Water doesn’t go on the food pyramid, silly!

Man, I don’t understand this sentiment at all. I don’t know what would be different from my setups, but KDE has always been rock solid for me. Back when I used it on Mandrake Linux and today.

OP, might you be an Arch user?

I did this over a decade ago and it’s still working. If I remember correctly I had to call to make it a permanent opt-out but it was totally worth it. My credit score was totally unaffected.

Essentially the same scenario with free credit reports and AnnualCreditReport.com. Just look up the instructions through ftc.gov whenever you’re unsure about something. I still follow the link to the credit report site from ftc.gov these days even though I remember the actual .com as well, just for good measure.

None of the points you make are wrong, it’s just a lot more uphill for hydrogen looking at the total picture. With almost every issue there is a way forward for hydrogen, but EVs are already significantly farther along the curve. It’s hard to overcome that kind of snowballing. Only time will tell!

It is great tech, but there are serious downsides too.

• storage and handling: Hydrogen is a tiny atom, so it leaks like nobody’s business. Even liquid hydrogen is terribly low-density which makes pretty much a hard limit on storage density, unlike battery tech which can at least hypothetically dramatically improve. Pressure vessels suck. They have to be crazy sturdy and roughly spherical which places major design limitations on vehicles that use them.
• distribution: EVs can limp by on sparse fast charging stations and home charging while better infrastructure builds out. Electrical supply is already ubiquitous. Who’s going to want a hydrogen vehicle (which you can absolutely already buy, nobody’s stopping you in the US at least) with so few fueling options? The upfront investment to bootstrap a market with hydrogen stations to the point of even competing with crappy EV charging is enormous.
• no onboard energy recovery: Regenerative braking is an incredible benefit on its own.
• industry synergy: EV manufacture benefits from tons of other industries investing in battery tech. The tide lifts all boats.

There are solutions as with any tech, but the transition picture with hydrogen is a lot lot worse than EVs. The least worst option tends to win.

Just plain old blue electrical arcs.

On the other hand, Cherenkov radiatiation is only indirectly related to criticality. It comes from any particle moving through a medium, generally water, faster than light travels through that medium. A luminous sonic boom of sorts! It’s associated with criticality because those are the contexts where it happens often enough to actually be visible.

Mercury-based diodes both look way cooler and are way less spooky than garden variety semicondictor diodes.

There’s no mention of anything like zero-days in that article. They only mention that it can target all major OSes, with no mention of cutting edge versions also being vulnerable.

Hilariously, the article directly supports my position as well:

The good news for some, at least: it likely poses a minimal threat to most people, considering the multi-million-dollar price tag and other requirements for developing a surveillance campaign using Sherlock

That’s a big part of my whole point. People who don’t do even a modicum of actual thought about a practical threat model for themselves love pretending that ad blocking isn’t primarily just about not wanting to see ads.

If Israel or some other highly capable attacker is coming after you, then fine, you really do need ad blocking. In that case malware in ads is going to be the least of your concerns.

Attacks that cast such a wide net as to be the concern of all web users are necessarily less dangerous because exploits need to be kept secret to avoid being patched.

There’s nothing wrong with taking extra precautions; I’m certainly not saying blocking ads is a bad idea. It’s the apparent confusion that an informed, tech-savvy person might choose not to block ads that makes me laugh.

Huh? The point of this discussion is that I don’t need to block them to keep myself safe in sketchy corners of the web.

You say with such confidence. Is it so hard to imagine people can defend themselves with means other than ad blocking?

Drive-by malware tends not to be zero-days though. I’ve stayed safe for decades just by keeping my software up to date.

Of course; I’m just a lot more worried about the systemic problems of mass surveillance than any practical risk to me individially.

The way people talk about people who don’t block ads is so funny.

I understand and respect the reasons people choose to use blockers, but ads honestly just aren’t that problematic for me in practice and are easy to avoid and ignore.

I adore Fossil as well. Having simple tools like a wiki and tickets built into each repo is rad.

Who’s barring cannabis users? Red Cross at least only has a problem if your decision-making appears impaired. They don’t even ask you to wait between smoking and donating as long as you’re thinking clearly enough.

As in the gore makes more sense in a game than a show, not that the games lack gore.

deleted by creator

Don’t give Java the credit of inventing bytecode, it’s a much cooler concept than that

Billions of years of ancestors!

That was before people had experienced consumerism. It doesn’t make sense to compare people existing without knowing of consumerist luxuries to asking people to give them up. Not saying it’s hopeless, but it is human nature. It’s animal nature. We’ve just moved ourselves into a world where those advantages have become disadvantages.