Fyi for point 2, you can sign with SSH key stored on a hardware token (e.g., yubikey).

I actually disagree that a book is “problematic” because it touches, presents, includes etc. any topic that morally we disagree with. Not every book has to be a manifesto or a depiction for a moral and just society, which is why I find most of the arguments against HP to be weak (some points were listed in a sibling comment thread).

subjecting any popular series to close reading with an eye for affront is likely to show up its flaws

I am quite sure this is true for any book (especially fiction), in fact. Which is why I think it’s an activity that makes sense only to justify the pre-existing opinion about the book, rather than having a value in itself.

if you have the chance to pick it up second-hand I’d encourage you to see if you can finish it.

To be clear, I know that Dan Brown stuff is garbage. I just have seen people who I think never read a book in the previous 10 years read that one (in translation though, so who knows…). So the book must at least be interesting and intriguing to keep the attention of people who are not used to read. For me this means not fitting in the “terrible writing” category, but maybe we mean different things by that.

The DaVinci code sold 80 millions copies. The first HP book alone sold 120 millions, and the whole series 600 millions, being the most sold series of books.

Not only they are one order of magnitude apart, but I think they sold for different reasons.

I haven’t read Dan Brown’s stuff, but I also doubt it’s terribly written by the way. Books that capture the interest of a population more and more unused to read can be shallow, banal, inconsistent, whatever, but not terribly written. Casual readers can hardly finish a terribly written book. In any case, HP books are children’s books. Children or teenagers are not literary critics, it’s not about reading “great literature”, however you define that.

I also can’t help to notice the coincidence that all the HP critiques started appearing in the last years, when the author went bananas. A series this popular, which ended in 2007, and suddenly 15 years later people notice that it’s “terribly written”? This smells more to me of a damnatio memoriae than genuine critique.

Honestly, I read the books translated + I could not and still cannot relate with the issues that I often see raised against the book (like the way diversity is represented). Especially when I was a kid, those issues were so not in my mind that I would never ever flag as issues.

To make an example: for me as a kid, slavery was something that mostly had to do with the roman empire. The whole debacle about house elves etc. is completely disconnected from real societal probelsm, recent history etc. I have always rooted for the elves because that’s what I was pushed to do emotionally, but without really ever reflecting on slavery as a whole. I am picking this example because it’s one of the most used ones to critique the book.

In general I also believe that authors can build worlds that do not represent their views, I find a lot of the critique I have read a stretch and I am especially suspicious that most of these critiques started appearing recently. I believe people started with the thesis (she is an asshole) and then backtracked the analysis trying to find anything at all in the books that could support the conclusion (rather than viceversa).

Either way, all of this is relatively irrelevant. People can like or dislike books - especially fiction - freely. For me the book is mostly associated with a vibe of being young, thinking about those stories, relating with the characters etc., not with the actual books content. So it’s more about thinking back of childhood/past than appreciating the literary value.

I found it very fun, interesting and captivating when I read those books (that is, when I was maybe 13-16?). If it was “terribly written” it wouldn’t have made the success it did, and also the target audience is generally not made of literary critics.

So I don’t think there is much to judge, especially since many people’s good opinion on the story is based on their lived experience with it, from when they were younger etc. And you can’t erase that from your life because the author turned out to be an asshole 15 years later.

Keep Tuscany, Rome, Milan, Naples and Venice and you are done for Italy.

Pizza a taglio is actually something almost exclusively found in and around Rome.

BTW even regular pizzas have various toppings, they just need to make sense (for example tuna and onions is a possibility).

Tbh, I have been to Iceland twice and I have managed to eat very well! (Italian here)

There is no much variety, but I have eaten very good lamb (as you are saying), stews (both mean and fish), even baked goods (there was a tiny house with very good cakes in the middle of nowhere in Westfjords).

My favorite probably was a fusion sushi place (I.e. sushi with local fish) in Seydisfiordur (the town where Ben Stiller arrives to in the Walter Mitty movie BTW). I don’t think the place exists anymore (that was in 2018) but it was very good.

Sometimes you can find very good food in unexpected places (for example, I have never eaten better Mexican food than in Rovaniemi, in Finnish Lapland!).

