quickenparalysespunk @ quickenparalysespunk @lemmy.dbzer0.com

Posts

4

Comments

88

Joined

6 mo. ago

vehemently agree!

i agree with wanting see more of tab title. for people who regularly keep 50+ tabs open, that is a pipe dream.

if tabs are so many that their iconized anyway, making the tab bar vertical and iconized isn't much difference.

and if the bar would expand on hover (hopefully in near future), like in Brave (not sure if it's a Chrome feature), then it can be wide enough to see plenty of title without reducing the webpage size most of the time.

this is the most balanced policy.

I'm not sure why it seems no one else is recommending this type of backup-for-rainy-day strategy.

I've been trying ironfox but it crashes when i tap "customize homepage"

have you experienced this?

i would not consider buying this much honey, personally, but i really appreciate your comment. it is so informative.

thank you! (sincere)

most beeluable player?

here we go again......

Viva C*****!

don't know about other countries, but in US and Japan, garlic is not traditionally mentioned as a winter/immunity support food.

a more likely recommendation is oranges or citrus in general, for vitamin C.

either way, humans usually survive common colds and regular influenza (in rich countries at least), so why wouldn't vampires survive it?

by moving to a different employer, i guess.

did you mean by betraying coworkers? maybe some people like that idea. I'm strongly against it.

either way, i would avoid such a company.

afaik "lockdown mode" shortcut is a basic feature in android. it quickly disables fingerprint/face/etc unlock, temporarily.

it should still be present in some form in most versions of android since several years ago.

if you can't find it in your power button long press menu, check the Lineage documentation.

btw powering off the device should also force password/pin unlock on the next boot.

seems like companies who know what proton is, would have no problem with it. some of their people would use it themselves.

companies who never heard of it wouldn't have any bad impression about it.

if they never heard about it but are wary/scared of everything they never heard of, might not be safe to work there. that's the kind of place that would test their workers' loyalty randomly, and not reciprocate any loyalty they receive.

it can happen. especially in California, because they have the population size to motivate health providers and pharma companies to negotiate.

it's not likely in the short term with the way the system is. and the problem which prevents it is not the economics nor legislative lack of will.

it's the insurance companies' lobbying and political campaign contributions. many many California legislators' campaigns are funded by insurance companies. and historically there has been a lot of corruption in the state's insurance regulator agency.

also the state's population , for some reason, are easily swayed by political ads in certain issues. like the car-share/delivery gig drivers proposition. i think they flip flopped in successive referendums. apologies if in wrong in that.

the law is not banning all sex for <18. Notice how its <18 AND age difference.

same age pair , no matter how young, would not face any criminal charges. (one set of parents might file a lawsuit against the other parents, but that could happen at any age)

it was difficult writing it too...

under 18 + 3 year age gap + sex = statutory rape in many US States and many countries