dylan604

More people are able to understand the effects of gambling. Psychology is still quack medicine to a large percentage of people, so blaming mood swings of teenagers on an algorithm sounds like nonsense to a lot of people. Gambling is understood. Psychological tuning of an algorithm is just mumbo jumbo in how it's understood.

How is investing not a form of betting in and of itself? At this point, getting out of bed in the morning is a form of gambling. Driving your car or even just getting in a car is gambling. Everything can be given odds, and once you tell someone the odds, it's gambling.

If tobacco taught us anything it's that people are slow to get wise and slower to make change. Spend enough money on advertising, and you can slow it down even further.

The term workaholic did not just invent itself

But it's not not the point. Assuming any group is immune is just folly at best. I guarantee that there > 0 addicts reading this forum. I'll even guarantee that it is > 1.

To me, the difference is a form of classism. Addiction to drugs is for the lower class. Addiction to gambling from making money from investing is something only upper class people can have.

> What's the rationale for legalized sports betting?

People are acting like sports betting is new. The Romans bet on the gladiators. I'm not a history buff, but I'd imagine older civilizations bet on some form of sport as well.

What's the rationale? To make money of course. To be confused on this seems like a bit of deliberate obtuseness. The fact it hasn't been legal for so long was because the puritanical start to the country. It would be nice to have specific leagues that were pure sport for sport's sake, but once one league allows betting and the money starts to flow, all of the other leagues will follow or wither

Funny how movies keep turning out to be more prophetic than fiction. The Last Boy Scout nailed the effects of sports betting.

To me, the proof things can change was during the lock downs and saw how quickly things changed once all of the automobile pollution approached zero.

GenZ and GenAlpha are yet to reach a point where they can do anything about it. Boomers are still making decisions and there's plenty of GenXers that are still clinging to the myth concept.

Until the Boomers finish ageing out and GenZ/A grow up to take the reins, the status quo stays

Why does it being common downplay the bot attack to you? As time goes on, I'd assume bots activity to increase. I do not see it ever going away.

Stuff like that tends to have a buyer before it is actually stolen.

And how many people use Thunderbird compared to any of the other email clients? People keep pulling out esoteric products as an example of how PGP is not hard to use.

Curves. Like the Cybertruck, the roadster is overwhelmingly straight lines. There's also so much more glass. Since the frunk is much smaller than the hood, they've extended the windscreen.

You're forgetting that other drivers very well may be armed with an even bigger gun.

I mean, if you were a dealer and had a customer like Musk, wouldn't you do the same?

There are plenty of examples in the world where the one is all that is necessary. It's not like there are more than one Burj Khalifa building in the world. Many people pay for a one off car. There are multiple TV shows based on this very concept.

Just because it's not your hobby or within your budget, doesn't mean that others must feel the same way as you.

Blue jays are the only bird that I've seen dive bomb cats. I'd much rather have the cardinals around than the blue jays

Tell me you're a nerd without telling me you're a nerd. Maybe you've moved the goalposts to "it's easy for tech dorks" vs "it's a total pain in the arse for your mom to use'. If the goal is to have encrypted email everywhere, running anything in via command line is out. If you can't recognize that, then you're clearly just trolling

Your use of ProtonMail+PGP is not how people expect ProtonMail to work when it is claimed to be encrypted email. ProtonMail+PGP is no different than GMail+PGP or AOL+PGP or FastMail+PGP or $coolNameMail+PGP. So what's your point?

Anything+PGP can be encrypted. You still have to use PGP which means creating public/private key pairs, store them correctly, and understand when to use the public key and when to use the private key. You still then need to know how to exchange keys in a trustworthy manner, but that's after you convince someone else to do all of that on their end as well.

So yeah, it's dead simple <facepalm>

It sounds similar to the Grand Canyon. Intellectually, we know it is big and deep and wide. Being there and seeing it for the first time is more of an emotional understanding of how big and deep and wide it is as if you didn't already know it intellectually. As they say, it never fails to impress. The sheer size is impossible to recreate emotionally. Maybe if they had put a human for scale it might help.

(Un)ironically, it's free precisely because of all of the ads and data harvesting

Even today, you still need an external program to your email app to enable encrypted messages with in the email app. With that, the number of encrypted emails will be extremely low relatively. Even looking at Tor, the amount of users is still much lower than the internet in general. To the point, I doubt a very high amount of traffic is "regular" traffic to raise the noise floor.

Please, enlighten me on how you used PGP where calling it hard to use is so far from the truth. ProtonMail only works if you send messages to another ProtonMail user. It does not protect you when you email someone else.

The term E2EE has been subverted. Apps like WhatsApp claiming to be E2EE, but only if you actually enable it, so that people think they are being encrypted when they are not does not help. ProtonMail falls into this as well where allowing email to non-encrypted addresses means there is no encryption. It's obvious to some, but not so for the majority. Very few people read the caveats that WhatsApp and ProtonMail provide.

The biggest issue of using PGP was using PGP. You were pretty nerdy to be on the internet back then, but even then using PGP was beyond what the majority of people wanted to do. Exchanging keys was problematic. Writing text in one app, encrypting in another app, copying encrypted back to an email was just tiresome.

I'm still glad that it existed as its mere existence seems to have pushed things in the right direction as far as protecting everyone's ability to use encryption if they chose. It just never became the panacea it was envisioned to be.

The website is signing up for a service. You could say that a website continuing to use the service of a known malicious ad provider is problematic, but are there any ad providers known to have not served malicious something?

I think you're also confusing multiple malicious activities occurring on the web. Data harvesting is another thing that needs to be banned into oblivion. Rarely are sites doing that natively. It is being done as a second part of service the site wants. A site/app wants naturally wants to seen analytics about how visitors are using the site/app, so they include some third party tool that provides that data to an extent at the cost of collecting/keeping that data for their own use. Want to make it easy for users to interact with social platforms regarding your site/app, they now get to collect/keep that data. That's a different thing than being served malicious ads.

oh gawd, please please please do not interpret this as pagination of windows with overflowing content!

the image carousel type dots or similar old skool pagination indicators are so much worse than a simple scroll bar.

> disappearing scrollbars makes zero sense and should never have been implemented on any interface.

My biggest gripe about the disappearing scrollbars is the layout shifting that can occur when the content changes making the scrollbar necessary or not. CSS has a few options that can take care of that, but it requires some digging for someone to discover them.

Why the website instead of the ad provider? The website didn't server the ad. The ad provider did and should be the responsible part to ensure what it provides is not malicious.

Attacking a single website does nothing. If you bankrupt the site, there are millions more sites. If you attack the ad provider, bankrupting it, and shutting it down, millions of sites are now protected.

Your logic just doesn't compute