I agree with the colouring, and if we’re fielding gripes with the calendar, I have a few. For context, I pretty much exclusively use the month view in calendar applications on my phone.

• I prefer scrolling to swiping when moving around month to month, give me a toggle
• the day cells could do with being smaller, allowing eight weeks visible up from current six
• tapping a day cell could open a lower third panel summarizing the event times and titles or a floating tooltip on the cell doing the same, instead of the current action which enters the day view which I find the largest way to display the information
• when an event is opened, I should be able to copy it and set a new date; it is so useful for recurring appointments with irregular recurrence to not have to type a hundred words over again
• speaking of copying, I don’t want to copy an address into a navigation application, let me tap the address on the event and open it in whatever default is set on my device
• I use a widget to display upcoming events for certain calendars, and with Proton having only a single option with zero customisation, it shows four events where my primary calendar typically shows twelve in the same space

I could keep going, but this is already much longer than this post haha.

If you’re interested, my primary is Business Calendar. I’m trying to switch away as the only sync option is through Google. Unfortunately, it has proven too functional so far and remains.

Kill death ratio - or rather, kill save ratio - would be rather difficult to obtain and more difficult still to appreciate and be able to say if it is good or bad based solely on the ratio.

Fritz Haber is one example of this that comes to mind. Awarded a Nobel Prize a century ago for chemistry developments in fertilizer, used today in a quarter of food growth. A decade or so later he weaponized chlorine gas, and his work was later used in the creation of Zyklon B.

By ratio, Haber is surely a hero, but when considering the sheer numbers of the dead left in his wake, it is a more complex question.

This is one of those things that makes me almost hope for an afterlife where all information is available from which truth may be derived. Who shot JFK? How did the pyramids get built? If life’s biggest answer is forty-two, what is the question?

I’m adding this to the list of things that I would have used if not for learning about it from a shutdown announcement.

I disagree they are bozos. I’m actually coming around on the idea. Not the mirror thing of course, but the VC grift using a flashy idea. Millions of dollars and the only thing you make is a slideshow? Brilliant.

This reminds me of the venetian shade idea. ‘Trillions of dollars’ hahaha okay let’s see who wants to pitch in.

Could you elaborate on this comment?

I happened across this video yesterday about this entrepreneur. Seems like a good hearted person.

Shyster menu options include:

• $10 - the only choice and drink, mustard and sauerkraut
• $11 - hot dog with the wrong toppings and drink, four toppings a la carte
• $1 dog treats
• $1,000 shirt off my back

Some choice text from the display boards:

• “The Only Honest Ripoff in DC”
• All prices include tax, and there is no tip screen. I hate that garbage.
• Want a hot dog with no drink? You aren’t saving money.
• Briefly recite the historical significance of MoonPies and/or RC Cola for a five cent discount on your whole order.

If I were local, I’d be buying some dogs.

I’m going to call bullshit on the underlying assertion that Signal is using Amazon services for the sake of lining Jeff’s pocket instead of considering the “several” alternatives. As if they don’t have staff to consider such a thing and just hit buy now on the Amazon smile.

In any monopoly, there are going to be smaller, less versatile, less reliable options. Fine and dandy for Mr Joe Technology to hop on the niche wagon and save a few bucks, but that’s not going to work for anyone casting a net encompassing the world.

Most people don’t even consider things like this. That’s why companies keep getting away with it. It’s not the customer’s fault.

I could. Presumably so could the others commenting on this post. But then what are we to do about the privacy or tech illiterate people we’ve carried to Signal over the years?

It’s easy to winge about just doing what you perceive as the optimal solution. It’s more difficult when you need to navigate the path to get there from where we are now.

Maybe they’re right. Steve Carell once took action to protect the future from God’s plan. Maybe we do too.

Ah see if only I had your genius those years back. I do still have that Blackberry, maybe I’ll get a new battery and set it up again.

To my surprise, you’re right. Brigades letting buildings burn didn’t happen - at least not by company decree.

The most I’d ever looked into it was to see what those plaques looked like. I appreciate you countering the idea, it led me to an interesting read of this correction article that seems a great summary of what really occurred.

Primarily it seems they all just worked together for reasons that, after reading them, are painfully obvious and I can’t believe I hadn’t considered even the first one.

• preventing fire spread from buildings uninsured to those insured
• quick efficient response was good advertising for the insurance company
• resolving fires in uninsured properties is an act of charity and displays goodwill

I did this with a Blackberry a while ago, but it destroyed the battery after a year unfortunately.

Might be fine if the charging could be stopped and resumed at a lower point. Maybe even a dumb solution like one of those holiday light timers to only charge for a couple hours a day would work. Damn, I should have done that.

Edit - Turns out, this just isn’t true. Thanks to Teft for the correction. Details in another comment.

Once upon a time fire brigades were private entities operated by insurance companies. When they heard of a fire nearby, they’d roll up and only take action if the plaque on the building had their company name on it. Domestic authorities these days certainly resemble that behaviour.

I’m unsure we are talking about the same comment. The misinformation is the claim the Gates foundation is continuing to fund Kurzgesagt, when that clearly isn’t the case. This incorrect information is veiled by beginning the statement with the truth of the 2015 grant.

Insofar as the reputational damage Kurzgesagt has incurred, I’m not sure there’s much meat on that bone. Sure, you might believe they have fallen from grace or some such, but as I pointed out in another comment here, we can’t just connect everything under the sun and say ‘group A is bad because groups B through Y are all next to one another and with group Z doing all those injustices, group A is complicit in those crimes’.

To me, the question of whether Kurzgesagt is a Gates mouthpiece is pretty cut and dry. A few reasons for this, but the most glaring is simply that the money didn’t keep coming, and it wasn’t much money to begin with. I wouldn’t be going out of my way to talk up my employer to clients if my last bonus was a decade ago and didn’t even cover my rent for the month I got it.

Thank you for linking that video and doing what you can to share these conflict free sources you hold in such esteem.

Sorry, I didn’t think the word ‘continued’ would have needed underlining for anyone that could read what I wrote.

Using a piece of factual information to prop up false information within the same sentence is how false narratives take hold.

They accepted, and continue to accept a great amount of money from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

It’s interesting how any false narrative starts with a granule of truth.

Kurzgesagt was indeed provided $570,000 in 2015. That money was paid out across the following four years.

They have not continued to accept any amount of money from the Gates foundation.

I did a few searches and while I didn’t find that quote from Kurzgesagt’s CEO, I did find the contribution listed from a decade ago on the Gates foundation website. $570,000 paid out over four years. They also gave NPR $2,000,000 the next year.

Since I didn’t find the CEOs quote you’ve mentioned, I can only question the context around it. Would those videos not have been made because the Gates foundation specifically tied the funding to those videos being created? Or would they not have been made because Kurzgesagt didn’t have the money to do so otherwise?

Regardless, Kurzgesagt is a private company and if they wanted to conceal hidden agendas by corporate contributors, they would just keep quiet - not openly acknowledge that they made content with money given to them by some larger organisation.

If we’re going to denounce any group of people that are connected via Bacon’s Law to a disastrous corporate industry, the moral high ground will be unachievable for the entirety of our species.