The author also maintains https://disable-javascript.org/, which the pop-up links to. And has the exact script + titles used.
> You may want to consider linking to this site, to educate any script-enabled users on how to disable JavaScript in some of the most commonly used browsers. The following code uses scare tactics to do so.
> When added to your website, it will change the icon and the title of your website's tab to some of the most unhinged things imaginable once the user sends your tab to the background. Upon re-activation, the script will display a popover to the user informing them about the joke and referring them to this initiative.
It's not clever when people use HN at work. It's a complete erosion of user trust and could legitimately get someone fired. You think HR wants to hear oh no it was an object lesson in not using javascript. That's why I was searching for nudes on the work computer when I shared my screen at that meeting, not realizing some moron had programmatically changed the tab name when I clicked off. This domain needs banned. It's not operating in good faith, or in touch with the reality of the damage it could be doing.
I swap back and forth between favorit movies. Every few days it may be Goodfellas. Some days it is The Room. But I always return to Kiki’s delivery service and Howls moving castle. Both are absolutely gorgeous and incredibly well told.
I also find myself quoting porco rosso a lot lately.
This a treasure trove of gorgeous lockscreen images. Very excited to put them into rotation.
A recent game, Eclipsium[0], was a short horror game with a similar esthetic. I really liked it for the simple gameplay and the short (less than 4 hours) completion time.
This is completely unspoken by most of the youtube channels that are making videos about this. The reason they are worried is not because of the algorithm or vanity. Especially for channels like LTT it is economical. They get the vast majority of their money from getting a lot of views.
The interesting thing here is that since youtube did not change anything, it is actually adblockers successfully making sponsored content less viable. Something youtube has been trying to, at least on premium ([ytp]), where I get a little "Jump ahead" button on all platforms when sponcon is detected (in aggregate people skipping forward, it also does it for intros and similar).
I wonder if it will have a measurable impact on placement in the algorithm for channels like RLM that are seeing the drop. But rely on crowdfunding and youtube ads.
A huge % of that overall revenue figure is their e-commerce business which will be relatively low margin. They are making roughly double in sponsored videos and sponsored projects than with adsense.
It makese sense that some of that sponsor revenue is tied to youtube viewcounts.
If sponsored projects and in-video sponsor spots dried up because of low view count I feel like a +20% loss would be something they would feel on their bottomline?
I suspect their business still requires that revenue.
But my example could be better. Take any moderately sized youtube channel which has a sponsorship in each video. Maybe one of the gaming channels that figured this out? If they lose the sponsorships it would probably not be great for them.
I share my .emacs with people who ask. Not really for privacy, but because I would feel bad: If someone tried to use any of it and was not able to ask me what I was thinking.
The usual answer is that I was not and we should change it.
I would also have to distribute a couple of novel go programs that I am not proud of if I was sharing it publicly.
And I do not want my search experience and product I pay for be dictated by US foreign policy and relations in a given time. Why should a search engine company get involved in international relationship affairs?
I’m not making some political argument here, I’m saying “boycott Russia due to its war of aggression against a neighbor” isn’t buying into “US foreign policy.” There are direct moral and ethical implications totally aside from any policy ones.
Make whatever moral calculus you want, just don’t play the goofball contrarian stuff and act like that’s derived from some high and mighty “I am independent from US foreign policy” lol
I do it on mandates of my home country is being invaded. It is not particularly about the US here.
Apart from that,
It should be socially unacceptable to come and grab part of the other country because "you want to".
By not boycotting, for me it feels at least like "one doesnt care", the worst "one socially accepts it".
As well as you can socially accept dark patterns on the web - they make money, customers pay - that's fine maybe?
Successful companies have a say in what is ethically acceptable. Same with green energy and other things that don't bring money short term but defend the better world we want to live in.
> and you do not boycott any companies in any other countries conducting wars
Perfect is the enemy of the good. Feeding one hungry person is good. It doesn't make one a hypocrite if one doesn't feed them all. (The person yelling about the one doing good being a hypocrite, on the other hand, is less clearly uncontemptible.)
I’m not happy about Kagi integrating Yandex. But I’m not going to drop them over it. That’s a personal tradeoff I’m willing to make, though I readily admit it’s trading access to a great product for participating in something evil.
I thought it was clever. But it also seems ham-fisted, and in poor taste.
reply