I bought one of these earlier this year. I still have a 1/4 of it left. Its rich and dense, eating more than a slice in one sitting will make you question how many calories you can eat in a day.
Tha.means that they trust you enough to not turn what they are watching against them at least. Yes, men tend to be isolated enough that sharing what they like to watch on YouTube requires at least some respect.
Nailed it. Feels weird to call him delightful, considering the subject of that one, but I totally needed three more channels to subscribe to last night
As I guy, I relate strongly. I think that’s because of all the ridicule I used to receive for things I liked as a kid. If I share my music playlist with you, that means a lot as well - music is very intimate.
Flashback to my Del Sol where I had to brake+heel tap the accelerator to downshift. Still took less coordination than using a damn touch screen infotainment system
It’s faster, especially if the handbrake isn’t applied already.
Some cars, like the one I drove most of the time in driving school, have an automation to keep braking for a second, so one just needs to: Brake, Clutch, Put in gear, Release Brake, Rev up engine a bit, Release Clutch.
My current car’s Handbrake is basically non-functional, so I have to do the fast foot shuffle.
No, I hold down the clutch and the brake, then slowly start releasing the clutch, and when the engine starts struggling I release the brake and jump to the gas pedal to get more revs in, release the clutch all the way, and hopefully start moving forward instead of stalling the engine.
Or just hold the brake, put in gear, then release the brake, rev up the engine to 3k rpm and release the clutch. Not as good for the motor and gearbox but faster lol
Edit: Ya’ll, if one knows what they do, and knows the car, speeding the motor up to a specific amount, often 2-2.5k rpm, and releasing the clutch a specific amount, takes less time than gravity needs to overcome the inertia. I’m almost always literally starting while practically still standing, because it takes ~0.1 second to do said things, if you know the car and its sweet spots.
Okay, so I’ve been thinking of doing something like this for my neocities site (whenever I have the time and drive to work on it). The biggest problem to all of this is the fact I don’t wanna use any JavaScript and don’t know if it’s even possible without JS.
I’ve already, in the past, been experimenting on another neocities page I have access to the idea of blocking access to everyone using a chromium based or safari browser with and without JS, too. To say the least, it’s difficult for a noob like me and so far has not worked like planned. Especially since there are so many forks of chromium with different names/user-agents.
I mean, I’d imagine it’s trivial to do without js. Just try to load an image or similar with a name that’d be blocked into the background image for a div that covers the entire page. Should silently fail to load with a blocker, or shows your error image if they don’t.
As a total HTML/CSS noob, I’ll definitely have to look up how to do this. I’ll probably end up trying it on the other site just in case I royally mess up my main site by accident. I at least have immediate backups for the other site right now, so I don’t mind experimenting with it.
You can try to load an image from a subdomain like ads., or from a filename like 468x80.png (see EasyList) to catch all the common ad blockers, maybe with an id of Ad-Container to catch css-based ad blockers.
DNS based blockers that use regular expressions or wildcards will work with the subdomain approach, but most of them still rely on hardcoded list of domains which means you either need to get a throwaway (sub)domain on their lists OR serve data from an actual ad server (or just live with the occasional false positives from people who believe DNS blocking is enough [which it really isn’t if we’re being honest])
But honestly, in this case doing it with JS should be fine since disabling JS is a quite effective ad blocker anyway. Here’s how I do it for example: ads.d.on-t.work/ad.min.js (and you can try it out at w.on-t.work)
I mean, yes? But also this is like that stupid iPhone setting that diverts your charging to off-peak hours or something. It’s such an incredibly small difference.
If it’s worth doing at all, it’s worth doing a little bit.
I believe you’re referring to iPhone’s clean energy charging feature. Here’s my question: if you can use clean energy, why wouldn’t you? It might make very little difference to the environment, but a little difference is still a difference.
Still, using ad-blockers is really not like that iPhone feature:
That feature relies on the grid itself, meaning it’s useless for a lot of people that have basically no clean energy where they live, while ad-blockers can be useful to anyone using the internet.
It may be to the user’s detriment, while ad-blockers improve user experience.
It’s device dependent, whereas ad-blockers are available to virtually everyone, not just iPhone users.
Ad-blockers can be combined with clean energy charging.
The impact ad-blockers can have on the environment is similar to iPhone’s clean energy charging in the same way a healthy diet is similar to eating a carrot. Yes, on the surface level they do just reduce your consumption of fossil fuel-generated energy, but ad-blockers reduce your energy consumption overall, not just trade it for green energy (that still requires tons of fossil fuels to be burned).
me_irl
Hot
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.