Unless I’m very mistaken rejecting all cookies must not take more clicks than accepting them. Too bad nobody enforces that…

If you ever get a fresh whole chicken (for dinner, for example), you can remove the breasts, then carefully remove the ribcage, make a small hole in the trachea, insert a straw and blow into it, you can inflate the sacs. Even if you know they are there, it’s still quite surprising. They are big! Highly recommend, if you’re up to such things.

I think human babies do the same thing. That’s why they can breathe while breastfeeding.

If you select a sufficiently short and localised subset of data, you can show almost anything. Would I be wrong to guess tjat your opinion is heavily influenced by the current state of the US? While I agree that the situation there is complete shit and something needs to happen, I would argue (admittedly without any solid data in hand) that globally, automation is helping loads of people and is going to continue to do so.

In general, it obviously is. The standard of living is rising over the last few hundred years. Many people can quite easily get things and amount and types of food that would be unthinkable just several decades ago. Many of which wouldn’t be possible to manufacture at scale, if at all, without progressing automation. Jobs shifting from production (agriculture and manufacturing) toward services are clear indication of this.

Enriching the rich disproportionately more is also happening. But that is somewhat different story with partially different causes.

So you don’t think that automating production and freeing people to do what they enjoy while improving their standard of living is a worthy goal? Yes, we are moving in the right direction, but there’s still an astonishing amount of manual labor in terrible conditions happening in poor countries to produce cheap stuff. For things that are automated elsewhere, but it would cost more than the cheap labor there. As I said, it’s sad.

And yet we’re still far from succeeding. It’s sad.

It’s great. It doesn’t have spell check, but it’s great for writing more characters easily (no long press, just swipe slighty to the side). You can completely customise your layout (and I mean completely, I have my name mapped for easy signing, but also copy, paste, back, compose button…), has Ctrl, Fn, arrows, anything.

Each key can have up to 9 (but realistically 5) characters - one upon clicking, the rest upon a short swipe to one of the eight directions. I haven’t seen another keyboard like this, and it’s so much faster than long press!

Do both. Can’t make a mistake by reaching out too much, I think.

Can you not fly with it? In Europe, you can, the limit is 5 or 6 cm of blade. I regularly fly with mine.

Have you already written to your members of parliament about chat control, and possibly other matters? Seriously, do it. There is very little you can do, but this might actually help. Slightly. Maybe.

I think that when you exert some pressure on blood vessels, the blood has to have higher pressure to pass through. While arteries work at higher pressure, veins have a lower pressure. So in the arteries deliver blood regardless, while veins accumulate more than usual until they are pressurized enough to let excess blood through the cuffs, accumulating blood in the legs. All of this is purely my speculation, though.

Do you know if there’s an instance with working RSS that also shows inages from the tweets in the RSS? I couldn’t find any for months.

Thanks, it honestly didn’t occur to me. Cocks have larger tails, best I could come up with was great chick.

Thanks. It seems to be just whatsapp web in an app form, so I could probaby just go to my browser. But that’s still an interesting idea that never ocurred to me on phone.

Is there, by any chance, an alternative client?

I think Ra has a magic casting system that is a programming language.

Yes. But if you have many complaints from MANY MANY users, it may not mean anything serious, it could still mean a very small fraction have problems. Absolute number means very little without context. That’s the purpose of the previous comment. Please note how it doesn’t say anything about qualities of Windows.

I think you’re probably misremebering what you read, so let’s first set it right.

The time always depends on the observer. If you’re going at the speed close to the speed of light (let’s say 0.99c, that is 99% of the speed of light), the time will slow down for you from the point of view of others who aren’t moving. If you go this fast, it will look like you were slowed down to the others. You yourself will feel normal and everyone else will look sped up. This effect is the larger the closer to the speed of light you go. We’ll get to the speed of light and faster in a minute.

If you went to the moon and back at 0.99c, to everyone on earth, it will look like it took you just a tiny bit less timw then it would take light, I think 2.5 seconds or so. To you, it would feel much faster, I didn’t calculate it but let’s say 0.1 second. There’s no way you would come back to distant future of Earth after a single trip to the moon.

You could come back to the distant future if you went much further. If you spent a year at 0.99c, much more time would pass on earth. If you kept looking, you would spend a year watching earth at fast forward. In the meantime, earthlings will spend many years wathing you slowed down from their point of view. For you it would feel like a year, for Earth, it would feel like many years, because the flow of time depends on your speed and there is no universal reference time.

Now let’s get to the speed of light. First of all, it is impossible for anything with mass to reach the speed of light. As you approach speed of light, the amount of energy needed to accelerate increases and you need infinite amount of energy to reach the speed of light, which you obviously can’t have. Massless particles, like photons, that is light, move at the speed of light. Hence speed of light :-) It is said that they don’t percieve time, they are sort of simultaneously everywhere along their path from their point of view. Easy to say, hard to imagine. But no dip is happening. From the point of view of someone not moving, just standing on Earth, if you are speeding up, you appear to be moving slower and slower and if you reached the speed of light, you would appear to stop moving altogether. From your point of view, you would feel normal, but Earth would be more and more sped up and then I guess you would be everywhere at once and time would stop to have a meaning? BTW, observing stuff would in fact be problematic, since you need light for that and getting light at the speed of light doesn’t quite work and there’s a bunch of interesting other complications even before that.

To get to speeds faster than speed of light is even more impossible. But there is a theoretical framework for particles faster than speed of light called tachyons. In a way, they are an opposite. They have to be faster, never can reach the speed of light and the closer to the speed of light they are (and therefore the slower they are), the more energy they need to slow down further. They are said to move backwards in time. They have not been showed to exist (once it looked like they might, but it was a technical issue with measurements). I know very little about them.