Why? Any government that supports ads needs to be eliminated, in my opinion.
2,090 karma · joined March 7, 2023
I suggest we eliminate ads completely. All companies that still force them onto the users, be it Google, Amazon and whichever, need to be either abolished, or be forced to stop cramming down ads onto people. The legislation also needs to change away from this pro-corporate worship that the orange mafia (but also prior governments) forced onto us (correspondingly in other countries as well).
He recently shut down Starlink, weakening Ukrainians.
I really don't think people should feed that billionaire any more, no matter the reason.
You'd think that the USA would be worshipping capitalism, but capitalism also has as one intrinsic aspect free competition, in order to drive down prices. This is VERY clearly broken here, by ALL these corporations. Why do politicians ignore this? I am aware of the corruption with the orange clown in charge, but prior politicians here also did nothing or barely anything at all. There must be a ton of financial kickback to these folks. They thus leech from the common man and common woman.
For me personally, AVIF is still better, for various reasons (not solely file size compression ratio as such, though this is my number one go-to objective; browser support is also useful but to me is not so important as it is).
I am keeping a close eye on JPEG-XL, but right now I am quite settled on .avif. All my local collection is in .avif, when before it was a mixture of .jpg, .png and a few animated .gifs. From my findings a few years ago, avif is superior to jpg, png and gifs on pretty much everything it matters. On very high compression, though, I also noticed artefacts, but we had that even more so with jpg, and for 1:1 comparable file size, avif beats jpg with both eyes closed.
By the way, great article. I hope he can do another review, based on that blog entry, in, say 3 years. Would be interesting to see how avif and jpeg-xl have improved. In all likelihood I will still keep on using avif, but if jpeg-xl is a real winner in some areas, I may use it. (Lossless is one area where jpeg-xl excels, but I don't need to store satellite data; I want to store old family pictures in an efficient manner, and here it seems avif is better.)
(Though, parentheses are sometimes needed due to ambiguity. But by and large, the lispy legacy has been overcome already.)
I understand the issue of technical power, mind you, but I don't really see how US companies expanding into Canada is a good idea as long as a hostile orange individual keeps on potty-mouthing Canadians.
That's a weird statement to make though. I would say that it was Gentoo's decision to test for all functionality.
But, even ignoring this for the moment: how does this apply to the linux kernel? Because the config file has TONS of options. Does Gentoo support all of these via use flags? If not, why not? Because that distinction to me would be totally arbitrary.
I don't think this is a very good argument. For instance, if I have a company, called 'tickle-cats', I may expect regular customers to go and tickle a cat for, say, 1 cent, as cost. So I would expect regular people to visit my homepage.
I may not necessarily expect or want to have bots, scrapers and what not, per se. I may have this by extension - possibly, e. g. to rank a website more highly. But bots and so forth are not my real target audience to begin with (and some are just malicious, trying to disrupt the business); some company owners may want to not have to do anything with them (bots, crawlers etc...). That's just one example of many more; I don't think the distinction "public versus private" is the only one that can be applied here.
Oddly enough, many don't seem to want to have a company homepage, in particular smaller companies.
I am confused. What does "comprehensive genetic testing" mean here?
Note: I understand perfectly fine the idea of testing. I fail to see why this is required here.
For instance, the blog author differs between surgery tumor and biopsy tumor. However had, a tumor is a clone, by definition; see Henrietta Lacks cells (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henrietta_Lacks).
I do not understand his distinction here. I don't think the distinction makes any logical sense either.
> Use AI to help you figure out what to pick based on your case.
I fail to see the point here either.
> The rest of the HN comments are worth reading too.
I am not sure about that either.
I understand the issue of cancer being different, and some can kill people quickly (Henrietta did not reach an old age), but I had small benign tumors removed surgically (fibroma of the fatty underskin). No extra treatment was necessary after that (this happened about 15 years ago or so). I understand that benign tumors are very different from metastasizing cancers; my point is more that I don't really agree with the statements made there in general. I think that surgery is a perfectly fine way for many cancers/tumors. It also is potentially very risky and can come in with huge problems. In my case, though, chopping off the small fibromas was the right choice. Unfortunately cancer will hat many people, also differently, so one may never be secure: https://www.cancer.org/cancer/risk-prevention/understanding-...
