At the moment they still get money from me. Don’t know how much longer though…

The audacity to direct you to a donations page after you fill out their survey 😂

With a house like this, the only logical choice of pet would be some kind of bird.

It probably isn’t. The webview grabs the title directly from github. Thanks

I see no title, its just a link with no context whatsoever.

You literally have no posts, and your account is 14 days old.

This is actually the very first non-clickbait title I have seen all week.

Are we really at that point, where people in here don’t even bother with a title for their lazy ass post anymore?

Too be fair, they are all evil.

Try this, if your TV can run it: https://smarttubeapp.github.io/ No ads, and there is even sponsor block included, so you don’t have to hear the annoying „segue to our sponsor“ and „please like and subscribe“ nonsense.

This seems like something you don’t want to use on a road with cars. Otherwise it looks neat!

Can we stop repeating clickbait titles from cancer tech magazines? If you post, then why not just give us the gist of the article? For instance here: what’s the feature, and why is it a concern that one might „fall in love“ with it?

It’s called sponsorblock, and there is no machine learning involved whatsoever. The data is crowdsourced.

Anyone else read that as „morphine spray-on gel…“?

They have an iPhone, so they are going to be fine.

I have no collection whatsoever. Everything that I watched gets deleted from the seedbox. A maximum of 900GB are stored on there at any given time. It’s cheap and no hassle to maintain.

Of course they are cheaper, thats why they put them everywhere instead of regular buttons.

Have you tried zotero? Might be the solution to a problem you didn’t even knew you had.

Yes it is. But your comment still doesn’t make sense until you add “per year”.

WattHours is a unit of work. If you say that bitcoin uses x amount of Wh it doesn’t say shit about how much it actually consumes. Because you don’t say in what amount of time Bitcoin uses said amount of work, you cannot compare it. I could state, that Bitcoin uses 5 Wh. Which would also be correct.

Its the same as saying, Bob eats 5 apples. Alice eats 2000 apples. Can you compare the two? No, because what I forgot to mention is, that Bon eats 5 apples a week and Alice eats 2000 apples in 3 years. Now i can compare the two.

Do you get my point?