![](/static/253f0d9b/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
![](https://programming.dev/pictrs/image/170721ad-9010-470f-a4a4-ead95f51f13b.png)
Did you just call “family” the “minor part of life”‽ Or am I misunderstanding you?
Did you just call “family” the “minor part of life”‽ Or am I misunderstanding you?
Okay, which instances should I block to get rid of the tankies?
Duolingo taught me “wilkommen” for “welcome.” Is that used IRL?
Todoist works great for me. I like the recurring tasks feature which lets me clear up a lot of headspace. “Clean XYZ every 11 days #chore” is all the syntax you need to setup a recurring task that’s categorised under the “chore” category.
Have you tried diluting your cycle with some water or turpentine to reduce its viscosity?
The trilogy of songs by The Lonely Island ft. Justin Timberlake.
ELI5 of certificates:
The “s” in “https” in urls like “https://wikipedia.com” stands for “Secure”.
When you connect to Wikipedia’s computer to read something, how do you know if the content you get back is what they actually sent and wasn’t altered by your friendly neighborhood hacker?
Wikipedia can “sign” the content before sending it you. They also give you a certificate telling you how they have a particular signature which has been verified by someone else whom you already trust, and how long this particular signature is valid for.
If a hacker tries to alter the document returned by Wikipedia, they wouldn’t be able to sign the document correctly. If they tried to give a certificate with a different signature too, you would catch it because they wouldn’t be able to fake the verification of the “someone you trust” so you’d catch the fake certificate.
Browsers handle all this stuff for us. If it detects something fishy, it’ll just show an error along the lines of “could not verify certificate”. In some cases, it’s genuinely an issue where you/the website is under attack and you may get a virus.
In some other cases though, it’s an issue of the certificate expiring and the guys at Wikipedia not being proactive about getting a new signature and certificate. If you are ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN that you’re just dealing with a lazy developer and not a malicious hacker, you can tell your browser to ignore whatever issue it detected and show you the content that was returned by Wikipedia.
Thanks for attending my TEDx talk.
Great story! Loved the twist at the end.
Thanks!
What’s the extension for nice backgrounds on new tabs?
It’s not as bad as Google yet, but I find myself getting terrible or no results quite a few times.
Ex: if I’m looking for a niche blog post from example.com, just entering the keywords doesn’t return the right result, if anything at all. I have to add “site:example.com” and the right link shows up on top.
It’s kinda amusing when this happens, but I keep using ddg anyway because bing and Google had the same issue for the same keywords when I ran into the issue.
This guy S_20xxxxxxx has a holier than thou comment ranting about the “assholes from reddit being pieces of shit on lemmy”, ironically, on a thread about people being aggressive on lemmy.
A few hours later, he replies to some comments of mine - every single one of them makes him sound more unhinged than the last.
I went through his comment history and his comments swing between these two extremes of being preachy and being unhinged. I decided that blocking him and moving on was better for my sanity than continuing to engage.
There’s no point in engaging with such people, do what’s best for you, and move on. Cheers! :)
Are you completely incapable of communicating without resorting to personal attacks?
Do you know how many scams happen because it’s ridiculously easy for anyone to edit the “knowledge” panel? I’d rather click an extra button and get the real number from the business’ own website than trust whatever is on Google.
“You’re not this obtuse are you?” – uncalled for, but, I guess you are who you are. So, you do you, buddy.
…and the website should have all that information, right?
What did namecheap do? I’ve got a bunch of domains with them. 🤦♂️
SEO itself is fine - it’s just optimising your website website for whatever a search engine considers important.
The problem is that search engines’ seem to have absolutely garbage metrics for what is important and worth it.
An example of search engines failing me miserably last month:
I wanted to hire a photographer, so I started searching using keywords like “wedding photographer MAJOR_CITY_NAME”, “photography MCN”, “event photographer MCN”, etc. The top results I got were all mostly along the lines of “top ten wedding photographers in MCN” i.e. listicles with links to a few photographers who probably paid the listicle creator? There were maybe one or two links to a photographer’s website itself in the first page.
I’m okay with ignoring the first page of results and moving on to following pages. But rather than giving me individual photographer’s websites in subsequent pages, I started getting listicles for “top ten wedding photographers in OTHER_CITIES”. I’d click through multiple pages of results to find maybe 5 direct website links.
What actually helped me find a photographers eventually was entering the exact same key words on Instagram. Almost every single one of them that I found on Instagram had an excellent website and the city name, and their addresses were mentioned clearly on their websites. So, it wasn’t a case of them not having enough information on their website. It’s just that search engines chose to prioritise listcles of photographers from other cities rather than giving me links to individual websites of photographers in my own city.
In this case, I got lucky because photographers have a presence on Instagram which has a functional search engine. What if I want to find a plumber, or someone else? I’m forced to just trust a listicle creator because search engines don’t want to give away links to single purpose websites and only want to keep us on websites with a shit ton of content (that may or may not be what you need) and ads.
/rant
At this point, I’m not sure if I should interpret that as “very recyclable” or “barely recyclable”.