It’s good. And the decision to have (or not have) kids is one of the few forms of power that the general population has over those in charge. If people are being squeezed out financially or have no hope for the future (e.g. environmental collapse), they may choose to opt out of reproduction.

The amount of bias, propaganda, and straight-up misinformation from western media regarding this “conflict” (more like massacre) is truly outrageous.

I don’t have any inherent support either side, and there’s too much history along with bias, propaganda, and outright misinformation to make a determination of who the “good guys” are, if anyone.

However, in such cases I will support the underdog on the principle that you don’t really want one side to have too much power over the other. That’s how we end up with things like ethnic cleansing and genocide. If Palestine (and Lebanon) had powerful militaries, you wouldn’t be seeing the mass devastation and huge loss of civilian lives. I’d prefer to see the sides more balanced so that they can keep each other in check.

Another angle to consider is that I consider the state of Israel to be actively harmful to Americans on the basis of:

• using our tax dollars to commit mass murder against civilians, including a staggering death toll for children

• infiltrating our government, interfering with our elections, and having an undue level of influence on American policy

• corollary to the preceding point: they support getting Trump back into the White House

• training American law enforcement, who then use their oppressive tactics on Americans

• similarly, technology they develop for surveillance and other means of control being used on Americans

• directly attacking our First Amendment rights

Bottom line is I’d say everyone sucks, but in different ways. But I am anti-Israel on the basis of them being way out of control (and without anyone to keep them in check) and due to the threat they pose to the American public.

Maybe they could make .io into a 3-character gTLD by adding a character to it. Moving all of the websites (except those actually relevant to the territory) over to a new gTLD in unison seems like it would reduce confusion for the people who use those sites. Knowing that acme.io is now acme.iox (or w/e) would make it easier on everyone.

If you don’t understand the purpose that it would serve and how it would help, I have no idea how could explain it to you. The benefit is self-evident.

everyone just migrating everything to a new TLD?

That’s what I’m suggesting. Make a new gTLD (3 character) for the defunct ccTLD to migrate.

Also:

The threat affects all email platforms providing web logins, albeit Gmail, Outlook, Yahoo and AOL are by far the largest

This is really just a generic article saying “be careful what you click on”

I think that’s where the divide is, and why my employer pays for everyone to have Microsoft Office but I use a free office suite. I simply don’t need the extra capabilities for my own personal use.

Microsoft expects me to pay for Office 365? No, fuck you, I’ve got LibreOffice and your older Office software still works as good. Your word processing program, Word, hasn’t really changed that much since 2007 or even 2003. Hell, maybe not since 1997!

Yeah, it’s a word processor. I don’t need a newer with more features that I will never use. Some of these might make sense for a business with collaborative projects and such, but your average home user doesn’t need it.

Some of them can also seem very gimmicky. “.biz” is particularly bad, as I think of it more alluding to showbiz instead of business. They should have made it “.bus” instead, it would have at least appeared more professional.

Is there a .web? There is already a .site that could be used.

Maybe they could make .io into a 3-character gTLD by adding a character to it. Moving all of the websites (except those actually relevant to the territory) over to a new gTLD in unison seems like it would reduce confusion for the people who use those sites. Knowing that acme.io is now acme.iox (or w/e) would make it easier on everyone.

There is a trade-off between efficiency and durability on incandescent light bulbs. They did sell bulbs that lasted longer, but those had lower lumen/watt.

For generic bulbs, the cost of electricity was significantly greater than the cost of the bulb. It was cheaper to replace bulbs more frequently than to waste electricity.

There should have been only one.

The 2 that bother me are lose/loose and rogue/rouge.

The stress of being wary for long periods of time will make you weary.

Toyota tends to stick with proven tech and does it the right way, rather than pushing the envelope on half-assed implementations.

I’m a big fan of assists where I am still actively driving. They are there if I make an error (e.g. drift to the edge of a lane) rather than doing the driving for me.

Lane-keeping is actually on by default in my vehicle, and I find it to be a nice feature. Lane-centering feels too weird for me, so I’ve tried it out but am uncomfortable using it.

I remember describing it as driving with a teenager, they got the general idea, but would make bad decisions so you had to watch them.

This is worse than just driving yourself. I either need to be engaged in actively driving, or it really needs to be able to handle the task by itself.

It’s why I find the lane-keeping feature in my vehicle to be useful, but lane-centering is just too weird for me to use.

The thing with (full) self-driving is that the edge cases are the challenge. Driving is the Pareto Principle really cranked up: (fully made up numbers) 2% of the driving represents 90% of the difficulty. And highway driving is a much simpler task to be automated than driving on a stroad, weird intersections, unprotected turns, etc.

I think we are a long ways off from full self-driving, and highway driving capabilities of current vehicles only address what is by far the easiest scenario. And even there those capabilities are limited from what I’ve seen.