Yeah but if anything doesn’t work correctly it’s specifically because of the Chromium monopoly on the direction of web development. It’s almost a reason unto itself to move to Firefox. It’s like saying “what’s the point in shopping at a mom and pop store when Amazon basically won the future of capitalism anyway?” As an argument it’s just “let’s give up and let Google win.”
Forgive me, sire; I hadn’t $80,000 to spend on a luxury truck.
You fuck.
Then I mean a later year because my girlfriend and I each own X1s from around that time which we bought on eBay. Mine, I believe, was listed as a 2018. Hers is a year newer. So those figures might need budged but I do not mean a T480.
Unless you’re just recommending a T480 over an X1, in which case, I apologize for stepping all over your punchline.
Preowned ThinkPad. You can get a 2018 or so X1 Carbon for $400 or less on eBay.
“Threatening”.
Threatening to make that place a lot cooler, sounds like.
Researching the situation regarding work visas…
Objectivity in reporting is a nice goal when you’re trying to write objective journalism. But this dude clearly wrote an opinion piece. It literally says “you shouldn’t” in the headline. That sort of thing can’t be objective, and it would look embarrassing if it tried. Objectivity for objectivity’s sake regardless of context is not really sensible. What you’re asking for is a fact sheet, not something written by a person because that person believes a thing.
That being said, I’ll give it to you: it wasn’t an especially good op-ed piece. It would’ve been better if he elaborated some of the stuff he said. But that just means he’s got some work to do as a writer, not that his crime was ‘not being objective enough’.
Anything that is, or once was affiliated with Gawker / GMG is, in its current state, a cringe-inducing, shambling husk of whatever it once was. My muscle memory still directs me to a number of those blogs and everyday I recoil at what has become of them.
Sucks for me. I use iOS (I’m sorry) and that’s the original reason I got YouTube Red (back then): they make iOS users pay for background playback. Most of my YT consumption is documentary / essay / spoken word stuff so I need that feature to treat it like a podcast player, basically. Most of the rest of my YT consumption is in my living room, where ad blocking isn’t an option (and I hear even if it was, they’re catching up fighting ad blockers).
I hate the Web 2.0 “enshitification” of platforms, and I hate advertisements, and I’m willing to pay for a good, useful service. But this is a mixed bag. It’s still ‘enshitified’ because most of what it serves me is algorithmic and nothing to do with the hundreds of channels I’ve subscribed to over the 13 years I’ve had this particular account. It’s still chock full of ads because videos do sponsor blocks these days.
And the worst of it is they’ve got you by the balls and there’s really nothing stopping them from being Netflix and just continuing to raise and raise the price. I was an OG Netflix Instant Streaming for Xbox 360 user…years later when they finally booted me off my own family plan, we were paying like…$23 a month? For what had at that point become the worst video service? What stops YouTube from bumping up to $19.99/mo a couple years from now? It’s the only game in town.
OH and they’re also selling all your metrics. That’s the other thing. If I’m paying (through the nose) for a service, it shouldn’t be double-fucking me by selling predictive measures of who I am and what I care about to filthy fucking “advertisers” (for-profit behavior manipulators).
YouTube (like every last piece of Web 2.0) was fun while it lasted. But it is now barely better than worthless.
Spotify has higher bitrate files than YT Music.
It’s good for reviewing and giving high marks for searchability, but right now I’m having a better time with the beta version due to the absolutely insane rate of progress the dev makes every day.
Speaking as someone who never really plugged into Twitter much in the first place: the notion that tweets have any sort of real value and that putting caps on consuming them is a meaningful control measure is the funniest fucking thing. Like no doubt he I actually trying to ruin it, that’s happening. But this is clearly supposed to elicit some kind of reaction, and I just can’t imagine feeling like, “oh, no, this only 600?” 600 of what? Brainfarts? Serious ideas that, if they were written by serious people would be in a long form medium? It’s like saying “you can go to the grocery store but you can only buy 60 chew toys for your dog per day”. Like, okay, I wasn’t going to do that anyway and I think it’s funny that you thought I was going to, or that I’d care about this new limitation.
Speaking as someone who never really plugged into Twitter much in the first place: the notion that tweets have any sort of real value and that putting caps on consuming them is a meaningful control measure is the funniest fucking thing. Like no doubt he I actually trying to ruin it, that’s happening. But this is clearly supposed to elicit some kind of reaction, and I just can’t imagine feeling like, “oh, no, this only 600?” 600 of what? Brainfarts? Serious ideas that, if they were written by serious people would be in a long form medium? It’s like saying “you can go to the grocery store but you can only buy 60 chew toys for your dog per day”. Like, okay, I wasn’t going to do that anyway and I think it’s funny that you thought I was going to, or that I’d care about this new limitation.
Speaking as someone who never really plugged into Twitter much in the first place: the notion that tweets have any sort of real value and that putting caps on consuming them is a meaningful control measure is the funniest fucking thing. Like no doubt he I actually trying to ruin it, that’s happening. But this is clearly supposed to elicit some kind of reaction, and I just can’t imagine feeling like, “oh, no, this only 600?” 600 of what? Brainfarts? Serious ideas that, if they were written by serious people would be in a long form medium? It’s like saying “you can go to the grocery store but you can only buy 60 chew toys for your dog per day”. Like, okay, I wasn’t going to do that anyway and I think it’s funny that you thought I was going to, or that I’d care about this new limitation.
Speaking as someone who never really plugged into Twitter much in the first place: the notion that tweets have any sort of real value and that putting caps on consuming them is a meaningful control measure is the funniest fucking thing. Like no doubt he I actually trying to ruin it, that’s happening. But this is clearly supposed to elicit some kind of reaction, and I just can’t imagine feeling like, “oh, no, this only 600?” 600 of what? Brainfarts? Serious ideas that, if they were written by serious people would be in a long form medium? It’s like saying “you can go to the grocery store but you can only buy 60 chew toys for your dog per day”. Like, okay, I wasn’t going to do that anyway and I think it’s funny that you thought I was going to, or that I’d care about this new limitation.
I think you know very well I would never engage with this possibility as a means of self preservation. Good day sir!