I guess supporting a president that does not care about laws and is demanding the very democratic structures that allow you to vote in the first place falls under free speech. But an educated person would NEVER vote to have his rights removed. Maybe you should educate yourself instead of just angrily making accusations
So it seems obvious that she had posted with her friend about working without a visa in the US, CBP found this, and she was rightfully deported. Note neither women featured in this little writeup actually denied it. These days they do check your social media for little secret plans.
If that was the case they seem to have known at the border and like every episode of border patrol they should just have denied entry. Instead they are wasting thousands of tax payer money. They also did not put her on the plane for which she already had a ticket.
Serious journalism gives the accused a chance to respond. Serious sympathy articles confront the subjects with the core accusations brought against them.
1951 Defense Of Greenland Agreement, they already agreed to sell Greenland to us. I wonder if the Danes will pretend not to have heard of it when Trump brings it up?
That's actually rude to say and I think my deck was ok and tapes were ok. My deck was a single well Sansui and my tapes were new Maxell tapes. Sure I might eek out some more performance with a Nakamichi deck and chrome tapes that cost $14 a blank or something but it's still going to sound like a cassette deck.
I find some charm in the lo-fi sound, if I wanted hi-fi sound I would just record something digitally for basically free, so I don't see the point of chasing the dragon of ultimate cassette sound quality.
It's not 'rude to say,' it's simply the truth. With good quality metal tapes, and Dolby C, a cassette is going to perform as well as any room you care to listen in. I find most people who complain about cassettes being lo-fi had shit decks.
Wow I didn't realize that Canvas Fingerprinting was exclusively used to detect fraudsters! Especially the wily ones who figured out how to delete their cookies! That's really cool - like how they scan everybody's files now to detect pedophiles (exclusively!).
This is never ever a problem unless a developer insists on always using the most cutting edge version of a library. There's no law that says you have to use the bleeding edge of every library when you make a program. Another issue these days, is that library maintainers often add new features or delete old features without incrementing the major version number. In the olden days it was assumed that minor versions were for bug fixes that don't break compatibility, and when you wanted to change how the library works in a major way, you increment the major number.
Now a lot of stuff is contnuously buggified so there is no concept of stable and in-progress.
Speedrunning is mostly cheaters using combinations of emulation, save states, etc. I don't think speedrunners actually speedrun on unmodified consoles in one go at all these days. Of course back in the day anything other than playing on a console attached to a TV would have been considered cheating and gotten you thrown out of the community.
Netflix is very profitable. Its net income for 2022 was $4.4 billion; for 2023 it was $5.4 billion; and in 2024 it was $8.7 billion. For more information, go to https://ir.netflix.net/financials/quarterly-earnings/default... . The 2024 Q4 earning announcement has a spread sheet with Netflix's financial results for the last 3 years.
Are there any numbers on YouTube?
While I don't doubt their costs are orders of magnitude bigger that other services, they also operate at a different scale operate as a defacto music service (I'm not talking about YT Music), and have the largest pool of ads to serve
YouTube profits aren't broken out separately. However, Google's quarterly and annual reports do give Youtube Ad revenues, which were $36bn in fiscal 2024. That Youtube is not profitable is quite the strong claim.....
Technically nothing what you said disputes the claim.
You're jumping to the assumption that surely YouTube's costs have to be lower than $36B, and that is not at all assured. They handle an absolutely gargantuan amount of network data transfer, not to mention processing compute. I'm ignoring the storage but even that at their scale is probably at least 1B.
>YouTube has been making a few billion dollars a year in profit for a while now.
Are you insider, or have access to leaks I'm not aware of? YouTube profits are not public information (they are not broken down in the public fillings) so how can you say that confidently?
In addition to the loss leader aspect it has for their other business units, what about more traditional expenses? Directly serving ads aside, all the user behavioral and popular trend data has to be hugely valuable in its own right. Plus all that ML training data would have cost them something if they hadn't already had it sitting on their servers.
It seems like you just have to be sufficiently large before you can successfully monetize a video platform.
reply