I can't seem to find any rhyme or reason to it. Sometimes the casting button just doesn't appear as an option. I first noticed when I tried to watch something that was a youtube video that's in 4:3 so my best guess was maybe that somehow had something to do with it but I tried various videos at different aspect ratios, frame rates, resolutions even different videos on the same youtube channel as where I has actually succesfully found the option presented.

This is probably happening for all sorts of video but I noticed it with youtube and did my testing there because that's where this extension works the most reliably and where I can be confident some other weird factors about how the website is setup aren't responsible for a video not being able to cast.

The game is here. . Tremendous fun and despite it's lack of depth, I've had fun trying to beat my records but ultimately, it gets tired fast given there's only one "level" so to speak albeit a randomly generated one.

I really like the mechanics of this one and managing them against fuel load. It's similar to a game called Space Rescue by Ostrich Studio which I also liked but both these games seem to be kind of little prototypes so there's very little to them.

The weird thing is that I'm sure it didn't always do this. I thought it might be because I'm trying to cast with FX_Cast but even with Chrome this also happens. In the past this sometimes happened when you'd expect, if the internet was particularly slow that day for some reason, or if I try to play something with a high frame rate, but in general I could expect HD 1080p quality. While I can't know exactly what quality is casting, it looks more like 480 and sometimes 360.

Don't know if its relevant, but it's a chromecast 1 I've been using since 2014.

So, it definitely doesn't work now, but it's just, I swear I used to able to avoid ads while casting to chromecast by using my computer with ublock origin installed in favour of the android youtube app.

On my MBP, if I'm streaming something to the chromecast for any appreciable length of time the display sleeps. That's not a bad thing, it's supposed to do that, but the trouble is, if I want to pause playback, it's not a matter of simply hitting the pause key to immediately pause. This is because pressing any key wakes up the display and presents the login prompt.

To pause, I have correctly type in my password, and then in the appropriate app hit the pause button. This process takes several seconds and if I needed to pause because of wanting to freeze on something I'm viewing, or because something around me is happening that demands immediate halt to playback for me to attend to it, then this lag between the decision to pause and when I've finally paused is really just way too long. To make it worse, if I'm streaming youtube and this happens, the playback controls presented via the browser on the video page stop controlling the chromecast stream, the pause key does nothing. I can eventually pause (though not seek) via the player notification controls but it's not ideal.

Something I've always noticed and am going through now. Sometimes I'll drink too much the night before and be concerned about a hangover the next morning. Morning comes, and almost always my first thought is "gee I feel like shit but actually this is way less bad then I was expecting" this misplaced optimism gets washed away at an indeterminate length of time later when a wave of awful nausea crescendos to a peak of crappiness before gradually receding leading me to think "maybe that was the worst of it" only for the cycle to repeat.

This happens even when the hangover is not one severe enough to have caused vomiting. Feeling sick from drinking too much I understand, but I wonder what's physically happening during the peak of these waves that's not happening during the troughs.

I'm trying to recall some of my earliest memories of world events. The further back I go, the more vague things get as you'd expect.

I think I recall seeing on tv over the course of several days in the 90s a tragic and mostly unsuccessful rescue operation to try and dig out kids who were buried in rubble and mud from a giant landslide that occurred after an earthquake.

I think it was in a part of the world you might have called 3rd world at the time and this featured in the media coverage in respect to the inadequacy of the rescue operation and the infrastructure allowing access to the site of the disaster.

What sticks in my mind is footage, almost always from the same angle, a very wide shot from far away of the school on a very steep hillside just about completely buried in mud. I think the buildings nearby that still stood looked kind of tropical, I think I recall tin roofs but the memory is a bit too vague to say that for sure. I think the angle all the news coverage seemed to be using over the several days must have been one of the only cameras near the scene and in a fixed spot since it was hard to see much of what was going on and it was the same angle throughout the reporting.

While researching this I came across photos of the Aberfan disaster in Wales and thought that might have been it until I saw it was from the 60s, and also the hillside wasn't really tall enough and the obviously the location, UK doesn't match my memory. I also found stuff about the same thing happening in Yunan Province in China. But that was in 2012. The photo in that article is basically exactly my memory in terms of hillside and type of region I'm thinking except that I recall it being a bit more cropped in and much more blurry SD-analogue TV-ish looking as it was actually footage not a photo.

It doesn't actually really work because if you later view your comment it doesn't reflect your extra vote. But it is possible to make the app give you the impression that you just earned an unearned imaginary internet point lol.

If you downvote your own comment and then upvote it again, it doesn't return the net balance of this action, instead double counts your upvote. If you had 1 point like you do by default when making any comment, and then downvote that, it goes to 0 points and then if you upvote, it jumps to 2.

Discovered by accident when accidentally hitting the downvote button and trying to correct it. Guess it's not really important since it didn't appear to actually really manipulate the vote count just temporarily display it wrong for the specific app user but still.

Hope text posts are okay. Weird request I know but, I was just thinking of the song "Blow up the Pokies" and it kind of reminded me of a certain mood of depressing Australian music that I kind of like to wallow in sometimes, I feel like I heard this kind of thing a lot in the 90s but can't think of many examples. The specific constraint of Australian songs is really just because of my personal connection growing up in Australia which makes listening to that kind of thing hit different.

