Before bed in a box was a thing I built my own. 4” of high density foam base, 3” of med density latex, 2” of low density latex on top. I swapped out the top layer a few years back, but the core is still going strong ~14 years in, and it’s still my favorite bed I’ve slept on.
One tip is you’ll want some kind of cover for your latex, since long term exposure to air will cause it to degrade.
Again, this was 14 years ago, no idea if the product quality has fallen off or there’s a better place to get it now.
Being truly critical of any product would reduce their chances of getting merch, trips, and other gifts from brands.
A good example of how this spawned articles that are absolutely useless: https://www.partitionwizard.com/news/
All those articles have nothing to do with application they're trying to sell, but they do (did) bump the pagerank.
Many companies do this, which has polluted search results for issues to the most common denominator, making it impossible to find that 1 post that actually has a working solution.
And now we've reached the next stage, those pages are no longer written by humans, but entire websites are being generated for the purpose of selling you stuff.
I was searching for the name of the bitter part in a peanut, and stumbled upon this website:
https://www etprotein com/parts-of-a-peanut-anatomy-of-a-nutty-snack/
We have entered a situation where there is no longer 'no answer', there is always some answer out there, simply to sell you stuff.
In the past if you searched for Brand X at Retailer Y, and they didn't carry it, you'd get no results. Now they autocomplete Brand X's name, and show you a whole bunch of products related to Brand X, with no indication that they don't carry it.
Difficult to find anyoone who will acknowledge this given the amount of mooney involved.
One search engine website pitched itself as having a mission to "organize the world's information". However search != organisation. The information the company was searching did not belong to them. It was outside their control. It generally remains disorganised.
The mission was actually to copy the world's information, intermediate access to it and sell advertising services.
The company did not sell "organising services" to information publishers. It sold online advertising services to advertisers.
Intermediating access to information was nothing more than a tactic to asemble audiences for advertising. The mission was to sell online advertising services.
Organising information for web publication is still an unsolved problem. (The problem of vast amount of disorganised information on the web remains unsolved.) Information that is organised is more easily searched. If organised well-enough, it can be generally be browsed without searching.
Utrustworthy, unethical coomputer nerds found ways to make money from the disorganisation. They became wealthy and were celebrated as being "successful". ^1 As such, it is difficult to find anyone who will acknowledge that relying on "search", where the algorithm is properietary, secret and can be still gamed by "SEO", etc., was deeply flawed. Flawed not in the sense of it offered no opportunity for making money. Flawed in the sense it ultimately does not work well for locating the information sought by the searcher.
If the wealth from intermediating access to information via "search" begins to dry up, then perhaps the fundamental flaws of web search will (again^2) be acknowledged.
1. NB. No one has been successful in organising the information published on the web.
2. As they were in the 1990s when one search project claimed (falsely) it wanted to counter the effects of advertising on "search" and remain in "the academic realm" only to then become the dominant web advertising services company.
It makes sense that product searches might be effective because product infomation tends to be organised.
But hey ! Now you can ask ChatGPT, Copilot or whatever for the same thing !
We are surounded
So we just get more losers and no winners
No win for the website creators