Sorry, I didn’t mean to cause offence at all, I just assumed that in a poly relationships the boundaries were open for negotiation, and that like you say open communication would be key. I didn’t know he went behind her back, I know nothing about this story other than what I read on this thread.

I get that in a conventional relationship, leaving someone for their best friend or their sibling would be a particularly heinous betrayal, but didn’t assume that that would be the same for someone in a poly relationship. I didn’t mean to offend anyone by asking and I apologise for any and all offence caused.

If he’s poly and and she’s poly and everyone knew everything, is it still awful of him to have sex with her sister? Seems like it’s OK if it’s OK with everyone, even if other people find it gross?

I misread that as “Where are the leftist Pope fans at?” and thought Europe, but then I realised my mistake.

If only I were able to click some sort of link to be able to meet with hot Catholics in my area. Oh well.

Thank you. Where can I find the wiki?

Edit: Wired says

DuckDuckGo Created a Privacy Exception for Microsoft Cybersecurity and privacy researcher Zach Edwards discovered a glaring hole in the privacy protections of DuckDuckGo’s purportedly privacy-focused browser: By examining the browser’s data flows on Facebook-owned website Workplace.com, Edwards found that the site’s Microsoft-placed tracking scripts continued to communicate back to Microsoft-owned domains like Bing and LinkedIn. DuckDuckGo CEO Gabriel Weinberg responded to Edwards on Twitter, admitting that “our search syndication agreement prevents us from stopping Microsoft-owned scripts from loading”—essentially admitting that a partnership deal DuckDuckGo struck with Microsoft includes creating a carveout that lets Microsoft track users of its browsers. Weinberg added that DuckDuckGo is “working to change that.” (A company spokesperson reiterated in an email to WIRED Weinberg’s assertion that none of this applies to DuckDuckGo search, adding that both its search and its browser offer more privacy protections than the competition.) In the meantime, the revelation blew a glaring hole of its own in the company’s reputation as a rare privacy-preserving tech firm. Turns out this surveillance capitalism thing is pretty hard to escape.

If you’re looking for a never true anticedent reason that “some content and ads you see may not be as relevant to you” is vacuous, that would work if they had an ad browser that was 100% effective on the site in question.

If you’re looking for a never true anticedent for “If trackers are disabled, some content and ads you see may not be as relevant to you.”, it’s that you can’t disable all trackers with a cookie dialog because of the “necessary cookies” blanket exemption, the too many tick boxes to use “legitimate interest” loophole, and that most websites use “fingerprinting”, meaning they reference you not by your cookies but by the worryingly extensive information they get automatically about your browser’s version, settings, capabilities and features, and of course IP address. So it’s never true that trackers are never disabled.

What the Wikipedia article doesn’t explain well in my view, is that logically, “if A then B” means “B or not A” for short, or more explicitly, “in all circumstances, at least one of B, or (not A) , is true”. This is vacuously (emptily) true if B is always true or A is always false, because it’s not genuinely conditional at all.

So I suspect that they meant it was vacuous, not on the grounds that the anticedent could never be true, but that the consequent could never be false. Like “If you give me $10, the sun will rise tomorrow”. In this case, all they need to assert is that “some content and ads you see may not be as relevant to you” is true irrespective of whether trackers are disabled, which is almost certainly what they meant.

I’m curious that the Wikipedia article says the base case in an induction is often vacuously true, but I think they mean trivially true, like cos(1x) + sin(1x) = (cos x + sin x)^1, not vacuously true. I couldn’t think of any induction proofs where the base case was literally vacuous except false ones used for teaching purposes, probably because I could only think of induction proofs of absolute rather than conditional ones. Probably there are mathematical fields where induction is used for conditional statements a lot that I’m forgetting.

You have a total of four choices:

1a. Wipe all their cookies every time, reject them every time they ask.
1b. Wipe all their cookies every time, accept them every time they ask. 2a. Don’t wipe cookies, keep the “essential” ones. 2b. Don’t wipe cookies, accept all our most of them.