Can anyone give some recommendations?

I have some bluetooth earbuds, Jabra Elite 3's, that I use with my phone most of the time. I also share them as well so sometimes they're connected to someone else's phone. I also like to connect them to my macbook. The frustrating thing is though, I've succesfully paired them with all of these 3 devices before, but it's really frustrating to connect them to something other than the last device they connected to.

If they most recently connected to my phone before and I decide to use them with my laptop, I remove them from their case, but they immediately connect to my phone. This is good, because that's usually what I want them to do, but I hoped I could, from my laptop select them from the list of nearby bluetooth devices and click 'connect' and thereby sever that connection between the headphones and my phone, in favour of the new connection between the laptop and the headphones instead. This doesn't work, the computer just says connecting for a long time, and then stops saying that (but doesn't say anything about having failed).

Ok, I figured, that sort of makes sense, after all you wouldn't want people to be able to just break your connection at will if you're using the headphones (although it would require having previously paired them, but still, devil's advocate I suppose). So I reasoned, you must have to disconnect them from the phone first, on my headphones that's achievable by just pressing the button on each bud once. Doing this disconnects them from the phone, but doesn't them leave them available to other devices for connection, they remain only available to the phone if you press the button again. The only way to finally sever this connection to allow the laptop access is to fully switch off bluetooth on my phone. This pisses me off but it's not a huge big deal, but the trouble here is, that's only if they're connected to my phone. The headphones are shared. I would have thought the 'ownership' of the headphones (for lack of a better word) would give precedence to physical access to the headphones. Therefore, if you have the ability to press the disconnect button on the headphones, then you're most likely the person making the conscious decision to replace one connection with another. I can't control someone else's phone, I'm the one with the headphones, but I can't choose what device they connect to.

Rant aside, this genuinely is a question because it just seems so illogical for it to work this way that I'm betting on there being something I'm missing that would allow common sense to prevail and let me replace one connection with another.

I only wonder because, while I know no one could advise per se that people deliberately make bad security decisions, I don't feel as a layman that the nature of the risk is adequately explained.

Specifically, if you use a really old OS or an old now unsupported phone. The explanations for why this is dangerous tend to focus on the mechanism by which it creates a security flaw (lack of patches, known hardware security flaws that can never be patched).

If we use an analogy of physical security whereby the goal is to prevent physical intrusion by thieves or various malicious actors, there's a gradient of risk that's going to depend a bit on things like who and where you are. If you live in a remote cabin in the woods and left your door open, that's bad, but probably less bad than in a high crime area in a dense city. Similarly, if you're a person of note or your house conspicuously demonstrates wealth, security would be more important than if it you're not and it doesn't.

I would think, where human beings are making conscious choices about targets for cybercrime some parralells would exist. If then, you turn on an old device that's long obsolete for the first time in years and connect to the internet with it, while I know you are theoretically at great risk because your doors and windows are essentially wide open, how risky is that exactly? If you just connect, at home on your wifi and don't do anything? Is someone inevitably going to immediately find and connect to this device and exploit it's vulnerabilities? Or does there have to be a degree of bad luck involved?

I've brought up the idea of malicious actors who are human beings making conscious decisions, (hackers), but I was once told the concern is more to do with automated means of finding such devices when they're exposed to the internet. This makes more sense since a theoretical hacker doesn't have to sit around all day just hoping someone in the world will use an outdated device and that they'll somehow see this activity and be able to exploit the situation, but I guess, it seems hard for me to imagine that such bots or automated means of scanning, even if running all day will somehow become aware the minute anyone, anywhere with an insecure device connects to the internet. Surely there has to be some degree coincidental happenstance where a bot is directed to scan for connections to a particular server, like a fake website posing as a bank or something? It just doesn't seem it could be practical otherwise.

If I'm at all accurate in my assumptions, it sounds then like there's a degree to which a random person, not well known enough to be a specific target, not running a website or online presence connecting an insecure device to the internet, while engaging in some risk for sure, isn't immediately going to suffer consequences without some sort of inciting incident. Like falling for a phishing scam, or a person specifically aware of them with mal intent trying to target them in particular. Is that right?

I have an iPad 1. I barely used it when it was given to me and then it more or less sat unused apart from the occasional booting to see if it still works every few years.

I'm fairly sure it would still work today though I haven't tried for about 3 years. Trouble is, it never got much use because when I got it from my Mum in 2012 it was already becoming obsolete and after about a year I couldn't do basic web browsing because almost every site just crashed whatever browser I ran, none of the apps in the app store would work anymore and the bookshelf app (think that's what it was called. Came with the tablet) I tried to use to make it basically an e-reader device stopped working. There were many similar issue I forget the specifics about but basically amounted to the hardware working fine but being mostly unusable even for old software.

I wondered if there were any good ways to make use of or generally rehabilitate this device. I had hoped there'd be a lot Linux options for something like this but it looks like the earliest model anyone made.any progress with was iPad 2.

Any suggestions besides picture frame?