... like banning all questioning, non-approved discussion, and denial of a certain historical event.

This sort of stuff has only made me hugely more suspicious of the historical narrative on the holocaust is correct. At this point, I suspect it isn't. And they know full well.

Yes, thank you.

Microsoft's behavior in the 90s and early 2000s was straight out anti-competitive and harmful to the advancement of computing. People forget that because Gates has given a lot of money to charity, but a lot of that money was ill-gotten gains.

Microsoft held back improvements in operating systems. They held back improvements in web browsing. They torpedoed any competitors to MS Office. They pushed poor standards merely because they were the standards that would give Microsoft more leverage. The world might be something like 5-10 years behind where our technology should be, because Microsoft abused the market, abused their partners, and abused their customers. And Bill Gates is largely responsible.

And yes, they're better now, but they're still not quite good.

In my opinion, the first book was totally boring with a few somewhat interesting concepts. I don't know if that's because it seems focused on Chinese politics and history that I don't know about. The second book is still a bit boring, but better, and it finishes strong. The third book is really interesting.

It's a shame if you made it through the first one and halfway through the second one, and then gave up.

What I'd really like to see is for Firefox-- or someone-- to really focus on making a stripped-down, secure, privacy and performance focussed web browser. No nonsense. No bundled services. No ads or marketing. Don't try to be innovative with the UI, just make it look completely normal and native on every platform. Don't have it do anything other than browse web pages. That's it. Keep the ability to make add-ons, but for anything that's not simple web browsing, allow someone to make an add-on to do it.

If they want to spread out into something else, I would really love to see them developing open standards for basic internet communication and collaboration. We really need updating modern replacements for SMTP, IMAP, and XMPP. Someone should come up with new open standard protocols and develop simple, direct reference implementations. Stop trying to make one application that does everything, and make each application do one thing simply and well.

This change doesn't prevent that, and most people aren't going to pay attention to that most of the time anyway. If I'm copying and pasting a link to email it or something like that, I strip those things out too, but I don't constantly do it while I'm browsing around.

I think for most people and for most uses, it's not a problem. Most people don't pay attention to the URL, don't understand what a URL is, what it means, or how it works. It's just an arbitrary string that you put into the box to bring up a specific website. Insofar as you're dealing with those people, it doesn't matter much what displays in the address bar.

I can see why someone might like this. It's cleaner and highlights the domain. Arguably this might help a little to prevent phishing attacks, but they could have done something like, put the URL in bold or display it in a different color. They could have even color-coded the domain to signal how secure/trustworthy the domain is. Like maybe if it's secured with an EV cert of a trusted company, the domain is green. If it's some random $10 cert from who-knows-where, it's yellow...?

I'll note that Safari already does this. It just shows the domain. I use Safari constantly and never noticed. Personally, I don't think I'll have a problem. At least it appears to add the HTTPS:// back in when you hover over it, which I think is an improvement over the current behavior.

Why are all you liberals so desperate for everyone to have the vaccine? Seriously. COVID-19 *isn't that dangerous*. Sweden hasn't had a lockdown and their infection rate is about the same as the UK, which had a massive lockdown. In addition, its fatality rate is vanishingly small, and practically zero in people under 70. The flu might have some vaccines, but it doesn't have a world-wide response of "everyone, literally everyone must get this vaccine NOW, and anyone who disagrees is so insane that we need to shit all over them."

Please just stop and consider what you're saying, and why you're saying it with such confidence. And whether sticking chemicals in people's bodies without a *really good reason to do so* is such a good idea. And why some people REALLY REALLY want to do it to EVERYONE.

You don't need a "conspiracy theory" to be extremely (and healthily) suspicious of a guy who made his money through aggressive, often-dishonest, anti-competitive business practices being determined to stick a needle into the arm of everyone in the world and inject his cocktail of god-knows-what. Sorry. You take that hit for the team, I'm not risking it. And I don't care what you call me.

When it becomes monopolistic then, yes, success absolutely IS poisonous.

What kind of a holocaust leaves hundreds of thousands of survivors 100 years later? Sounds like a pretty inefficient one.

Nokia still exist?

Yeah but the Windows 10 settings doesn't even show off with animations and shit. It looks butt ugly compared to the control panel, with tiny black-and-white icons and loads of pointless whitespace everywhere (because the UI is designed to work on mobiles as well as widescreen monitors). It's a lose-lose and they're still doing it.

Safari has been doing that for quite some time.

And I hate it.

Having said that, clicking in the address bar brings the whole address back. But I don't want it hidden in the first place.

1) Straw=man argument.

2) Repeat for the third time: YOU need an app. THEY don't. I get that this was awkwardly worded, but read the whole thing.

3) That's right, it doesn't go to Google. But Google was the whole point of what I wrote. So: another straw man. Further, courts have increasingly been ruling that even police need a warrant for that.

4) Apparently you are ignoring Google's history, because you wrote "I feel like I can trust this."

I know quite well how it works, as I have already established. Despite your efforts you haven't "corrected" me on a single point.

Nor have I been "shouting".

Not even in most of those.

Last I checked the stats, fully 80% of the U.S. has no real alternative to their ONE local cable company for broadband internet.

Even worse: the big cable companies, like Comcast and Spectrum, have those parts of the U.S. divided up into "non-compete zones", in which one company has pretty much exclusive domain over the whole area.

Which is illegal as hell. Anti-trust laws haven't been taken off the books. But far too often these days they have been ignored.