clearleaf

If you clicked on an ad ever you're a different sort.

That behaviour is so weird that it feels like an oversight. It's like we're not supposed to be able to access those options at all. A lot of people are explaining it by saying PIP mode lowers engagement so they hide it. But then why have that as a built in feature at all?

Me too except my first phone is the only one where I had to replace the battery. My 5 year old phone still lasts the whole day without going through any of this rigmarole. It's mostly superstition and the parts that aren't are such a wash that they aren't worth worrying about. Just look at these people trying to reach an agreement on whether you should stop charging at 80% or not. Your gadgets should work for you not the other way around.

I see wine as being pretty much obsolete so I'm interested too in finding out what people are using wine for at this point.

On the article, the "side-eyed-moon" doesn't look like a side eyed moon to me. It looks like a normal smiley face.

A lot of them are probably the same companies. Brands seen online such as xkgjd and hjafskdj are not meant to last.

Dissapointing that they didn't bother getting flash to run. I stopped reading when it settled into a pattern of "I opened this page and it didn't work. Then I opened this page and it didn't work either." Of course it didn't! What is the point?

The title of this is a good example of a garden path sentence.

Never heard "ShareAlike" either, and it sounds like a proprietary file sharing feature for phones or something. I just say open source and everyone has always known what I meant.

You have it backwards. The Reddit thing is in the real world and the night club is just in your imagination.

Back in my day websites didn't have loading screens. Now that computers are way faster they somehow do.

I can't stand this. When I have data entered into an app like that, it kind of feels like handling a live bomb. God forbid you palm the edge of the screen or fumble your phone.

Most people in my family older than me used to be fine with computers. They're much harder to use and more confusing these days.

The internet was a hell of a lot less regulated in 2008 than it was in 2016

The slide rule cartel is using our site to push it's propaganda

I hope I never find myself popping out of trap doors to defend the status quo like they are.

They're never here to give a voice to people who don't have one, or to make us look at the material in any different way besides complete dismissal. You call them Intelligensia but I call them people who suck all the oxygen out of the room.

I seriously doubt they "can't find workers." I have a friend who works at a rural Tim Hortons and he described to me the massive stack of applications he spotted as "thicker than the phone book. Like two new packs of printer paper." Despite multiple interviews per week nobody gets hired. They've been on a skeleton crew since last summer. I think it's a total crock that they can't find anyone. More like they can't find anyone good enough, and good enough means willing/able to do 4x more work than anybody with the same job had to do previously. I want to start my own million dollar paranormal challenge, but it's for anyone who can prove a non striking non startup company has suffered due to not being able to find workers. I don't think it's happened a single time since 9/11.

I've been around family lately which means I've been hearing FM radio and seeing TV news. The twitter story was being run nonstop for my entire last visit so at one point I asked everyone if they used twitter or knew anybody who uses twitter and the answer was no from everybody. Everyone knew instagram users and tiktok users but no twitter. I myself use twitter sometimes but it's just when I get linked to tweets, I don't actually use twitter for the sake of using twitter. It's really strange to me that it's given so much more legitimacy than other social media sites when hardly anyone is using it.

I'm pretty sure they do this because sometimes google returns the right sites seemingly by complete accident. Have you ever submitted a search, and there's a result for the right site, but it's to an irrelevant subdomain or archive section? Sometimes google gets me into parts of a website that users aren't supposed to be able to navigate to. Google has exposed weird personal files to me that were stored on commercial web sites multiple times, yet it couldn't return the actual intended entry point for those exact same websites. I have no choice but to assume malice over stupidity here.

No matter how much the internet gets "sanitized" or "civilized" it's embedded in my DNA to never trust any online ad. The first thing my brain does on a new page/screen is separate the real parts from the junk, and I don't even perceive the junk anymore. It's become an instinct that causes me to skip or miss sections in text books because if they get cute with the formatting it can trigger the same reflexes. If I were to break this habit completely (not that I want to) I don't think I have it in me to ever believe a product or company in an online ad is even real, let alone legitimate. That's just how I see online ads. I don't trust any ads but if it's on TV or a billboard I at least believe it's a real if scum sucking company.

The algorithms haven't been over those specific subjects enough to "refine" them to modern "standards" and it's only a matter of time before enough people search 3 way solenoid valve to get it connected to the forever growing mountain of useless search terms. It's actively decaying.