hexage1814

The problem with infinity scroll is the lack of "pagination", which essentialy make most of content to get hidden away. For instance. Let assume you have 3000 comments on a YouTube video, your browser will crash way before it "infinite scroll" to the end (I know that that are tools to bypass this, but I'm talking about the default experience).

The article is somewhat old, but the quality of the Medium code continues to be terrible. What made me think about this is how the front-end of Substack, which has stolen Medium's thunder, also looks terrible these days. It wasn't always like this. But these platforms always seem to follow this standardisation pattern.

>defendants made public statements taking credit for the fact that Facebook and Apple had removed the content

It feels if they were a slightly smarter and not had made an announcement that about such fact they would have gotten away with it hell, this probably happens all the time, but other administrations maybe were more discreet. Be that as it may, regardless of this decision, which can be appealed by the way, there is that saying: there is nothing more coward than money – and would argue power as well. A single discreet Trump meting with Tim Cook, and Trump saying "I would be really happy if you removed that app, and not tell anyone that I asked you for it", could have been enough.

It seems these sort decisions are fundamentally useless:

* It doesn't even force companies to reinstate such apps.

* It doesn't give any constitutional right for apps to be on the app stores.

* It doesn't force companies to allow people to install apps from whatever they want, which would be by far the best solution

Generally speaking, unless there was a sort of constitutional right of people submitting apps to app stores, I find it somewhat complicated, because the multibillion dollar corporation could always argue, "Oh, we didn't remove it because the government asked us to gain some favor with the current administration, but rather because it violated our user policy." Like, you can very, very, very easily hide behind a private corporation deciding to exercise its power to decide such an app violated their internal user policy.

Hell, even if there were a public register of Trump asking them to remove an app, you could always argue, "Well, anyone, regardless of them being president of the United States or not, is free to ask for an app to be removed; anyone could theoretically demand and protest anything, and Trump, as any citizen, has this right" (not saying I agree with that thesis, to be clear).

But I do believe the whole point highlights a bigger problem: a negative relation between big corporations and the government. I'm not sure how anyone would solve it. Maybe by sidelining the whole issue by making it easier for people to install apps from whatever the fuck they want, without the app stores gatekeeping what software one installs on their device.

But if anything, we are moving far away from that, even on Android

I think article sounds click bait or at the very least not representing the facts fairly. Also, debloating is not only about performance, but about you not seeing random crap, when open the star menu for instance, other similar anti-user features, like the new context menu that doesn't offer you the same functionality as the old.

What I would agree or say, is that if you debloat and update Windows, the update will most likely undo whatever you did, and well, that's part of the game. I usually solve this by disabling updates and deciding when I will update the system, so I'm prepared and have reserved time to re-apply the patches on that day.