Blaming kids for trigger warnings is like blaming them for participation awards. Blame the adults who put them there. The kids just expect them because that’s what normal for the kids.
I think this is much more the case of an aging population that sees a clearly sensationalistic article with little to no context, from a source that has routinely made clear their bias and recklessness, and then decides that all people under 30 have somehow gone wrong and soft.
If you've been taught that exposure to opinions that you disagree with is unsafe, a trigger warning on a play is as reasonable as a cancer warning on a pack of cigarettes.
We've owned three homes, our first one had a heat pump. In Virginia. It generally sucked. It wasn't as good as real A/C in the summer and wasn't as good as gas or electric heat in the winter. I hope to never end up in a place that uses a heat pump.
It may have been low on refrigerant. I'm in Virginia now and most of my neighbors have heat pumps including me. Mine is 17 years old and is definitely low on refrigerant so I use the original baseboard heat instead.
"Heat pumps use refrigerant to condition the air in your home by adding or removing heat through thermal exchange."
"Air conditioning is a cooling system that circulates cool air into an enclosed space, creating a comfortable atmosphere and improving indoor air quality."
"Air conditioners generally last longer than heat pumps because air conditioners only run when the air needs cooling, while heat pumps operate year-round."
> "Heat pumps use refrigerant to condition the air in your home by adding or removing heat through thermal exchange."
This is what air conditioners do, too.
> "Air conditioning is a cooling system that circulates cool air into an enclosed space, creating a comfortable atmosphere and improving indoor air quality."
This is what heat pumps do, too.
These are two sentences that describe the same process, just in different words.
The last quote is potentially relevant: a heat pump is an air conditioner that can run in reverse to provide heat in the winter, so you're running it in both situations, and thus for more time.
> Streaming became popular because it was easier than piracy
We never stole (cute word pirated) anything. We became cordcutters (OTA and streaming) because we felt we weren't using but maybe $20 of the $180 monthly we were paying to cable. We became cordcutters in 2013. We never stole (cute word pirated) anything.
"Stole" isn't the right word either. Pirating does not deprive any legal entity of ownership. It's merely copyright infringement. It also likely circumvented access controls, thereby running afoul of DMCA. But it is not theft.
I'm speaking as someone who also never pirates. I'd rather not watch something and spend my time doing something else.
My pockets are absolutely overflowing with revenue big corpo would otherwise have gained, it's ruining my pants!
Do you know where I could stash all this revenue big corpo would otherwise have gained? Or perhaps I could give it to you? Would you be interested in giving me something in exchange for all this revenue big daddy corpo would otherwise have gained?
Reminds me of the Napster case, where the damages were calculated as higher as the gross world product at the time because of the "1 pirated copy = 1 lost sale" philosophy.
Implying that music companies would have been richer than all the nations + other companies in the world combined, if it wasn't for music piracy. It's not hard to see how that's bull.
If I wasn't pirating I would most likely have at least one service.
I'm stealing just as much as I would be stealing if I took code from a developer without paying what we agreed to. The entire stealing/not stealing discussion is just useless semantics.
The inverse has also been suggested over the years: people who pirated at some point are more likely to pay for content now, whether or not they continue to pirate content
Also, making a backup copy of something you own is usually piracy[1]. In what universe is that theft?
[1] The act of making a backup is not in and of itself (as it's considered a fair use/exception in most [not all!] jurisdictions, even outside of US), but it often involves circumventing DRM, and that part is piracy.
I want Thunderbird to look like Thunderbird, not Outlook. There's nothing superior about Outlook. When Microsoft made the ridiculous decision to stuck the search text box in the Title Bar, it was clear they have no clue any more what they're doing. Then Thunderbird recently followed suit. Dumb and dumber. At least TB lets us fix it. Now they're focusing on Exchange support when the best email servers on the planet have nothing to do with Microsoft? Dumb and dumber redux. Time to look for a new email client on the Linux Desktop.
I get your sentiment, and while some may disagree (most of this is subjective, anyway), there will be many who agree with most of your points here. However:
> Now they're focusing on Exchange support when the best email servers on the planet have nothing to do with Microsoft?
People don't want Exchange because they like Exchange. For people who like Microsoft, the very last thing they care about is that their email client communicates with their server over Exchange.
This feature is for the unfortunate Linux fans, like you, who are stuck with a job that requires them to interact with a Microsoft server. That's not dumb, that's a smart move on the TB side (well, lucky, perhaps, that people are willing to work on it, more than being smart) to allow users to use TB in the first place. If you don't use Exchange you won't mind the support (barring perhaps reduced development elsewhere), but it will let many people use TB where they otherwise _could not_ without plugins.
>now, I don't see many places using Exchange switching to Thunderbird,
Because you couldn’t.
There was a TB extension “OWL” but it wasn’t good enough for me, still lacked things like the contact cards with data from your Active Directory install, and other default Outlook features.
So the point for me is now you could take that path - maybe.
It's "a public API", not "an public API", because of the consonant rule.
I really worry that there are people out there who will anxiously mangle their company's data thinking what is being called AI, which doesn't exist yet, will save the day.
Use it as a tool not a replacement. However it does do things well even without much additional information like fixing SQL statement[1]. That being said it is consistently improving, GPT-3.5 to GPT-4 was a major upgrade.
> Can you explain this more? Why are you so tied to ipv4?
For me, IPv4 doesn't break the privacy barrier, IPv6 blasts a huge hole straight into each and every household, office and IoT device on the planet. No, privacy fixes put into IPv6 do not work.
Can you explain this more? I realize that one IP address per device poses a major problem for privacy, but I thought we somewhat mitigated that by dynamically reassigning IPs.
What exactly is the problem with the privacy fixes that were put into IPv6? Why don't they work?
I'm guessing that the GP is talking about the fact that if there were two persons in a household using the Internet at the same time, with IPv4 they would connect from the same IP address (though of course with different port numbers), but with IPv6 they would likely connect from distinct IP addresses, and usually only sharing a /64 prefix.
You are correct that this isn't a big issue. SLAAC addresses are generally changed fairly frequently by the OS. As for stateful DHCPv6, well I turn it off for both this reason and the fact that Android doesn't support it.
The difference is that the average household shares multiple devices behind that single IP address, whereas IPv6 addresses are unique to the device you're using.
Identification to the level of IPv4 can still be done with IPv6 by using the /64 where you would previously take the /32, but with IPv6 you also get identifiers from within the network as well.
With how much IPv6 space is available, I'm not sure why SLAAC-based networks don't just assign different IP addresses to different use cases. I can see this becoming a problem on large company networks, but in home networks you could generate a random IPv6 address every hour for every website you visit and still never run out of address space.
Operating systems aren't exactly geared up for per-application outgoing IP addresses, and perhaps handling tens of thousands of IP addresses will bog down the kernel somehow, but in terms of privacy protection we could be doing a lot more than what IPv6 Privacy Extensions are doing right now.
