agedcorn

What I never understood is why the unloading process is so needlessly complicated. After splash down, why not attach a cable and hoist the capsule onto a ship for unloading?

Instead, it's always this long spectacle of multiple back-and-forth boat trips, inflation and attachment of rafts and 'porches', and several helicoptor trips to a ship.

Just build a recovery ship that can park right over the capsule and hoist it on deck.

I believe these companies (Uber, Lyft, etc.) coined the term 'rideshare' primarily to skirt the taxi laws.

You see, they aren't technically running an unlicensed taxi business - no, no, no. When you use their app to say 'hey, I wish to go to the icecream shop on third', it lets all the other people with the app (and a car) know. If any of them happen to also be going to the icecream shop on third, they can let you know and the two of you can connect to share a ride there - isn't that nice!

These are in no way unlicensed taxis... That would be highly illegal and totally unfair to other taxi businesses that have to spend ungodly amounts of money to license their vehicles. It's just you and a stranger sharing a ride to go get some icecream...

That's the wonderful thing about a living language, if enough people start using a new word or a variation on the spelling of an existing one, it can simply become correct at a point.

The compound variant 'usecase' is often used in tech and refers to a very specific means in which a system is utilized.

Sounds like Cold Urticaria. Might want to see your doctor and carry an epi-pen if it affects your breathing.

Don't worry, I Upvoted Not Because Girl, But Because It Is Very Cool; However, I Do Concede That I Initially Clicked Because Girl

A 'digital rendition of Hell'... you even Doom bro?

Wasn't the original Doom a digital representation of Mars and its moons: Phobos and Deimos?

Yup, need to tax leveraged assets.

7 Dems who voted to fund ICE in January (DHS Funding):

• Tom Suozzi (NY-03)
• Henry Cuellar (TX-28)
• Don Davis (NC-01)
• Laura Gillen (NY-04)
• Jared Golden (ME-02)
• Vicente Gonzalez (TX-34)
• Marie Glusenkamp Perez (WA-03)

21 Dems who voted to fund ICE in February (DHS Funding):

• Sanford Bishop (GA‑02)
• Rosa DeLauro (CT‑03)
• Rick Larsen (WA‑02)
• Ed Case (HI‑01)
• Bill Foster (IL‑11)
• Marie Gluesenkamp Perez (WA‑03)
• Jim Clyburn (SC‑06)
• Jared Golden (ME‑02)
• Scott Peters (CA‑50)
• Joe Courtney (CT‑02)
• Josh Gottheimer (NJ‑05)
• Kim Schrier (WA‑08)
• Henry Cuellar (TX‑28)
• Jim Himes (CT‑04)
• David Scott (GA‑13)
• Sharice Davids (KS‑03)
• Steny Hoyer (MD‑05)
• Terri Sewell (AL‑07)
• Don Davis (NC‑01)
• Marcy Kaptur (OH‑09)
• Marc Veasey (TX‑33)

I fully agree with you in wanting to keep your health telemetry private. I too baulked at smart watches for the same reasons. I hate the idea of such info being collected by any company.

I've found GadgetBridge paired with a cheap smartwatch to be a good solution for me. It let's you keep your telemetry local and provides a GUI for the info I want: steps, heart rate, activity, sleep, etc.

It sounds like they have some support for AsteroidOS already too. They also claim "As of the next Gadgetbridge release, it should have full support for AsteroidOS, and feature-parity with AsteroidOSSync."

Heh, 'polyculture' sounds like a word a friend would use when describing the new folk they're hanging with after turning a 20-year monogamous marraige into an open relationship.

You're right, I probably should have phrased that as 'they appear to be doing everything they can to monetize the consumer...'

Actions speak louder than words and the action of modifying their TOU to remove the following really struck a nerve:

"Does Firefox sell your personal data? Nope. Never have, never will. And we protect you from many of the advertisers who do. Firefox products are designed to protect your privacy. That's a promise."

Removing this statement feels motivated by more than the excuses they're giving - it feels like a betrayal. Subsequently shoe-horning in AI features doesn't help reverse this sentiment, it only emboldens it.

To each their own, but Mozilla clearly doesn't care about being 'the privacy focused browser' any longer or they wouldn't be taking their current actions.

It's been a steady exodus since less than a year ago when they removed the bit from their TOS about never selling your personal data and promising to protect your privacy.

I believe the recent surge has been the forced integration of AI features which are on by default (arguments were made to at least make them opt-in and not opt-out). Such features compromise privacy and security.

They're actively doing everything they can to monitize the consumer and going against their supposed stance as the 'privacy focused' browser.