RIP_Apollo

Just wanted to say that I like your username :)

OK, no worries.

(Also, I didn’t downvote your comment btw)

Are you sure that Feedly is open source? I can’t find any mention of it on their website.

Can I ask why you’ve taken this approach? I understand why you would use AdGuard at home, but couldn’t you just also use it on your phone/laptop as well when you are away?

Wouldn’t using the VPN to your home network just add extra latency? Or is there some benefit that I’m not aware of?

“Your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could, they didn't stop to think if they should.“

Haha. I thoroughly enjoyed this comment. It was so well-written. Thank you for writing this.

If you’re English, then you misspelt the word ‘colour’.

Am I missing something here? I count the total number of net beneficial decisions to be 22, and total number of net disadvantageous decisions to be 21.

Shouldn’t both totals be the same number? When one team gets a beneficial decision, it can only happen at the expense of another team (i.e. it’s a zero-sum game).

I could understand the discrepancy if this analysis were counting games in other competitions, but this is only counting Premier games so I would expect equal totals.

There’s a difference.

“A company may lay off an employee when it doesn't have the resources to retain them, while a company may fire an employee who isn't meeting the company's expectations.”

Source: https://www.indeed.com/career-advice/career-development/laid-off-vs-fired

Sure, they both suck because they both result in you not having a job anymore. However, if you are fired, then this looks worse when you’re looking for your next job. Potential employers may want to know why you were fired, and will likely view you as a risk.

Whereas, being laid off doesn’t carry the same negative impact to your reputation that being fired does. You haven’t done anything wrong to get laid off.

And in some countries, getting laid off (AKA made redundant) means that the company has to provide a payout, which is proportional to your length of service. You wouldn’t get this if you have been fired for wrongdoing.

I would say, if anything, the fear is likely under-blown.

Sure, you’ll find many users here on Lemmy who hate what Google are doing… but we’re not the typical internet user. I mean, we specifically found this niche platform called Lemmy rather than use one of the mainstream social media platforms. The typical “normie” who uses Chrome probably has no idea about the privacy risks of using it (either in its current form or when the Topics API is being used). We need to help others understand, and hopefully convince these people to move over to Firefox.

Except you’re giving your passwords in an encrypted format. So if the company is trustworthy, it’s safe to let them store your passwords because it’s encrypted in such a way that even the company who own the password manager couldn’t access your passwords even if they wanted to.

(Note the caveat of “IF the company is trustworthy”, which rules out Lastpass)

Now I accept that there are legitimate arguments against storing passwords in the cloud via a password manager… so in that case, you may wish to use a local password manager (like Keepass) instead. But realistically, a typical person isn’t capable of memorising lots of unique, secure passwords… so the passwords need to be written down or stored in a password manager, just to avoid weak passwords or password reuse.

You don’t need to apologise. The comment OP asked how Canada was doing, then the next commenter gave their opinion on the UK, not Canada.

It confused me as I read through the comment chain, as I was also expecting a comment on Canada (not UK).

It’s probably worth mentioning that the UK has a parliamentary system, not a presidential system. So the people elect a party, and the party leader then becomes prime minister (but the party can decide amongst itself who the next party leader should be, and this is usually done by a vote among party members).

Now there are legitimate criticisms of whether this is a democratic process, but the person who you replied to seemed to suggest that the recent change of prime ministers without elections was unusual and evidence of the UK “plummeting”. This user is entitled to his/her opinion, of course, but I just wanted to point out that this is actually constitutional and common practice in the UK.

“Far from being unusual, it’s actually the norm for Prime Ministers to enter office outside of a general election.”

Source: https://fullfact.org/news/unelected-prime-ministers-common-or-not/