go $fsck yourself @ gofsckyourself @lemmy.world

My username is a wordplay on the Linux command filesystem check: [fsck](htt

---

Read more

Posts

14

Comments

1,232

Joined

1 yr. ago

Well, it states "total color blindness" so, effectively none.

My point is that when you have "total color blindness" it simply means you cannot effectively discern the difference of of color. That does not mean "black and white."

For example, everyone has a blind spot in their eye where the optic nerve passes through the retina. This area has no photoreceptor cells, so there is a spot in each eye that cannot see. When you look through one eye and close the other, do you see a black void spot? Is it a blank white area? No. It's just... nothing.

"Total color blindness" does not mean "sees only in black and white"

Edit -
The reason I say this is that the phrase "only sees in black & white" in the title could easily be taken literally, making it sound like a simple black-and-white picture. While it's the most common and helpful analogy, colorblindness is more nuanced than that. I suggest a slight change in the title to offer more clarity:

TIL that due to a genetic bottle neck, 10% of the population of the pacific atoll of Pingelap has achromatopsia, i.e. total color blindness, like seeing in "black & white"

_{Rant about people's reactions in this comment thread}
::: spoiler spoiler This concept is clearly difficult to convey, I get that. However, I am disappointed that some reactions focused on criticism of my articulation rather than seeking clarification or offering alternative explanations. I tried an analogy using NULL to illustrate the conceptual difference, but that was also met with criticism focused on its imperfections rather than the concept I was trying to convey.

I have a range of close, personal experiences with colorblind people, and the conversation of colorblindness has come up frequently. I have also confirmed my understanding of the deeper nuances with optometrists and a neuro-ophthalmologist. My intention was simply to share my information, which I believed was the purpose of this community. It is disheartening to feel that my attempts to communicate were met with such negativity. :::

I noted that this was something added automatically by Ghost, the blogging platform the website is hosted on.

However, ultimately there is no good way to discern if a link like that is not an affiliate link or a non-anonymous tracking link, particularly for the average user. Particularly when the link does not include nofollow on the anchor tag.

You'll be fine to move them to Cloudflare.

What the other user is describing would be an extremely rare scenario, and you should be able to change registrars in that case anyway.

There's really not much of any practical benefits of that kind of excessive "risk mitigation".

Yeah, I think the title is just bait to get more clicks. Leveraging legitimate fear for what Trump's administration is doing to garner more clicks is pretty scummy.

It's also ironic that the premise they are playing on to write this article is anti-trump, but then they go on to list Protonmail even though the CEO has been kicking Trump's boots.

Edit - Oh, look at that... a referral link to Proton.

They also use GoDaddy for their domain registrar. No one who runs a website and uses GoDaddy should be trusted to provide any reliable advice on anything tech related.

Okay. What the fuck?

*Again - no affiliate links. You can count on that, for every post on this blog. I don't profit from you as a reader in any way beyond your direct support, if you so choose.

Then what the fuck is this?

Edit again - Apparently their site is a Ghost blog, which has a feature that adds that referral parameter automatically. It's called "outbound link tagging". At least it was not intentional, but it does show more evidence that this person should not be relied on for good information.

I find their website so awful and painful to use. Everything is difficult to find and just takes longer to accomplish than nearly anywhere else. I bought one domain from them once and will never use them again.

I'm not sure what the consequences are for ignoring it, but it would violate the ICANN RAA to lock a person out of being able to transfer their domain except for legal reasons like evidence of fraud or a court order. Sure, they can terminate your account on their services but they can't prevent you from transferral without violating their agreement with ICANN.

It would be a weird scenario that you're describing that would be unusual and exceedingly rare. You would need to be directly connected to something highly illegal for that to happen, not just a normal user.

I was 100% thinking of Ed when I typed that

Left out buttered toast. Can also add jam or cinnamon sugar.

If it's a funeral, then someone already checked.

Definitely don't bring a torch into a movie theater. You'll set off all the fire extinguishers and get kicked out.

Summary for those who can't watch at the moment?

Yeah. It's weird to identify so much with something and not liking it quite vehemently...

Sure, if you'd like. I'm just waiting patiently for now.

I have not gotten any response.

It would look like this

You mean """The Deep State""" right? ...right?

I did see that, but I don't use matrix.

They started harassing me using sjw accounts

What is the best way to contact them? I don't see anything about that on the sidebar.