and plastics, things that are impossible to avoid unless you structure your life around limiting exposure to them, are most likely mild carcinogens?
Also, please tell me, regardless of how you classify addiction, that you at least understand that the only evidence-based approach to drugs is decriminalisation. Almost all of the societal ills associated with them are entirely the fault of their possession and sale being crimes. You can’t find safe environments to use them in if they’re illegal, nor can you feel safe seeking medical aid if you’ve taken too high a dose without realising it. If you’re a dealer, you have no regulatory bodies to answer to, and pay no taxes on the money you make. If you’re running organised crime, you’re already sitting on enough of a supply to land you in jail for the rest of your life, and that makes murdering competitors seem like a much more palatable option. And then there’s the developing world. Most of the money this makes ends up back in the hands of rebels, warlords and cartels in the developing world, where they cause untold misery and suffering.
But if you legalise them, that nips most of those problems in the bud. You can publicly admit to using them, feel safe seeking medical aid when you mistakenly take too much, get help from programs designed to end your dependence. The dealers go out of business, replaced by actual stores that pay taxes and follow regulations, like not being able to sell to minors or water down your product to sell more of it. Organised crime loses one of its biggest sources of money overnight, given that their expensive material of unknown origin and purity is suddenly replaced by cheaper material of known origin and purity. The cross-border smuggling also ceases, because what else are you going to find that is illegal, compact, and high in value? Oh, and the developing world can actually benefit from drug production, since the criminal groups will be greatly weakened from the loss of profits, and developed world importers would rather deal with legitimate businesses than violent criminals and rebels.
We learnt this shit a century ago with alcohol, one of the most destructive drugs (even meth would not be as destructive if legalised), why are we still doing it?
Well, for starters, thank you for answering the prompt.
But, I mean, the barebones definition of Disease is when the organism’s functions behave outside of their evolutionary purpose. I don’t think people evolved their brain’s Sigma Receptors and Dopaminergic Systems just to be triggered by Meth, much less to form a habit based on the results of that interaction, so by definition I think that fits the terminology.
If you are looking for something to set up at home then you can buy one of those hockey puck looking things. They connect to Wi-Fi and you can teach them a set of IR commands that they can repeat.
I find it hard to believe that there’s any overlap on the Venn Diagram between people technologically literate to use the Fediverse and people who still use Chrome. I’m always shocked to see posts like this. For OP, join us
If it doesn’t work with Firefox and a VPN I just don’t use that service anymore. Im not going to go out of my way to use a service that doesn’t support certain browsers. Except for my bank… They win that battle against the VPN
I started using Firefox back when it was called Phoenix so it pains me to say this. Firefox pretty much sucks. For a long time, their biggest selling point is it’s not Chrome. It’s noticeably slower than Chrome and, outside of a few nice features, it’s been stagnant for a while. It routinely lags behind and hasn’t really innovated anything in years. The UI hasn’t changed materially since like 2004. Is a tabbed window the best we can do? It was great back then but now we use so many web apps that the tabs are unwieldy.
A free, open source browser should be an incredible priority. I would put it up there with Linux in terms of importance. Instead of treating the project as important, Mozilla is screwing around with Pocket, a VPN and email masking. What the hell? It’s pathetic. They wouldn’t even be in business at all if they weren’t being paid by Google. The organization is rudderless and it shows in Firefox.
One of my computers is a Chromebook (which I was required to have in order to run my college’s proctoring spyware, and bought before the Manifest V3 controversy was a thing). I’ve tried running Firefox on it inside the Linux virtual environment but it doesn’t work well, and the issue hasn’t been urgent enough to be worth blowing away Chrome OS and making it into a normal Linux laptop yet.
Genuine question here, whenever these posts about browsers come up (which is very often) I never see anyone mentioning Opera. What’s the reason for this? I seem to remember it being very popular with the tech crowd a number of years ago, that might be misremembering on my part!
They used to back in the internet explorer era have the fastest web engine. The reason they aren’t talked about much these days is because they are yet another chromium browser.
