So their cynical move is to send more traffic to reddit at the same time reddit’s quality has gone down the toilet. Sounds like Google alright.

Cybersecurity is expensive and doesn’t contribute directly to profits. It can prevent serious damages (legal, financial, and reputation) but that requires long-term thinking. Most executives don’t look past quarterly earnings.

I’m sort of the opposite. I liked Joplin but found myself needing the features of Obsidian. I do know what you mean about Obsidian getting in the way. While it’s easy to start using it, there is a bit of a learning curve to using it well. And it can be a little quirky-annoying at times.

I think that’s one reason there are so many software offerings in this space. There’s a wide range of preferences when it comes to features vs simplicity.

For me, Obsidian is just about perfect without any extensions, but I’m also glad it is extensible if you need them. The configurability and customization, while using standard markup, and keeping the vault storage sizes small were the major pros for me.

Some other products I’ve tried in this space were just too much for me. Huge save files, overdone UXs, and proprietary formats. Joplin and Obsidian were both a breath of fresh air when I found them.

I hope you are right about this moving forward. My experience so far has been the same as yours (re: the arms race, uBlock working well). My understanding is Google is being super aggressive about this and they are not dumb, they know about uBlock, Pi Hole, and other ad blockers that people use. They want to make it impossible to use them by basically profiling your browser and its extensions. However, that could just kick off a variation on the arms race. A lot of things about their attitude makes me angry, but they are just ignoring the fact that advertisements are a vector for malware and don’t really care if they help spread malware as long as they are getting that sweet revenue.

Dumb question, will it be possible to create a browser that will trick the shitty new web into thinking you’re using an approved non-ad-blocking-browser while you still block the malware/ads?

I know this sounds like an internet edgelord, but it’s like they want us to build the guillotines.

It almost looks like the art style is doing a reverse Garfield. It’s bizarre and hard to look at.

Thanks for the history, I am not surprised it evolved like that. Reminds me of Agile. It was a great concept that morphed into ‘micromanagement with extra steps’ in many shops.

This is a common excuse for a lot of box checking nonsense and we both know it.

I use more than one computer, it’s more like 8 times a month for me.

Right, but if I take your perfectly reasonable and mature position then I can’t prove to the web how edgy and superior I am!

Thanks.

Thanks. A helpful response instead of a smarmy one. Refreshing.

I have stopped using Brave. Fuck those guys.

I just wish Firefox would update less frequently. It’s way too often.

“Disagree and commit” = do what I say or quit. Worker exploitation has many douchey buzz phrases.

Is there a date range on the bad ones? I own 3 different 2TB extreme portables (around 4-5 years old) and have had zero issues with them. They are not the model specified tho (i.e, they are not SDSSDE81-2T00).

Yup, illegal does not mean immoral or unethical. It just means some rich or powerful person doesn’t like what you’re doing. There’s a lot of overlap, of course. Many illegal acts are also immoral or unethical. But it’s not a 100% overlapping Venn diagram. Also YT is kind of evil, so it’s piracy against an evil corporation as much as the content creator. The smarter content creators have sponsors and embedded ads and don’t rely on YT for anything.

You keep making this about ego or me trying to “sound smart” and it’s utterly exhausting because I’m trying to encourage others, not prop up myself. It’s simply not about my ego or self-esteem (no matter how badly you want that straw man to stand up). My entire point is that people should trust their instincts more than they do. And no, I’m not absolving him of any crimes by doing this (that’s more straw man).

Since you insist on projection, I’m going to indulge in some here. It sounds like you just want to engage in a virtue competition here, and you’re reading a lot of consequences and implications into what I said that, in my view, are simply not there. It’s not that I think everything you’re saying is wrong. It’s not. It’s just so twisted out of context and I have to ask myself why. Is Pixel arguing in bad faith in order to do what Pixel is accusing me of? Which is to look smart (or virtuous) on the internet? I don’t know, but the optics are pretty bad at this point.

Evidence is better than instinct, no argument there. But you don’t always have access to evidence, and ignoring your instincts to jump on a fan bandwagon is ill advised.

This reads like it was AI generated.