It's hard to take complaints about UI consistency seriously when the cursor is changed for no reason at all (with a barely-different hover state, too).

And a GDP 2/3 the size. And way less than that by disposable income.

Even users from "rich" EU countries are worth ~30% of a US user to most companies.

Doesn't matter. Rich enough to afford most products, as pretty much the only market other than the US. And more people. Biggest addressable market for most things.

So what? Even people living in poor EU countries buy iphones, use windows, watch Netflix

If the market was at best 1/3rd of the US no one would bother implementing all these regulations

And yet Apple, Microsoft and Netflix make significantly more revenue from the US than the EU. It's almost as if the EU is not actually a bigger market.

Or maybe their products just aren't that compelling ;-)

Yeah, it's definitely not the low purchasing power.

Like I said, delusional.

But that's undefined behavior, so the compiler is free to ignore that possibility.

> so the compiler is free to ignore that possibility

And that's what is wrong. This is the most unfriendly behavior towards the programmer.

For context this article was written when 95%+ of websites used HTTP 1.1 (and <50% used HTTPS).

You must never drive on a curvy roads then. Every car I driven waits until the approaching car is fully around the corner, blinding them for a full second before dimming, instead recognizing the headlights around the corner and dimming earlier.

Newer cars with matrix LED headlights account for this, such as the Volkswagen ID series. The brights not only "blot out" the shape of the cars around you, they also rotate when turning or going around a curve, so that you never accidentally point them at oncoming traffic.

It's quite magical and weird to observe in real time. When driving past oncoming cars, you can see a halo of darkness around each car. There are videos on YouTube that show the effect pretty well.

I don't even know what a Chevy Bolt looks like! Maybe the problem is every other model.

It's not hard to know when a car is approaching from corners / hills; there's light before they get there. I have fun manually adjusting the brights; I drive automatic transmission, lighting is the only fun I get.

That's running 5 miles a day. Everyday. That takes months of training for an already fit young person to build up to.

90 minutes of extra walking is a lot of time to offset a snack that could be eaten in 1 minute.

That is just the run, though? My point in mentioning the other things is that it isn't that much, all told.

I also 100% think that your offset point is a big part of it. 90 minutes walking the dog outside is doubly beneficial because you are not snacking during the time.

The in-memory solution creates a 2nd copy of the data so 50GB doesn't fit in memory anymore. The kernel is forced to drop and then reload part of the cached file.

I actually can't tell. The majority of these are literally examples of bad regulations. They have mass appeal without care for 2nd order effects.

The top of the page is a banner rallying against a regulation that would fit right in on the page.

And the fact that the site is a laggy mess just makes it a bit surreal.

Despite the title, the article doesn't talk about "iffy internet" at all. It's all about "slightly slow" internet which is a complete non-issue except for large downloads (e.g. modern games).

Congested and/or weak wifi and cell service are what "iffy" is about. Will a page _eventually_ load if I wait long enough? Or are there 10 sequential requests, 100KBs each, that all have succeed just to show me 2 sentences of text?

I have two ADSL lines each of which is slightly below the federal broadband definition.

Most kinds of communication products (Zoom) work OK, except for anything from Google.

The dummy "loading" grey boxes it shows are still this size. Such a great "user experience."