Opera is owned by a weird group of Chinese investors, collects your data and sends it to China. They also use crappy marketing practices, and the Opera GX “Gaming Browser” is a fucking joke. And their VPN isn’t even a VPN, it’s just a proxy. Not a company I would trust, especially when there are much better options like Firefox.
I thought switching to ff would be painful but the migration tool handles most of the heavy lifting! You will have to sign into most sites again but your saved passwords transfer. Most youll really have to do is just find any addons you use again
A study showed Dementia brainscans heavily correlating with a form of Plaque. For decades people believed it, but then it was debunked. Someone expressing disbelief in it before the debunking would not have been “flying in the face of everything we know about logic.” They would have been right.
A researcher made a study where Aspartame used to sweeten Gatorade correlated with fast developing terminal cancer in mice. The researcher who developed Aspartame shot back by saying they fed the mice daily with the equivalent to 400+ Gatorades. Of course, a French study later showed at large scales people who consumed aspartame were slightly more likely to develop cancer in the following decades, but the outcome was still preferred to the consumption of sugar. This is an example that is much more clearcut in the favor of science, but I think there is still room for skeptics to express doubts.
I think talking about these things in a welcoming environment can both alleviate certain less scientific beliefs while also giving a great idea of how the general public views certain topics. Also it’s fun. There is a guy in here who thinks maybe a dude can fight a bear, not that they should.
Yeah to be fair a few of the responses were that. I just don’t know a way to keep away the oxygen consuming idiot opinions like the woman so proud of doubting the moon landing.
Basically if you’ve got a logical explanation I can get on board with your idea as a hypothesis, but some of these replies are not that and are insane.
This reminds me of the research on saccharine that involved massive doses of it in mice. The belief that pumping huge amounts into a mouse can substitute for lower levels over long times always struck me as odd. Most systems, especially biological ones, have a critical level where systems fail. An example is the body’s ability to process toxins like alcohol in the liver. If you overwhelm the enzymes in the liver you get far different results than if you gave low levels over long periods.
Of course, a French study later showed at large scales people who consumed aspartame were slightly more likely to develop cancer in the following decades
If we’re gonna be correct about this, the study showed that there’s potentially an increased risk of developing cancer but there is a lot of data that still needs to be analyzed, so it’s a bit early to draw conclusions.
When I was a kid I saw this stop motion animation on tv about a little kid afraid to go to bed. This crescent-moon headed bird man comes and steals his eyes. It ends with the boy, blind, stumbling around in the dark.
I had to use my Moto G5s Plus again for 2 weeks when my current phone (Poco X3 Pro) was broken. It made me realize how usable it could still be, it’s just that the battery is basically dead. Also the micro-USB connector is so worn it doesn’t work with some cables anymore, and it is soldered-on. Well, OK, there’s a few more problems. It only has 32GB of storage, screen gets burn-ins within 3 minutes now, the main camera’s focus is mostly non-functional (it just makes weird noise while shaking the view, but if you hit it just right it can be used), it’s very laggy, it keeps losing cell signal,…
OK, it does have a few more issues, but I could still use it if both the micro-USB and battery were fine. The bezels and navigation button/fingerprint scanner are a large enough positive. But I can’t do micro soldering. I don’t even have money for a soldering heat gun…
I’m still using my '18 Nokia 6.1 and '16 Samsung Tab S2 8". As phone I see no alternative apart from fairphone, haven’t found an alternative yet for the 8" tablet. (There are no 8" left it seems)
Main tablet is a Lineage running Samsung Tab S5e, no alternative found for that. No 10" (or slightly larger) tablet that has an alternative rom. (Or one I can start developing for with another device as base)
One big technical reason for this was actually the file system. Back when phones came with various types of sd-card support, they only had a few gigs of storage. fat32 was enough and was supported everywhere. But fat32 had some file system limitations and when sd-card sizes grew over 4gb there were comparability issues since windows was limited to fat32 and ntfs. I can imagine the support hell when a user couldn’t mount the sd card containing photos on his or her computer.
