Jimmycrackcrack

So abortions bad, but killing babies good?

I have often suspected that that's exactly what it is, there's even clues of a genetic basis. How such a force can somehow be responsive to specific language is hard to imagine but evidently it can.

Haven't quite watched them all yet but from the sizeable sample range that I have seen, A View to Kill would probably be the worst.

Die Another Day was one of the silliest in more recent years (If you can still call that recent) but the ludicrous plot and stupidity of it didn't detract from the enjoyment so I don't think it would deserve to be at the bottom. It wouldn't have occurred to me from watching it that it would be a popular candidate for worst Bond movie. I also really liked Brosnan as bond and probably because of my age, to me he is the archetypal bond with actors before and after being variations.

Also, even if it were that easy, it's kind of hard to expect someone to leave their home for the greater good. Looking at it from the perspective of society at large it makes logical sense and frames the empty nester as selfish, but when it comes down to the individuals it's kind of hard to blame them, it's their home and they love it and they chose it, why should they choose something else?

In general, large scale, difficult, costly changes done for social good are hard to get off the ground when they rely on large numbers of people choosing to make them and solely for the social good without any other natural motivations.

They were mentioned at least once

I had forgotten about this so evidently it has stopped, that said I have only ever used ublock origin and it was happening to me, with that on Firefox so I don't know about this theory that it's just that one particular adblocker.

I find it hard to let go of the idea that Google was doing this, but then again I suppose the fact that it isn't now would suggest they weren't behind it in the first place since the supposed motive for it was to push people to Chrome and if you just stopped doing this after like a month tops then it wouldn't be a particularly effective strategy.

I really feel very uncomfortable with the notion of tracking the kids anyway. Arming them with knowledge as best as possible, and as usual showing interest in their behaviour to try and look as best as possible for signs of problems but ultimately kids are still people with their own lives even if people in development. Yes you need to protect them, to a certain extent, but ultimately some of this is no business but their own. You can try to educate and forewarn and hope some of it sticks but the tendency from my memory of being a kid is that that tends to be met with an eye-roll, this is probably where the temptation comes from to track children or drastically restrict the choices they're able to make so they can't ignore you but this is hardly a great way for that person in development to ultimately... develop.

This is dicey though, not least because as yet another random person on the internet offering their unsolicited opinion, I don't even have kids, and if you follow my logic to extremis, you basically have, "let the kids just figure it out on their own they'll be fine" which definitely won't apply to everything and can have disastrous consequences in some contexts. But nevertheless I think this concept of tracking, either covertly, or overtly with the intention of making a kind of panopticon effect for the kids, is likely ineffective but even if effective, is indicative of something going wrong with the intent of the surveillance.

Well everyone knows you're supposed to give 110%

Yikes

The guy clearly isn't familiar with a lot of image formats and is trying to find out about them by asking, a perfectly reasonable thing to do, and in a special community called no stupid questions, no less.

You don't need to call anyone a gullible fool and furthermore you've not actually helped to answer the question "what is webp", at all. What are you trying to achieve with this pointless aggression? If you wanted one less "gullible fool" you'd have to answer the question and educate, at best you've sown confusion.

Out of curiosity, what is this original image?

How do those things work? When I first saw them come in to existence I was under the impression they were just front ends for navigating and playing media in your personal library and storage, like windows media centre used to be, but they seem to be something altogether a lot more capable and complicated. Where does the content come from? Is it streamed?