2b is the only scenario where you might not get asked again. 1b is the easiest no thanks.

I use the duck duck go browser because it makes that the default and offers to whitelist sites for cookies if you log into them (but you can turn that off in settings). It also autorejects a lot of cookies that use common popups.

Looks like somebody scored!

I take that as a compelling recommendation for Signal.

Despite the fixes, theft claims for the affected Hyundai and Kia models continue to exceed industry norms, including for vehicles equipped with the upgraded software, according to HLDI. One reason could be that the software-based immobilizer only activates if the driver remembers to lock the vehicle with a fob, while many people are in the habit of using the switch on the door handle.

If ever there were a problem that is ripe for fixing with the first version of the software upgrade, not a future one, this was it.

We’ve all had nights like that.

Personally, I tend to buy something one to three years old so that it’s already dropped 10k off the new price, then run it for ten years or so until it starts getting unreliable then move on to the next one. It then costs me about 3k to 4k a year to have a car with no problems at all. I honestly don’t know when my electric car will start to get unreliable, but I’m not going back to noisy, smelly and slow ever, I’m sticking with quiet, clean and fast and never using a petrol station again in my life. My partner was a bit more sceptical at first but has very much come round and in a few years we’ll be a two EV household.

Not agreeing with them, but I can tell they’re talking about staying together “for the kids”.

Yes. The person I was replying to thought it was somehow bad for the battery to outlast the car. I was making the point that that’s fine. In response to your point about the cost of an engine, I should say that batteries are a far bigger part of the cost of an electric car - it’s really just not very complicated apart from that - very few moving parts indeed compared to a combustion engine. That’s why the car companies aren’t very keen - unless they make their own batteries, they’re not adding as much value when they manufacture them. They prefer to push the hybrids which have the complexity of both and a lot less battery capacity (but very much don’t have the advantages of both for the driver).

Well the original model Nissan Leaf has been available in the UK since about early 2011, which is more like 13.5 years than 11, and I did a quick search for the 2017 Nissan LEAF on more than 100k miles on autotrader and only one of them had lost any battery capacity at all, and it had over 90%. Another one had 120k miles on the clock and was still at 100% battery capacity. You can mistreat a car and it won’t last as long, yes, but it really is the older model that has the common battery problems. The new ones don’t. And there are brands that have much better battery care than the Leafs, with active cooling etc.

You see, the reason we know they’re lasting longer is, you know, science and math, where they measure stuff and do the sums, and given that the old type of battery declined a lot in the first 8 years and the new type isn’t declining, then all you’ve got left on your hands at the end is just an awful lot of FUD about battery life peddled by an awful lot of people who don’t actually know.

When did you last lose a car to engine failure? Electronics, gears, suspension, stuff like that, but not the engine. They have to over engineer the battery because the earlier popular electric cars had bad batteries and they have to over-compensate. Hence today’s batteries.

Battery replacement after ten years is for very old EVs shrub much shorter range. The old model Nissan Leaf is what makes these stories. More recent cars have already outlasted the usage that the old pretty bad ones had by a significant amount. Your criticism is like saying you don’t want a mobile phone because the buttons are so fiddly.

I think you’re talking about batteries from nearly 15 years ago, which did degrade significantly with age and/or use. There has been a significant and noticeable improvement since then. The person you were taking to did say today’s batteries.

I feel like you missed the point. The point is that you probably want to stop every few hours anyway so there’s not a lot of point getting a PHEV. You’re buying two engines for the price of two, with the maintenance costs of a gas engine (higher) and extra weight. It’s just fear that gets people to buy PHEV. There’s hardly any mpg benefit over a gas car in real world usage, and there’s hardly any of the lively acceleration of a proper EV. No fun, no cost savings, just all initial expense. Get an EV or stick with your old gas car, PHEV is absolutely not the best of both.

May your upvotes be many, your memes evergreen, your code inspired and your bugs few, easy to find and to fix. May your managers be sane, rational, realistic and fair. And may your preferred team win when you really want them to. Unless they’re playing mine, of course, in which case you’re on your own, buddy.