As far as I'm aware, creator sponsorships rarely care about whether or not you watch the segments, but about how many people follow the link or whatnot. So you could make the argument that sponsorblock makes you never follow the links, but that really assumes you would otherwise, which...
Silentiea
joined 1 year ago
Louis Rossman/FUTO's YouTube app, GrayJay, now supports Sponsorblock... and shames you if you use it
But nuclear is scalable while running, allowing you to ramp up and down as needed to cover for the intermittent nature of renewables without relying on fossil fuels or similar. Isn't that why adding nuclear into the mix is such an effective strategy?
Biomass as a source of energy has a lot of the same problems as fossil fuels, no? Why is nuclear not on the table while biomass is?
They have to use terminal to download a new one, duh.
Or more likely, there will be an option to use the OS's installation media or something to install edge again, if not a still-legal-to-remove-but-separate-from-edge installer that would take someone who knows what they're doing to remove.
Yeah, hence it's unlikely a roof would fill it to the same extent and wouldn't be a problem.
Can mostly handle. Snow blindness is a thing, and that's all diffuse reflection too, not specular. But it's unlikely a roof would be such a problem.
It turns out a lot of people (who aren't otherwise interested in xkcd but would like a relevant one in the moment) really don't care about the alt-text and titles.
I'm with you, but more often than not in the "relevant xkcd" moment, people lack interest for the alt text.
Oh, and I hadn't realized how awful youtube became over the last year or so with the ads. I was just dealing with it like an asshole. When I put ublock back on, my enjoyment of youtube shot up!
Try getting some kind of sponsorblock, too. I didn't realize how annoying those little messages were until I didn't have to manually speed through them.
I've got some swampland to sell you in Florida.
But don't worry, it comes with a bridge!
No, they're not particularly dry.
Why do they have to prove that? You backed up the assertion that sponsorblock hurts creators with the mere unlikely possibility that sponsors might be able to see metrics, how does their single anecdotal bit of evidence that people using sponsorblock are the kinds of people that won't click ads anyway not pass the same muster?
Admittedly they're both bad evidence, so why are we treating yours as better?