One would think this situation would be better documented by vendors, instead of relying on obscure incantations. But one would probably be told by Customer Services that this defect is not covered by warranty (if you still have it) and you're out of luck.
I never understood why advertisers insist on giving me "relevant" ads. I find it better if the ads are diverse and all over the place, as I discover new things. The "relevant" ads are usually about stuff I just bought, so useless to me.
I find this site insightful in terms of discovering new things. It could be made into some sort of tumbler for ads. :)
You can opt out of the relevant add in all major networks. I know I did once, and it was so much worse. Most ads were for shit I absolutely would never care about. Weight loss systems, beauty products, child care products, quit smoking assistance systems, etc...
I know this is sacrilegious on HN, but I personally prefer targeted ads to that. I still think you and everyone else should be able to not have ads targeted if you don't want, and I'm all for alternative funding systems where you pay for content directly, but I'd much rather see ads for SaaS companies I may use and movies I'm interested in over that stuff.
Because there are people who buy more than one of something.
Buy a widget - you might be purchasing for a company and will buy a the same widget next month for the next employee. If you advertise your widget to everybody 99.999% won't buy it, so that 99.9% that won't buy another widget is a much larger margin of those who will buy another. (the ad is about either keeping you a loyal customer or getting to to switch to a different brand). Most of us are more valuable as a possibly purchaser of more than one than as a potential customer of something new we didn't even know we needed.
I read a related claim about this. People that just bought an, e.g. refrigerator, are much more likely than others to buy a second one soon as they're more likely to need a new refrigerator and even the small chance that the one they just bought doesn't work or isn't satisfactory means there's a much greater chance they'll need or want to buy a second one than that other people will want to buy one.
I could imagine buying a mattress would be an even better example.
> Because there are people who buy more than one of something
The New York Times stopped behaviorally targeting in Europe without much consequence [1]. I don't think we can reject the hypothesis that adtech is largely a scam, with targeting being done more so adtech companies can "differentiate" themselves than for any benefit to publishers.
I don't mind if they're actually relevant ads, but they rarely are. Quite regularly, they keep showing me the same irrelevant ad over and over and over again. The logic behind their ad selection completely eludes me.
Maybe I've blocked enough cookies that they actually know nothing about me? But I use plenty of Google services, and I'm generally logged in to my Google account by default.
Maybe the problem is that the things I'm interested in, are things that don't generally advertise much. Not on such broad generic advertising networks, at least.
Are they really relevant? According to advertisers I am in constant need of a slimmer wallet and a stair lift, while I'm rather happy with my current wallet, and my legs are still more or less ok.
The system is unconcerned with how useful the ads are to users. Ads exist to persuade potential customers to buy, not to provide utility to them. The "relevance" is for them, not you.
If I were given the choice between targeted ads and non-targeted ads (funny: no web site has ever offered me this choice), I would always choose the non-targeted ads. Since I disregard all ads anyway, the only difference is the targeted ones are served by sharing my information all over the place and the non-targeted ones aren’t. Therefore the non-targeted ones are better.
For all our worries about Big Data and privacy, Google et. al are apparently doing kind of a bad job at it. Seems like a one-hour conversation with a human would produce more relevant marketing insights than analyzing tens of thousands of data points does.
I use "Should I Answer?" for this purpose. I don't have to give them my data in order to know who's calling me most of the time. It could block calls, but I don't use that feature.
How does your setup work with a second monitor that comes and goes?
Use case: I have a laptop that I take everywhere for me, but I plug into a second monitor while at work. I also use multiple desktops, and this pattern is sometimes causing windows to jump to another desktop when disconnecting the monitor.
I had the same issue using unity/gnome on a laptop with 1-3 monitors. After I switched to i3 I was forced to set the monitor config manually with xrandr. I set up keyboard shortcuts for switching between 1-3 monitors. This fixed all the issues with automatic window placement since the window manager no longer tries to do this in an automatic fashion.
Tiling window managers definitely have a learning curve, but after I spent a weekend switching to one, I can't see myself ever wanting to go back to floating windows.
I have two bash scripts that set things appropriately -- laptop.sh and desktop.sh. Xrandr, xinput, xset things. There's probably a better way to handle this but it's not inconvenient enough to make me figure it out (or duckduckgo it).
My setup isn't the exact same as his but I've never had any problems plugging in a projector on my XMonad laptop. In the XMonad schema windows are always associated with one of the 9 workspaces and each screen displays one workspace with the windows all scaled to fit nicely in the display. When you unplug a screen the windows on the associated workspace stay on that workspace and don't go anywhere else.
I'm nitpicking, but is there a reason why you use the numeric signal number in Linux? On my machine "kill -SIGSTOP" works as expected, and I don't remember a time when you couldn't use signal names like that.
Colouring is not very universal, and so not generally a good choice. Browsers have taken different approaches to this, two popular ones are:
* Identify TLD registry operators who have a sane approach that prohibits or otherwise is effective for controlling homographs, whitelist their TLDs, default to showing punycode (the A-labels used by the DNS system which are always just ASCII). This has the effect that if your name looks "wrong" that's a problem to take up with your TLD registry. Note that com doesn't have such policies at all, it's a vast sleazy market and it remains interesting to me that huge global brands would rather be in that market, trying to shout over the crowd, than leave it to rot.
* Identify cases like you've described with "confusing" mixtures of scripts and display those as punycode.
Both have problems. The former requires that you effectively police TLD registry operators. Find out what their policies are, check they actually implement those policies effectively, and take action if this changes. The latter requires you figure out how all the world's language communities use different scripts, and how that interacts with Unicode, in order to avoid penalising combinations lots of people want, while still detecting attacks.
> when you go to раураӏ.com that last character shows up in red.
All of them would show up in red, all of them are cyrillic. If all but one character was cyrillic, Firefox would detect this and render the url in punycode. As implemented now, firefox renders the URL as shown because all characters are from the same script (~character set). Chrome is more suspicious and renders it in punycode (https://xn--80aa0cbo65f.com/), though it would presumably render the confusing version if my locale was Russian.
They're supposed to display in punycode characters outside of your locale.
Maybe whitelisting specific characters instead of only locale would be best.
Your color idea is neat but look at it from the perspective of people that actually use idn domains and don't speak english. What if раураӏ.com was раураӏ.fans-ùøê.com where ùøê was part of the same charset as ӏ and the user speaks both locale. Even if you color it,it would be difficult to train users to pick up on that.
I had the ideas used in this project in my head, but I've been putting off the work forever now.
I LOVE YOU FOREVER for using transactions as the central operation rather than double entry accounting, and I love you even more for adding the ability to tag transactions. I can not put off work for a web interface instead, which is a lot less work to put off :)
I haven't tried it yet, but it's now high on my list for when I get home from work.
But it can also be used for evil: cancel a valid stop that someone commanded and hope they don't notice.