Did same thing, not everything works, but there are (almost) no ads for me.
I would add Smarttube with Sponsorblock extension for android TV to the list. They had hickup recently with melitious hack and malware in their code but now seems to recovered.
And for all ads-trolls: "Oh, you are stealing income from creators." If I consider their work worth it I pay them (semi)directly.
Thats why I singed out from ads everywhere I could. Adblocking everywhere it's possible, no legacy radio or tv - only add-free subscriptions or free alternatives, alt-apps for youtube, no social-media like f...book, twitter or (Thor forbid) tictok. I always reject any discounts, special offers when it require to agree to "marketing cominication". I block all robocalls and if any pass throu I chase down the company behind it and file complain to authorities (in my country it's illegal to contact anyone without him/her agree for it).
Not everything works of course and only ads I cannot block are OOH like billboards.
I support creators directly where it's worth and pay or donate for all sites/services/apps I use frequently (if applicable).
I asked it to count letters in his answer. First it asked me what answer, then suggested Python code that will count letter in gpt api reply, then gave wrong answer, then dropped my connection. Wonderfull product. AGI is so near, you u can almost smell it...
On top of all this you can't access your account without accepting new ToS. After login web page show full window modal form with one button "confirm" so you can't reject it. I'm sure most of HN readers can handle this minor obstacle ;-)
After I asked vultr for access to my account without acceptance of new ToS they wrote me back legal slur suggesting I may host questionable content:
>(...) you take the necessary measures to protect minors from accessing harmful material on your website.
>(...) requirements apply to you, including removing any infringing content and safeguarding minors.
I have "type 1" diabetes for 27 years. I hear similar stories like this (revolutionary cure working on animal models) every year or two. Until now non of them worked. I hope this one will be beeter but my expectations are quite low.
AFAIK there hasn't really been a clear link between roundup and certain rare blood cancers. Just a correlation between them in certain geographical areas. Some studies have found the correlation and others haven't. I believe even the doctors who treat these diseases know this to be true.
Though, it would be really easy to write a book citing only the evidence in support of the link. At this point I'm not sure what to believe, but I have no need for roundup so I avoid its use.
As a counterpoint, here's a relevant part of an interview with the lawyer who won 2 billion dollars in damages from Monsanto addressing skeptics of the trial: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gw5H36B1tJE&t=2842s
No, I watched it, I'm a little surprised that one imprecise statement is compelling to you regarding a matter of scientific facts. I mean rather than taking it second hand from a lawyer that an unknown portion or a jury were 'scientists', you could actually take it from scientists and advisory and investigatory bodies comprised of scientists the cite specific sources.
I suppose it's my Bayesian priors coming to light - I'm so distrustful of one side of this debate in general that simply having 'science' in a website title gives me a reaction similar to a lot of people who see 'truth' or 'infowards' in a headline. I'd probably be much more receptive to the same studies if you were linking to google scholar or scihub.
You had just been linked scientific sources in the parent of the comment I replied to right? And your counterpoint was that a lawyer said 'scientists' were on the jury.
I disagree. If science means anything it means the same to a trained professional as a literate layperson.
The idea that twelve ordinarily competent people sequestered and doing nothing but studying the science for months would be more likely to come to the wrong conclusion than people whose careers depend on a specific outcome is not science. If science is an impenetrable language available only to a designated elite, then it's just religion with weirder cosmology.
"Glyphosate is one of the least toxic herbicides used. It inhibits the enzyme 5-enolpyruvylshikimic acid-3-phosphate synthase which interferes with the shikimic pathway in plants, resulting in the accumulation of shikimic acid in plant tissues and ultimately plant death. The enzyme and pathway do not exist in animals, which is why toxicity is so low."
"The shikimate pathway (shikimic acid pathway) is a seven-step metabolic pathway used by bacteria, archaea, fungi, algae, some protozoans, and plants for the biosynthesis of folates and aromatic amino acids ..."
Even if there is no biaccumulation of glyphosphate in animals (maybe), can we be sure that there are no negative effects on digestive systems of humans (and wild animals)? What about water and soil biomes?
As all business focused companies, Google and its shareholders cares only for money. If they only could, they would sell newborn children as target practice for muscal cолдат-s. All sanctions can be easily avoided with resellers and “good will” from management and creative paperwork. Here they even didn't try.
Google should be made to donate a few $M (or 10s/100s) to help defend Ukraine then, although it's still a completely shitty situation that a country fighting for its freedom is being "traded" for the temporary economical benefit of certain parties.
How about Western telecom carriers and IT resources stop providing services to Russian military complex? We still have Western telecommunications providers supplying IT and communications services to companies directly related to Russian Ministry of Defense and its war machine.
