Cry me a river. I've never enabled this. The way email works, it's dead easy to associate the message you sent with the image your mail application downloaded, and there really is no way to prevent this. The idea that blocking tracking pixels is saving you is naive. Every commercial email message you get with images in it has trackers in the URL string to see who got the mail. Tracking pixels are just a way of doing that without showing you an actual image. If you don't want to be tracked, disable image downloads.

Bandanas are fairly useless because the weave is so loose. Masks aren't virtue signaling—they prevent your outbreath from carrying droplets. You are signaling virtue in the sense that people can see that you are protecting them, and this will tend to make them think you aren't a complete asshole, which is always good. But you're signaling virtue because your action is virtuous—wearing a mask is not performative virtue signaling.

The mask doesn't really protect you much at all, although it's better than nothing. But if everyone wears masks, then we are all protected. So please, keep up the good work, and don't second-guess yourself.

I would not count on sunlight as a solution unless they're on the dash for a good long time.

That's not overkill. You're doing all the right things. The thing about cloth masks is that they largely protect out, but also somewhat protect in. So if everyone wears them, then everyone is well protected. If only you are wearing one, you aren't very well protected, although it's better than nothing.

The reason to wash the mask is because there might be virus on it from breathing in, and you don't want to handle that. So when you take it off, put on a new one, and treat the old one as infectious: don't store it with unused masks, don't touch it if you can avoid it, wash your hands thoroughly after touching it. Your instant pot solution is a great way to rehabilitate a used mask.

Perhaps, but what's interesting about his standard is that he's saying "because we can't trust corporations to say for sure that an ad contains no falsehoods, we must allow all ads, even if they very clearly contain falsehoods." It's a neat dodge. I wonder how many people will fall for his grift.

Win. :)

You had stations? We had to go to the Grange on a Saturday night to listen to a couple of dudes play fiddle!

Seriously, this pretty much matches my experience—I haven't watched Netflix more than once in the past couple of months. It's easier to just read a Harry Potter fanfic. Pathetic, but true.

If you live in the Bay Area, a rental will be about that. And your rent is $3000/month, so even though you are making six figures, it's going to set you back. If you live in Vermont it might be even less than $50/day, but that assumes that the rental company will rent to you. If you make $10k/year at Walmart, they probably won't. You're better off leaving your junker where it died and buying another one, to which you will do the same thing.

Yes, they are, because they have no choice. They are driving junkers. They probably don't have insurance. This is yet another aspect of how mandatory driving sucks: these cars may not be safe to drive, but they're going to be on the road anyway, because the owners have /no choice/.

Now it's a $2k repair. Not so good if you are working at Walmart and making $10k/year.

I do network security for a living. I quite clearly understand the implications of lots of security problems, including this one. If you think there is something incorrect about what I said, feel free to correct me. If you review, you will find that I actually explained why I think this is bullshit—I didn't just assert it was bullshit, as you seem to be doing here.

In what sense was it buggy? Every app you run on your Mac thatâ(TM)s not sandboxed has the same access. Why is this different?

The risk here is that somebody will trick you into starting a zoom session with you, and you won't notice, despite that the app will pop up when you click on the link, and despite that the camera light will come on.

This is not a zero-day. This is not a root exploit. This is a trojan horse, and not a very effective one—it can't install itself and persist. It is deeply unfortunate that this is being described as a "zero-day exploit." The effect that disclosures like this have is to make us stupider, not smarter.

Mine does drive like a granny. I have to goose the gas pedal whenever someone is exiting, because it won't pass them until they are entirely out of the lane, at which point I'm doing 30mph on the highway.

This report from Consumer Reports doesn't match my experience, though. My experience is that when there's a car behind me and I want to change lanes, the Model 3 will slow down to get behind that car before changing lanes, which is not at all what I want, but is also not at all what they are describing. Something's fishy here.

This is laughably untrue. Go visit Joe Sixpack. Then go visit the home of a former robber baron. Compare and contrast. Let us know what you learn. Just because Joe has a TV doesn't mean he's living the life of Reilly.

This is a lovely sentiment, but it only works if the worker reaps the benefits of their increased productivity. If that benefit is siphoned off to the owners of capital, then what you have is fewer jobs that pay the same, and more impoverished former workers. In order for efficiency to make things better, the fruit of the improvements have to be more evenly distributed. And that's a hard problem to solve with unregulated capitalism.