Banning them stops them spreading this content on mainstream platforms and stops normal people falling in to the trap. It also makes the site tolerable.
I'm not really sure how this relates to the parent comment. On that original point, it seems crystal clear that a large chunk of the population is easily impressionable and can get quickly swept up in to batshit insane conspiracy theories and cults. There is no bubble here, we can see by the sheer number of supporters these conspiracy theories have that they are a very serious problem and we need to come up with solutions rather than going "Ah well it'll be alright"
Apple charged multiples of the market price when they were installing user upgrade able consumer grade 2.5” HDDs into their laptops, this won’t stop them.
Apple products are not just worth the sum of their components, they are an “experience” unto themselves.
I type that both sarcastically and with complete sincerity. Apple is vertically integrated, which puts their products in a different class than Intel/Windows, ARM/Android. If you’re an Apple user you’re not worried necessarily about the CPU or memory, your concern is whether you can run the Mac OS or iOS and the ecosystem that goes with it. So Apple doesn’t have to compete on price for its hardware, but rather on other intangibles.
Agreed. I’m just pointing out that the price that Apple charged and the underlying price of the components is poorly correlated. Apple will charge what you’ll pay, not what it costs to produce.
I hate the fact that in the year of our lord 2020, Apple is still selling new iMacs with HDD, and to add insult to injury, charges an arm and a leg to upgrade to SSD. SSD should not be an upgrade in 2020. It should be the base level default. If they want to allow upgrading to Optane or something else, fine; but not SSD. Apple is so behind I feel like a parody twitter account similar to Internet Explorer one is in order.
I didn't realise open street map had made so much progress, the demo page looks really nice. The satellite view is not very detailed where I was checking but other than that I'm very impressed with the offering.
I didn't understand that part. If I remember right, the open street map website used to have a demo page of their own. In any case I'm very happy to see this.
OpenStreetMap's own demo page is openstreetmap.org (or osm.org). I find lima's reply also a little confusing, but I think he just means that it's fine for companies to take the data and use it for a map (and indeed it is), but I don't understand how that makes this not openstreetmap. I mean, technically OSM is the database, and the demo on their own page "is" not openstreetmap because openstreetmap isn't a demo but only a database... but I'm not sure he meant to be pedantic so I'm not sure what it meant.
Openstreetmap is just the underlying data - absolutely anyone can come along and build a program to draw images from it. That's why OSM is so powerful, and what distinguishes it from Google maps etc.
Are you suggesting OSM has better point-of-interest search than Google Maps?
I love OSM, but this doesn't match my experience at all. Can you provide a bit more detail, maybe some examples of searches that OSM has better data for than Google?
At least here in Sweden you have much more detailed POI info in the countryside, like rune stoned and such. In Google Maps they can be impossible to find, and even the small path leading to them do not appear.
I thought the same as simonw, I guess the confusion comes from that I would interpret POI search as being shops in towns. Indeed, things like runes and other countryside things with trails leading to them, gmaps is terrible at. I guess they just don't see the money in it, so it's up to us to map it ourselves.
OSM is obviously not so good for shops, but it has incredible detail in other points of interest, down to drinking fountains and benches. Although of course it depends of how well mapped your part of the world is.
For me, it's the user experience. Searching for anything recreational will bombard you with hotels, restaurants, etc. It's nice to be free of this information at times.
Really? What's the best Linux distro/toolset to use in order to get anything to show up in a usable way in HDPI? I don't think you can buy new monitors anymore that are at low enough a resolution to support modern Linux.
Err, you must be looking in the wrong aisle/store. You can certainly buy new, good IPS/MVA panels (as a finsihed, desktop-ready unit) with more classic dpi. E.g. the classic format 19" 1280*1024: iiyama PROLITE P1905S-B2 available for 150~200$ new. To be fair, this is probably one of the, if not the lowest DPI/resolution desktop screen they offer, but still. it's at about 86 DPI, they also sell a 32" 1080p screen running at 68 DPI. I do like it a bit higher between about 100~110 DPI, and above 120 DPI requires high DPI technology. So, yes, please consider reasonable hardware. Don't buy HighDPI if you don't want to handle HighDPI with legacy software.
It seems it wasn't a new release. It opened in Europe in 2017 to very low ratings, the film didn't cost very much to make (relatively speaking) and this stunt has brought more attention to the film than any advertisement could have on its own.
