Chromium browsers don’t allow extensions (uBlock Origin being the best) to block ads as effectively due to their implementation of Manifest V3. The Firefox implementation doesn’t share that limitation.
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2021/12/chrome-users-beware-manifest-v3-deceitful-and-threatening
https://www.theverge.com/2023/1/17/23559234/firefox-manifest-v3-content-ad-blocker
https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2022/05/18/manifest-v3-in-firefox-recap-next-steps/
Yes, there is a difference, but it’s minor and big stuff, like adblocking not working as well, are true of Chrome and Chromium.
Edge is Chrome.
Insurgencies work and has been proven time and time again. See: Iraq
The insurgents lost in Iraq. I know you stopped paying attention when FOX News moved on, but the Iraqi government won.
Yeah, I don’t trust TERF Island to do this right. They’ll ban Contrapoints long before they ban Rowling.
They’re completely meaningful and not at all patronizing. (Do you even know what that word means?)
Not wrong, in that the studies are valid, and completely relevant to your point.
Guns kill their owners far more often than they kill home invaders and other intruders.
According to EU rules, eventual video calls to emergency services would be obligated to have the video feature on both ends — the caller and the dispatcher.
“Obliged” means “required”
99% isn’t good enough for emergency services. Also, sometimes, video is too dangerous.
Doesn’t seem to be what the article says:
According to EU rules, eventual video calls to emergency services would be obligated to have the video feature on both ends — the caller and the dispatcher.
“Obliged” means “required”
According to EU rules, eventual video calls to emergency services would be obligated to have the video feature on both ends — the caller and the dispatcher.
“Obliged” means “required”
So people without video phones, or who can’t use video phones, can’t call emergency services.
You’re more likely to kill yourself or a loved one than a home invader.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/apr/07/guns-handguns-safety-homicide-killing-study
Researchers find ‘zero evidence of any kind of protective effects’, with women at particular risk
[snip]
Living with a handgun owner particularly increased the risk of being shot to death in a domestic violence incident, and it did not provide any protection against being killed at home by a stranger, the researchers found.
https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/magazine/magazine_article/guns-suicide/
While gun-suicide rates are higher in rural states, which have proportionally more gun owners, the gun-suicide link plays out in urban areas, too. “In the early 1990s, the dramatic rise in young black male suicides was in lock step with the homicide epidemic of those years,” says HSPH’s Deborah Azrael, associate director of the Harvard Youth Violence Prevention Center. “Young black male suicide rates approached those of young white males—though black suicide rates had always been much lower than white suicide rates. It was entirely attributable to an increase in suicide by firearms.” Put simply, the fatal link applies across the board. “It’s true of men, it’s true of women, it’s true of kids. It’s true of blacks, it’s true of whites,” says Azrael. “Cut it however you want: In places where exposure to guns is higher, more people die of suicide.”
I don’t want to share an instance with the nutballs on the tankie instance or the nutballs on the fascist instance.