Was McDonalds ever cheap in the first place?
Was McDonalds ever cheap in the first place?
Yes, but framing is important. Saying “Oh look what our perfect corporate buddies over at Taylor let us do even though it’s their call” (a huge lie btw.) vs. saying “We finally got this victory, we can finally do part of what we should’ve never have been unable to do due to corporate greed, thank you Taylor for getting some sense, it seems like your scrooges still have some semblance of a soul left” is a big difference. As always, the truth is somewhere in between these two extremes. However, I’m inclned to lean towards the latter more than the former on the spectrum.
Yes. Just as entering through an unlocked door isn’t trespassing.
Most of the sources also have copyright notices the model gobbles up, effectively making it more like trespassing and taking the no trespassing sign home as a souvenir.
In a few years they’ll charge you monthly for the priviledge of using/knowing what it collected on you.
I was wondering, what makes the modem that hard to replace?
I get that the embedded systems in cars are complex works of engineering, but I don’t see why there can’t be some sort of standardized physical interface akin to OBDII to be used to ‘upgrade’ the modem.
It’s not twitter it’s Xitter!
Yup, same thing, but more shitty. Although, I agree with MAGA Musk that it shouldn’t fucking exist.
Sorry to hijack your comment, but seeing that “my grandchildren are in my daughters’ ovaries post” right above this one and your comment made me wonder:
Why is gas so damn cheap in the US while saying “healthcare is expensive” is a giant understatement.
Compared with Europe, where gas prices are regulated (and gas stations still seem to be doing just fine to the point that new ones keep popping up around where I live at an astounding rate) while it’s the healthcare that is subsidised and made availiable to all.
How come? Why aren’t gas companies in the US be as greedy as hospitals and pharma there? Why aren’t European gas stations few and far between, continuing to barely hold on, fail and ultimately closeleaving Europe gasless?
Even its name is
full of shit.a hallucination
There, fixed it for you.
Well, they are half-eaten on the back, so checks out.
Not everyone believes an AI bubble is forming
Well, the AI’s not wrong. No one believes a bubble is forming, since it’s already about to burst!
Yes. Yes it did.
No, they did not report that in media.
You’re kidding, right?
it’s better to avoid using it and report web compatibility problems
It would be if sites were truly incompatible, but developers know Chrome/Chromium dominates the market and instead of bothering checking compatibility with firefox, they just preemptively block Firefox since that’s an easier “fix”.
That’s assuming the vendor isn’t Google and doesn’t have a vested interest in Chrome hegemony.
Still. Finding a site that doesn’t work and reporting it absolutely is the way to go.
You can bet 300 new uBlock replacements to spring up practically overnight, some of them scams, reducing trust in the Google ecostystem.
Unfortunately it’s a bigger problem.
Google doesn’t plan to block uBlock Origin itself, but the APIs it uses to integrate into Chrome in order to function. This will effectively disable all adblockers on Chrome. uBlock won’t be removed from the Chrome extension store, it will just have 90% of its functionality removed.
Additionally, this isn’t a Chrome-only change, but a change in the open source Chromium, an upstream browser of Chrome all other Chrome-based browsers use (essentially everything aside from Firefox and Safari themselves).
The change itself is involved in changing the browser’s “Manifest”, a list of allowed API calls for extensions. The current one is called Manifest v2 and the new one was dubbed Manifest v3.
Theorethically Chromium-based browsers could “backport” Manifest v2 due to the open source nature of Chromium. However that is unlikely as it’s projected to take a lot of resources to change, due mostly to security implications of the change.
Vendors of other Chromium-based browsers themselves have little to gain from making the change aside from name recognition for “allowing uBlock”, which most users either wouldn’t care for or already use Firefox, so the loss for Google isn’t projected to be large, just as the gains for other vendors.
TLDR: uBlock won’t be removed from the Chrome extension store, but the mechanisms through which it blocks ads will be blocked. The block isn’t a change in Chrome but in Chromium and affects all Chromium-based brosers (all except Firefox and Safari). Other vendors could change that to allow adblockers but it’s projected to take a lot of time and resources.
They aren’t meant for public roads, just like Teslas.
Microsoft should go macro-shaft themselves.