The solution to that was ExFAT, which is another patented MS system, so requires a license fee (I think) but otherwise is compatible with anything (because they all had to pay the fee…) But specifically compatible with Windows out of the box.
I’m hoping that the repeal of Roe vs Wade seals the fate of the republican party. With continued legal action against gerrymandered states, a solidified stance against women’s reproductive rights, along with the overt racism I’m optimisticly hoping to see a functional dissolvement of the republican party in it’s current form by 2028. The pessimistic side of me is worried about strategic division of the democrats “not wanting Biden” or other short sighted horeshit driving us straight into a hate filled fascist government we can never recover from.
seals the fate of the republican party? the repeal of Roe vs Wade happened on a democrat’s watch and on a Catholic one
when was it you saw and heard Biden on tv defending abortion rights and saying is fighting for us? maybe a few times shit is so real he should be on the tv or streaming or something everyday
Biden has rode “I am not Trump.” into the ground but people are still supporting him on that fact alone
and Obama who Biden was in the White with wrote policies that harmed the health of the citizens and Trump and then Biden both expanded on while in office en.wikipedia.org/…/Family_Smoking_Prevention_and_…
when has Biden been a champion of healthcare or for cannabis or for gay marriage? dude is Catholic for God’s sake and very public about it and his policies and actions in office have reflected this he chose a prosecutor for a vice who openly opposed what he promised on the campaign trail the ones he has went back on like cannabis when he fired all those staffers
and everyone still thinks he is a cannabis champion
being not trump does not make someone a better more qualified candidate
Biden took my right to vote away so this is one of the only outlets
know in this next election it will most likely be Biden vs Trump same as before how could it go differently remember what happened when we were going to have more options
Obama and Biden chained the Green Party candidate to a chair so she could not debate with them and the other major politicians how is that not fascist
the repeal of Roe vs Wade happened on a democrat’s watch and on a Catholic one
The actions of the Supreme Court are completely unrelated to which party occupies the presidency at the time. The two branches are independent of one another.
Chrome is based on Safari (which itself is based on KHTML). They diverged a long time ago, but there’s still a genetic relationship there. Even if Safari for Windows were still a thing and you were serious instead of trolling, that strategy still wouldn’t be as good as switching to Firefox’s actually-unrelated codebase.
Firefox primary revenue is Google as default search engine, i.e. Mozilla sustainability model is unreliable since it depends on a direct competitor. Mozilla, and thus Firefox, is controlled oposition. Safari, on the other hand, has no such issues whatsoever, and has an independent browser engine. That’s why I recommend Safari, and everybody here should switch to it, and I recommend you as well.
spoilerWhen the leader of the rebellion died in the attempted heroic scene and everyone was distraught and shocked, I was just think “Why do I care? He’s said a couple of lines and been on screen for about 5 minutes…”
I don’t even understand how the characters even cared about each other. Even in the story it seems like they knew each other for like a couple days max.
5 minutes before he was clearly on his suicide mission I said, “I hope Ray Fishers character dies so he doesn’t have to be part of this garbage for part 2”
Then he died in the most meaningless and rehashed way and I was glad for him.
So I watched this last night. It is a pretty bad film, with the worst use of slow motion I think I have ever watched.
It feels very rushed in its plot, and the fizzles out instead of ending with a bang. Very few action scenes feel good, from bad camera angles and slow motion that highlights all the wrong things. I would also describe the film as a collection of nobody’s, very little character growth and you spend almost the entire film playing Pokémon with them.
I don’t recommend watching, and I would be surprised if a directors cut would make a difference.
I agree with all of this, the entire thing is inconsistent from the costuming for everybody to the accents to the slowmo to the character “development” to the sound effects for the lasers from guns to the world building with scifi and magic but also regular real world snow elk to the literal star wars shuttle crawl opening to blade runner but in the desert to the showing “good” characters because they’re against sexual assault who then never show up again to characters who get backstory in the last 35 minutes of the movie after having been with them for 2 hours, to characters motivations directly contracting themselves. So many scenes of faces just looking, no words, no help, just watching…
The slowmo is so awful, from scenes that are inconsistent through themselves - full speed, 60%, 30%, back to 60%, move to the next scene *still at 60%. Later? Eh, these four action scenes just set a 70% slow. They are so exhausting it genuinely feels like a chore to sit through. Oh, but the final fight has no slowmo from what I can remember, so there is one scene at least that doesn’t have it. The first half of the spider fight was okay outside of the racist music. Mostly everything else is literally just slowmo movement/shooting and closeup faces.