Risk of getting any type of cancer may be up to 40%; dying may be in between 13-17%, higher for older people. So I am not at all suggesting cancer is harmless at all, but at the same time I would not use that recipe listed on the author's blog entry either. I think the best qualitative assessment I could do is to say "it depends"; and to not rely on AI either. IMO most people should read up on things for a while, does not have to take long, say a week or two of slow, concentrated reading in a non-emotional but objective manner. Then you may understand a lot more. Cancer biology is, for the most part, actually cytology/cell biology. (The cancer chapter in the book molecular biology of the cell is also good; I think even non-scientists will understand most of that via slow reading too. Why does everyone want to succumb to AI here? I don't understand it.)
I stopped using Amazon some time ago though, so no more money from me goes into that monster. There were several reasons for this. The number one reason was actually ... prime. I feel that ever since amazon prime came about, things decayed quality-wise. But my habits also changed; I used to buy hardcopy books. I still love them, but I rarely use them anymore. I used to purchase hardware on amazon, but I no longer want to support companies that are part of the evil Trump clique, so no more money into US corporations from my side - the canadians led the way here (though Canada also has troublemakers such as Shopify; look at how much damage they caused in the ruby ecosystem in the last three years. Unsurprisingly DHH is on board of Shopify, so you can see how greed inter-connects these people in their agenda.)
The bigger problem is that Amazon and other US companies actively eliminate competition in other countries. It is a form of colonialism. Sadly, the other countries so attacked often don't really have a good means to retaliate. Just look how obedient the EU is to Trump - it is disgusting behaviour from EU officials here, in particular Leyen. These work for the USA (and probably for personal benefits too) rather than Europeans.
It depends on the personality. Some people are very open. Some are not. I find social open-ness much harder than closed-ness. The open-ness approach, though, is most likely the better strategy indeed. It just helps little when people are naturally closed off mentally already.
So the social cohesion in the USA is absolutely broken.
What is more tragic, though, is how they try to export their insanity onto other countries, be it Canada or the EU. Trump also supporting war criminal and genocidal man Putin, is such a clear fact for the agent Krasnov theory.
Evil in joint operation here.
The population in the USA really need to begin to think about their political system. That two-party system does not really work; and the transition to a de-facto one-party system led by an authoritarian clique is even worse. The system is totally broken here.
> It's a psychologically very difficult time.
That's true, though it depends on how one handles that. But I think it is also clear that there are fewer options available when you are somewhat old already. People at age, say 20 to 25, may not feel a problem when they are gamers. At age 55, it is much harder to reason as to why you may wish to invest many hours per day into games; it just is not that productive, for most people (excluding e. g. playing to have fun, but that still does not answer the question of producitivity; I exclude professional gamers here, as they can often make a living just from donations, twitch etc.. but most people are not like that. Some of these gamers soon hit the age range 50+ by the way, I do watch a few of them every now and then.)
Dunno. Facebook is pretty ruthless and evil here as well.
Anyone still having doubts about this company? To be fair: the US corporations all do that. I remember how Facebook linked off-connection data together. They are all operating in the same manner here, sustaining US spy interests.
It is to me shocking how few have listened to Yuri:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yErKTVdETpw
Of course he did not 1:1 predict Trump, but things such as "flood the zone with shit" is exactly what Yuri spoke about, just using different words e. g. informational overload or the corresponding russian words. And what he also didn't expand on enough, IMO, is corruption. Putin bets a LOT on corruption. Imagine if Trump were not corrupt - Yuri's prediction would not come to fruition. You need a rotting egg for leverage, and who knows what kompromat exists on the orange, clueless man.
The current slop-code though ... I don't think many would miss it.
Others "heroin", as analogy, isn't one convincing to get into the slop addict scene really, in my opinion.