It has been available to torrent for some time. I can't think of a better candidate to try this experiment on. It worked fantastically. Beyond that I can't see this having gone unnoticed for 6 hours.
Persisting an npm package to your project for 5 css rules is a far more egregious case of "you might not need..." than a simple css reset could ever be.
I've lived in countries that have socialized medicine and ones without and my experience was dramatically different. I was always taught that socialized medicine was better. However I never got half decent care until I bought private health insurance.
My whole life I've been on government healthcare plans, across various countries. Imagine my shock when the first time I called my private health insurance provider at 34, it worked well. They chose the clinic I would go to, when I arrived to my appointment I was immediately ushered in to meet a physician. The physician was able to diagnose many problems within a couple of minutes, and I was asked to call my insurance company back so they could approve a series of tests and treatments.
I waited half an hour for approval and I then immediately saw two different doctors and had an x-ray all before leaving the building.
The clinic is interested in actually treating me and giving me the best care possible so that I don't come back. This ensures they get repeat business from my insurance company. Socialized medicine never gave me that kind of care or expediency in my life. The problems were all fixed.
One of the problems I've had for 10 years. Doctors were never able to diagnose it properly or it was "come back in 2 weeks, try this medicine, try that, etc." They were not interested in treating me they were interested in seeing me again and again because they were getting paid by the state.
I'm sure there are anecdotes to the contrary but I am completely sold on private healthcare. It's also fantastically cheaper. In Germany for example I was paying 800/month for healthcare, half "paid by my employer", which would really be my money. My current private healthcare costs about 380/year.
Diagnosed immediately, immediate care. I can buy as much or as little as I want and don't have to subsidize others. I'm encouraged to stay in shape and healthy.
You will quickly find the limits of private healthcare once a surgery or advanced treatment is necessary. Usually that it is not covered in your plan. Heck, even relatively simple specialist interventions will go beyond coverage.
In many countries they are great at routine care, no doubt, as they're just not overcrowded and that is the main reason for problems in public systems.
If you shift all the crowd there... well... they degrade much quicker and worse than public.
So, apples to apples. Fully public vs fully private systems.
You could say compare German system with US system which are almost completely mirror images except German one is many times cheaper.
Not true. For the small amount I am paying I am covered for one major surgery in a hospital per year. Hopefully I never have to use it. If I need two major surgeries in one year well then I'll pay for it. Sounds like I've got bigger issues.
More than one surgery per year I'm covered for surgery in the medical vehicle. So if I'm going beyond that, I think I'll take the extra 9220 that I'm saving every year and risk it! Call me crazy I think most of that money is going toward treating fat people and drug users.
I don't know where you live now but private insurance is much cheaper in countries with universal healthcare. Probably because the insurance company only pays for "extras" that the existing system doesn't. They don't pay for ambulance rides for example.
Also, universal healthcare does not mean private insurance does not exist.
I would like to isolate every website I visit into a container, such that cookies or other tracking mechanisms are unable to be effective while on other pages.
To an extent, Tor can address this, though many sites make this exceedingly painful (Captchas, rate-limiting, outright blocking), and Tor itself is slow -- to set up, bandwidth, and latency.
I'm not sure if some middle tier of connection indirection, content caching-and-forwarding, or other mechanisms, might better address this.
There are protocols such as IPFS and browsers such as Min which might be a partial response to this:
So Twitter doesn't censor enough, dunno how much more time or money Twitter could have spent trying to control the narrative. So the lesson here is that it's never enough. If you had Twitter completely sanitized there'd be people who don't understand 'changing the channel' complaining about too many meat-eaters on the platform.
censorship basically allowed for trolls, memelords, bots, eggs and shitposters to thrive because of how they censored wrong-thinkers willing to have a rational discussion. only those who have nothing to lose are left in the conversation.
The article argues that it wasn't so much censorship as poorly-implemented censorship.
For example:
> Internally, Costolo complained that the “abuse economics” were “backward.” It took just seconds to create an account to harass someone, but reporting that abuse required filling out a time-consuming form.
And of course the larger story of a vigilante censor being blocked. Twitter doesn't want outside forces policing it, but that means it has to police itself, which it has failed to do at critical moments.