I used to do this, but then why revealing even my domain. I have bitwarden integrated with simplelogin, and I get service_garbage@aliasdomain.tld

This way I can easily filter with prefix matching (if I want to), but don’t reveal anything at all about me. Also much easier to be consistent, block senders etc. Plus, I can send emails from all those addresses if I ever need (e.g., support).

By user abc@example.com

Looking at how this started, it’s even more depressing.

Already debunked

https://bsky.app/profile/tannerofthenorth.bsky.social/post/3lp572utm5c2c

I understood what you meant, not sure why you would assume otherwise. My point is that there is no need to invent new business models. Your proposal is similar to “pay with your data”, a new business model that has negative consequences for the collectivity.

In case of these types of games, a flat rate for the game and potentially a pay-per-use without margin to cover hosting (minimal, can be factored in the initial price) and API calls (gMaps) could be an option. Or none of this, and they factor in the cost already in the initial purchase. Either way, to come back to the topic of discussion, asking a one year subscription for a game sold for free (to lure people in) is IMHO predatory behavior with no excuse.

Anyway, tl;dr money already exists and people can pay for that, we don’t need to waste more computing power to find an alternative. The use of crypto incentives the overall crypto market which causes even more people (or companies) to waste energy for nothing.

This feels like a technical approach for a solution to a political problem. We shouldn’t normalize a solution to a predatory approach that companies have, we should regulate so that the approach can’t be taken by companies on the first place, we should foster competition so that those who do are going to be outcompeted etc.

Wasting even more electricity to compute numbers used in an unstable speculative market with no clear future is IMHO a completely wrong approach to the problem.

Objdct storage is anyway something I prefer over their app. Restic(/rustic) does the backup client side. B2 or any other storage to just save the data. This way you also have no vendor lock.

After your and the other commenter’s post I had to go check, I didn’t know she was in Scientology. Wow, that makes it even worse. Personally it is just her facial expression range (that is, a very narrow one), that irrationally makes her unlikable to me. I thought it was a good character representation in the first season of Handmaid’s tale, but then once I realized that it’s how she plays every character, or in every situation…

Gal gadot and Elisabeth Moss for me. Also not a fan of Jason Momoa/Chris Hemsworth type of guys. Anything with them in the lead and I generally nope out. It has to do with the plain, flat, repetitive characters and lack of depth, not the physique (for example I respect dave Bautista evolution).

Absolutely! In Bruges, Banshees of Inisherin, but even older stuff. I am a weirdo and like the 2002 Phone Booth, for example.

Was there a vegan angle to this, or what?

Yes, the whole discussion is around antitrust, and he thinks republicans have a chance to do better than democrats there. There is nothing to “bro” about, it’s pretty clear from the context. If he said any of that before the election, I could vaguely read an endorsement for single-issue voters. Saying republicans are better than democrats in fighting antitrust after Democrats shat their pants about it, doesn’t sound an endorsement to me.

The rest of this comment is out of topic. His focus (and his company focus) has always been on a specific political area. So there is no expectation that he would address the whole political scenario, when he was talking about that narrow area.

But he went out of his way to demonize the democratic party and somehow hold the Republicans up as the defenders of small business

So this is what bothers you? A completely legitimate critique of the democratic party? Well, I personally cannot care less, but you do you.

I see the issue as very simple: Him and his company work in the privacy space. Tech monopolies are a problem because captured people. Improving in this space is a win for privacy. Which is not something that is beneficial “in a vacuum”, it’s beneficial to all those vulnerable people that will be attacked by this government, or the next. he expressed optimism about the fact that republicans can do better than democrats here. Period. Naive, wrong, whatever. A legitimate opinion based on his reading of the last few years’ trend.

No endorsement, no “pledge loyalty”, nothing. Just a consideration. He also mentioned on his reddit account that ultimately actions will be what will count (as it is obvious). So to me this is legitimately a nothing burger. I cannot care less that people in US (and in many more places) live politics like a football game. I cannot care less that you or others got hurt because he criticized Democrats. They could and should do better, and then if the critique is unfair I will be there saying that he “goes out of his way” to criticize them. So far he clearly motivated his opinion with what Schumer did.