The movie is atrocious. I went into it with an open mind. I liked the self-indulgence for ZS:JL because it’s DC and it was a vision brought back from tragedy.
This?? He couldn’t get it right the first time that is on him. This is likely the most unoriginal, most predictable thing I have ever seen and the fact that there is a four hour version for part one is sad. I have never felt such disdain watching something. And honestly, that 4 hour cut could simply be Jimmy getting 45 minutes frolicking in a field getting his horns, an extended griffon flight sequence and 4 more added fight scenes with 2 dialogue scenes. Boom, 4 hours. I wish I even felt like this was being facetious.
I wanted to write a “the good” and “the bad” but… Genuinely, just watch James Gunns Suicide Squad instead. You’ll feel more emotion, get a deeper sense of the characters with actual fucking pacing, there’s actual set ups and payoffs that are meaningful instead of just… “Everything” and best of all you won’t have to sit through Rebel Moon. Oh, and if you want a sense of good use of slowmo, watch some of the Rocky movies, or Creed. As a slowmo comparison only, although thematically these movies are so much more impactful.
On the other hand, don’t wait. Watch it now and just see exactly how terrible it is. Maybe get really stoned or really drunk, watch it with someone who is familiar with Star Wars and its homages and prepare yourself for the rejected Star Wars story ZS presented to GL.
I’m not a hater, I’m not somebody who writes scathing reviews about movies because of stupid reasons, I generally like most movies even if they are bad. I generally like most things even if they’re mediocre and predictable, if it’s something done well it’s got merit.
I cannot recommend this movie. After seeing it, I can’t even see why anyone would want to see what 2 more hours even holds. At least 40% - being very generous - at least 40% of it would just be slowmo. It seems to contribute absolutely nothing of value and has absolutely no point to any of the decisions being anything. The entire thing is pointless drivel and I can’t believe I ever thought it might be worth watching. I haven’t called out so many sequence of events in a row since The Eternals (which I liked) but none of them were even meaningful or interesting. It was stupid shit like “oh she has a rope and fell, time to get it around and knock him down”. All of the background fire lasers are individual streaks, there’s no differentiation of weapons but there’s apparently multiple different weapon pulse fire noises. Sounds of 3 and 5, but nope, all just individual bolts.
And oh my gosh, the stupid fucking. The amount of talk about sex, that test where women talking about a romance and it failing? 15 minutes in, not even kidding. The main character apparently sleeps around, so does everybody the whole farm town is just an orgy. There is more talk about sex than plot in this movie.
The plot by the way is runaway on a farm imperials appear and create an army after surviving an ambush and the heroes ride off into the sunset. And everything is A-OK.
There’s no underlying theme. There’s no attempt at trying to make claims about philosophy. There’s no stitching of unique elements to create a fantasy world. It just babbles fake history at you and character repeat the fake history and we just get to accept that there’s random fantasy creatures in scifi space settings while we get philosophy babbled at us - it’s not positing ideas of making conversation with the audience, it’s just “my robot sentience is from magic and I feel bad”.
So yeah. I’m conflicted. On one hand, I don’t think anyone should subject themselves to this. On the other hand, I think everyone needs to see this so that ZS never gets another job, or at least severely reduced creative input.
Anyway. If you do watch it, I highly recommend Suicide Squad right after. Because for every deep chasm that you will find from Rebel Moon, this movie actually delivers something impactful. There is meaningful development. The conflict feels real and organic, not contrived. Even these ridiculous fantasy her- er, villains are more likable, relatable, and give you actual edge when they make a decision with actual consequences.
All of Rocky including Creed is also a good contrast. I don’t even watch boxing.
asklemmy
Active
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.