bshacklett

I don't see that as malicious. Is my consent record "strictly necessary"? No. Don’t get me wrong. I’m sure they love that, but if sites saved that preference when only necessary was selected, I’m sure a bunch of people would be screaming that they weren’t following the law.

Please tell me they didn’t break something crucial to my workflow. The containers extension has been languishing for years now. The fact that the first new thing I hear about the feature is in a blog post does not bode well.

YouTube shorts is the worst. I want nothing to do with them, but I consume a lot of longform content on YouTube. On a regular basis, I find myself scrolling through shorts without even realizing it. i’ve tried all sorts of things to hide them, but from what I’ve seen it’s impossible.

I don't understand how people are angered by this. I understand that it may be difficult to plan, but in the end, we're getting more without being charged. No-one's forcing folks to use up credits. Take it for the bonus it is.

Point to another source that does it as well or better. The problems might have been solved, but it seems the majority of the industry continues to ignore them.

That said, I’ve been using Niri with Noctalia for months now, and I’m continuously delighted by the lack of astonishing behavior.

Truly. The number of times I’ve been surprised by something on newer macOS versions and thought: “I think this used to go against the human interface guidelines” is crazy. IMO: the first major sign of the downfall was when stealing focus on OS X became common.

Jobs had no problem calling BS on annoying behavior. Unfortunately we’ve completely lost that, and Apple is no longer the bastion of usability that it once was.

Then Sony should never have offered these assets for sale, because they never had the right to sell them!

If they use anything that can be classified as a "digital lock" to enforce the policy, section 1201 of the DMCA comes into play. That includes potential criminal liability, resulting in fines and/or jail time as described by section 1204.

Hopefully Anthropic's legal team will force an answer to that question shortly.

This is one of the most wholesome and awesome things I've seen in a while. Thanks for sharing!

From dictionary.cambridge.org: a dishonest plan for making money or getting an advantage, especially one that involves tricking people:

I can easily see a social media company demanding an ID falling under this definition if the accuser believes that the actual use of said ID will be different or more expansive than implied. That is not an unreasonable assumption, IMO.

There’s a lot of pain and anger in this reply. I’m sorry you have had to experience whatever has led you here.

And yet, at the end of the day, I always sleep better knowing that I put the effort in to be a good person, even if it didn’t work out the way I’d hoped.

I get the cynicism; it’s easy to feel like the world is just full of uncaring people sometimes. But, does adding one more help?

We’re in dire need of this right now. The number of people that I work with who refuse to pick up new tools and technologies is astounding. If they _do_ try something new, they seem to avoid all but the most basic knowledge of whatever it is, and look at me crosseyed if I suggest going the slightest bit deeper (`git add -p` rather than `git add .`, for example).