Cool. I stopped paying for it back when it was still called “YouTube Red”, during one of their many crackdowns on creators’ freedom in the name of benefitting advertisers. I dumped it and installed an adblocker, and eventually YouTube Vanced and its successor Revanced.

It’s not true.

But if it was, it wouldn’t be a reason to dislike Postgres. Academic AI research in the '90s is a far cry from commercial AI companies today.

Thanks!

What’s the reference here?

Insomnia > Postman.

I switched to Insomnia around 2021 when Postman started enshittifying and found I liked it a lot more. Insomnia has also been relatively enshittified unfortunately, but it feels like it’s to a lesser extent.

Worth noting that Lemmy receives at least some institutional funding for its development. And I believe some of that funding is contingent on hitting active user goals or similar metrics.

What’s xz?

Yes, they have two options. Either honour the sticker price, or stop selling it at all until the price is fixed.

In Australia if the price at the checkout is higher than the price tag you are entitled to the first item free

Got a source on that? That’s not what the ACCC says.

They would have to refuse to sell to anyone. It would likely not be lawful to leave it on the shelf and sell it at the higher price to someone else who might not have noticed the discrepancy, until they fix up the shelf pricing.

Australia, the country the article is talking about. That was a quote from the ACCC website.

Reminder that by law, if the price is listed wrong:

Sometimes the price of an item in store or online at the checkout may not match the displayed or advertised price in store or online. If this happens, even by mistake, the business must either:

• sell the product for the lowest price - either the checkout price, or displayed or advertised price, or
• stop selling the item until the incorrect price is corrected.

Relevant username, I guess.

Sounds like you need to upgrade your toaster, noob.

Hoffman was the head pedo and creator of jailbait is just as valid

No, it is not.

your opinion that it was a joke that he nothing to do with it

Not the opinion I expressed.

He was a mod for a while, but not the top mod. Top mod is the creator, unless the creator quits, passing it off to second mod. And he was mod at a time when anyone could be added as a mod without their consent. No need to accept an invite.

It’s bad enough that he was happy to let the subreddit exist for as long as it did even after significant on-site pressure to remove it. The same thing he did half a decade later with the_Donald. The fact that it took mainstream media criticism to be willing to take it down should be scathing enough. We don’t need to make up bs.

That’s cos it’s not true. He was a mod of it for a while, but I’ve not seen any verification of how long that was, and it was at a time when you could just add someone as a mod without them needing to approve it. But he was definitely not its founder.

He did allow it to stick around until the mainstream media started kicking up a fuss about it. That would be bad enough. We don’t need to make shit up.

Fair enough! It’s your meal, and even if it were completely uncontroversial that beans need to be in chilli, if you don’t like beans you don’t include them!

What, why not beans? I know beans was a meme on Lemmy a while back, but it’s a legit part of a chilli recipe.

Serious question.

Huh?