You would think, but the number of people I've met who surf the web without any adblockers at all and just seem fine with it is alarming. I think Google is counting on a lot of people just not knowing any better.
Won't stop me from informing them otherwise though.
Played the Beta, thought it was... good. Better than 3 in some ways, but not up to that oppressive, almost claustrophobic ambiance in D1 that made it so damn good. That said, I loved rolling around as a Shaman Werewolf tanking everything. Was it the most effective? Nope, but I tanked Butcher twice and the World Boss and survived. Felt great.
Haven't played the game proper on release though. Got drawn into other things actually. Am looking forward to it.
Diablo III. First time I played it was at the urging of my friend, who told me unironically, "don't worry about the plot, the plot doesn't matter." Unsurprisingly my experience wasn't particularly engaging and I lost interest, not seeing much reason to play it over any number of other games that didn't have an always-online requirement.
Flash forward several years later. My then-girlfriend (now spouse) asked me if I'd ever played a Diablo game, and I related my experience. After she was done sputtering and emitting various noises of extreme outrage she insisted that I set things up so we could play through Diablo 1, 2, and then 3 together. I went in to D1 expecting to be similarly disappointed and instead found an incredibly dark, atmospheric, and compelling story. Oh and we did get The Butcher so I also shat myself. After that I was way hyped for 2, and by the time we hit 3 I was far more interested in playing. Loved the hell out of it, found myself not only enjoying the game but completing through the last stages of a season journey to score extra stash space and all that. Not out of obligation either, I was legitimately enjoying the grind.
if it’s not a thing now could it become a thing a decade from now?
Nope. "MAPS" is in the same vein as "attack helicopter" and "bathroom rapists": it's just another attempt by bigots to invent some "evidence" that the LGBTQ+ community is actually deluded/dangerous/evil/etc.
There was a post yesterday saying that the price of YT Premium Family in Australia is almost literally doubling next month (+88% IIRC). People from a few other regions reported similar. Completely insane.
I commented elsewhere, but the headline was referencing an 80% rise in uninstalls during the month, but the article itself revealed that there was a matching rise in installs during that same month. In other words it was people uninstalling their old adblockers and installing a new one, cycling through them to find one that worked.
The content creators get paid the exact same whether I skip the sponsor segment or not. YouTube doesn't track that, or not in a way they share with anyone else at any rate. Sponsors aren't going to pay the content creators less due to skips since they literally cannot see who skips the segment.
In other words, it doesn't hurt the content creator in the slightest.
Sponsors don't pay the creator less if you skip the sponsor segment. That's not tracked, at least not in a way that google will share with the creator or anyone else. If that changes someday, sure, you have a point. For now skipping the sponsor segment is as harmless as skipping through the commercials on TV.
That article was full of such blatantly misleading crap. Headline talks about record number of adblocker uninstalls, but the actual data says it was an uptick in both installs and uninstalls. In other words it was people cycling through different adblockers trying to find one that still worked.
Cheaper bulbs, definitely. I had a corner display cabinet I tried to switch over to using an LED bulb; the compartment for the bulb was nearly sealed and also lined with reflective materials, so the exterior got hotter to the touch than it ever did with an incandescent bulb. Damn thing started flickering and malfunctioning a few months in. Tried another LED bulb and the same thing happened only on a slightly longer time frame. Finally just gave up and went back to an incandescent bulb.
That's Bing now. Bing back in the day was bad. Not Yahoo bad, but still bad.
Separate of that though, Yahoo search is just bad so I do believe this. There are other viable options and were a few back in 2017; Yahoo was not one of them.
Sorta-kinda: I have an old launch iPhone that I've held onto so I can use it as an overbuilt iPod Touch. No apps, no phone service, it just works for playing music and does it well. I don't use it super frequently, but every so often I just wanna play some music offline without having to worry about anything else, and it does a great job.
If I went out more not in the car I'd probably get another proper MP3/DAC player. Back in the day I had a Sansa Clip I bought as an impulse Black Friday purchase and that thing was absolute fire. Small, great battery life, showed up in Windows as a standard external storage device, even had an FM tuner built in. Only downside was that it only had 2gigs of storage, but that just made me be a bit more choosy with what I put on it. If the damn thing hadn't wound up going through the wash on accident I might still be using it to this day.
Put in another vote for Vivaldi. It's definitely lightweight. I've got an older server I keep around (for YAR HAR FIDDLE DEE-DEE purposes) and Vivaldi's the Chromium-based browser that works best on it.
That said, the default browser I use on that thing is Waterfox Classic. Vivaldi's lightweight, but it's not as light as that.
Another note: a few years ago I would've actually been able to recommend Edge because to my surprise it actually worked pretty damn well, especially if you were trying to get sites to get Windows-oriented web-apps to function correctly on Linux. Unfortunately they've since pushed several changes that have made it truly obnoxious. Big fat memory hog that tries to load "recommended" content in the background and won't stop sending to/receiving from sites even after you close the window/tab.
It's fair (from a personal taste standpoint) to say BBT isn't funny; it's not fair to say it's inaccurate. Damn if the higher sciences and a bunch of academia aren't rife with people like that.
Personally I find it amusing all the same, but I get why my Mother the PHD finds it mostly tedious.
Because this isn't just about "making anything in return" any more than neo-Nazis are booted from platforms "just for having different opinions." More people are using adblockers on YouTube because YouTube isn't simply displaying commercial advertisements, they're pushing "ads" for scams, malware, and all manner of heinous and/or sketchy content. Even separate of that, the frequency of ads and the presence of minutes-long ads you need to manually skip have made watching content difficult and unpleasant, if not unworkable. Adblocker usage is as much about restoring functionality to the site as anything.
All of these issues have been raised with YouTube, but rather than address the complaints by adjusting how ads are selected and served they've decided the only solution is for you to pay them monthly, not just a few bucks but as much as (or more than) the major video streaming services. All of this for content they do not make, at a price point far beyond what they need to be profitable. It's greed for the sake of greed, pure and simple.
yukichigai @ yukichigai @kbin.social Posts 7Comments 370Joined 2 yr. ago 
You would think, but the number of people I've met who surf the web without any adblockers at all and just seem fine with it is alarming. I think Google is counting on a lot of people just not knowing any better.
Won't stop me from informing them otherwise though.