Why though?
While I also object to this as a matter of principal, I genuinely wouldn't care if my government knew I flew across the country. Assuming you aren't doing something dodgy, you're putting yourself though some major inconvenience to deny them a datapoint that is actually if no use to them anyway.
Firefox already supports h265
I don't understand why more people don't run a local recursive resolver. It isn't hard.
I do, but this isn't a block on simple DNS. I just tested with some of the reported urls, and am getting a webpage with 451 error.
The message says: "Cloudflare has taken steps to limit access to this website through Cloudflare's pass-through security and CDN services within the United Kingdom". I doubt the pirate sites use cloudflare at their end, so I assume it's the ISPs that are using it as some kind of proxy, or new greatfirewall of the UK, hence their involvement - ISPs delegate enforcement to them, if all their traffic is going through them anyway.
Yes, all businesses that cater to serving the 'unique' tastes of the rich and famous keep detailed lists on their clients. These lists are very important to the business; some might even call them an insurance policy.
Risky strategy, sometimes that same insurance policy gets you suicided, before mysteriously disappearing. Allegedly.
Except this article is about "full fibre" and how widely available it now is, it is not about FTTC which you used to have back when you lived here. Sure, it's not at 100%, but it will have to be pretty soon as the current tiemframe BT has set to remove copper is supposed to be end of 2026 (that's been pushed back a year I think already though).
No, in the UK "fibre" might well just mean FTTC. "Full fibre" specifically means FTTP.
There is also a contraceptive coil, but that is also not likely to be where the OP suggests.
As you'd probably expect, Nimbys really don't like the idea of new HT lines running through their local countryside
I don't think it's unreasonable to object to doing significant harm to the country side for the sake of green power, it's contradictory and unnecessary. No one objects to underground cables, it's cutting a massive track through the country side to fill with pylons that people object to for a variety of valid reasons. Burying cable costs more on paper, but probably not by the time you've gone through the legal processes to force it on everyone, and the cost of the delays these incur. The problem is trying to do the job cheap, rather than doing it properly, and achieving neither.
build more power lines, batteries
The UK is doing just this, of course it would be better if we were further ahead than we are. We are paying the price of a slightly uncoordinated roll out, i.e. lots of new green power generation before power lines and storage, but we are moving in the right direction and will get there in the end. For its faults, a lot of people in parts of Europe, or even the US, would love to have a grid that works as well as ours.
I have 138.0.4 (latest) and none of this is in my address bar. The blog post doesn't say anything about needing to enable it.
It's a phrase, not maths.
1) The summary states the "UFO" was static, and the jet flew around it, so wouldn't be difficult to get it in the middle of the viewfinder. I think it also states this was the best of 6 pictures.
2) The whole picture is a bit blurry, to my eye the "UFO" looks no less blurry than the rest of the image but perhaps your vision is a bit sharper than mine.
That said, hoax is still infinitely more likely than real aliens.
I guess they couldn't find a torrent with leaked nvidia designs to train ChatGPT on - you can't plagiarise stuff you've never seen.
There's no reason to stop monitoring. At the very least, getting regular PSA blood tests to confirm whether things are stable or may have progressed.
Don't forget poorly differentiated tumour cells may express little PSA, leading to false reassurance from a low level.
Most prostate cancer progresses very slowly and is unlikely to metastasize.
It does usually progress slowly, until it doesn't, then it kills you (often painfully because it's metastasised to bone).
Very often, men with prostate cancer die of something completely unrelated.
This is what I was taught at medical school, it's also just what my dad was told 15 years ago, but the "you'll probably die of something else first" argument is just plain retarded. It's the same excuse idiots give for poor health behaviour like smoking. Medicine is getting better all the time, people aren't dying of other things so much as they used to, they are living longer and allowing these conditions to come into play. My dad was still in excellent health otherwise, in his 80s, when hormone treatment inevitably stopped working 14 years later. Treatment for prostate cancer needs to improve too, rather than just ignoring the condition.
On the other hand, operating on it can cause impotence and incontinence. If I ever get diagnosed with it, my first question to the doctor will be, "does it matter?", not a panicked question about how soon I can be scheduled for surgery
I can tell you, as a doctor, if I get diagnosed I will have surgery in the first available theatre slot. Yes there are potential side effects, significant ones (see my previous point about the need for treatment to get better), but I'm not (literally) going to sit on cancer that *will* go on kill me kill me unless I'm "lucky" enough to die of something else first.
The reason for similar outcomes in the UK of surgery or not, is likely the fact we don't have screening, something held off due to the fallacy that it's not harmful and we overtreatment. With proper screening and earlier intervention I am confident (though clearly can't prove it) that more radical treatment will be more effective when used earlier, than when it's currently identified and there are already micromets or local spread that surgery can't remove and will only be held in check for so long with hormone treatment.
"Oh what wouldn't I give to be spat at in the face..." -- a prisoner in "Life of Brian"
