grue

I now blame AOL for more than I had previously considered.

Look up the phrase "eternal September."

2000 was better, though.

Those things are still top quality, for retrogamers looking for authenticity in how the pixel art in their old games gets rendered. High-quality CRTs need to be found a good home, not discarded.

Flash was also cancer that ruined web pages.

The reason Java Web Start wasn't, was specifically because once you clicked on the link, it downloaded the app and started it as a real desktop application, with its own window and taskbar entry and whatnot. It didn't rely on being embedded in HTML (I'm spefically not talking about Java applets, BTW -- they sucked too) or manipulating the DOM for its UI; it could use Swing and have the same look and feel as a native application.

I make this point at every opportunity:

The "normal" working-class single-family neighborhoods in my city are zoned R4, with a 9000 sq.ft. minimum lot size. The rich neighborhoods are zoned R1, with a 2 acre minimum lot size. That means every R1 lot could fit at least nine R4 homes on it. Why do we have ridiculous shitty traffic on the freeway going past that rich neighborhood? Because every single one of those mansions physically displaced eight other households out into the suburbs, who could have otherwise lived there if the law wasn't being (ab)used to subsidize the rich.

And that's just the difference between two kinds of single-family, let alone rezoning to allow the real level of density the market demands! If my city were zoned appropriately, the entire metro area population could be housed within the ring road.

Don't get me wrong: I'm not saying it's "selfish" or wrong to want to live in a single-family home... just that you only deserve one if and only if you're actually willing to pay for it. That means being willing to outbid multifamily developers who would build the lot out to its highest and best use, not hiding behind zoning to protect you from the free market.

(I'm also not saying it isn't selfish or wrong; I just try to stick to the geometric argument to deprive the person I'm debating of an excuse to turn it into an emotional debate.)

At this point, Canonical is so desperate that even if you try to use apt on the command line to install certain packages it'll override it to install the snap version anyway:

$ apt search firefox

firefox/oracular,now 1:1snap1-0ubuntu6 amd64 [installed,automatic]
  Installs Firefox snap and provides some system integration

What was that phrase, again? Oh yeah: "VOTE BLUE NO MATTER WHO."

So what? That doesn't mean it would've worked.

The Democrats, as played by Prince John from Robin Hood: Men in Tights

Eh, "executive order," "royal decree" -- same difference, at this point!

"Diversified."

"Divested" means kinda the opposite of what you were trying to say.

The bottom line rebuttal to all the variants of the "but whatabout people who want to live in single-family houses" arguments is real simple: if it were truly that important to them, then they would be willing to pay fair-market rates for it. Which means artificially inflating the supply (thus subsidizing the price) via restrictive zoning laws wouldn't be necessary.

People who think they are entitled to live in single-family houses to the point that they want the law to forcibly impose that lifestyle on vast swathes of the population are just selfish takers who want society to subsidize them.