There’s a big difference between “heated” and “burnt” tobacco. Same as with weed vaporization vs smoking, vaporization is much healthier compared to inhaling burnt plant material.

It sure will if not fix, at least improve your overall mood, and consequently your life

Nah, it forces them to sell over the ten years, since if they wait up until the last moment, the market’s gonna get flooded, meaning they’ll have to lower prices to be competitive

If they did, it’d be the same as the “enhance” tech from the tv shows.

Blurring causes information loss, the blurrier it is, the more information is lost.

After a certain point, so much is lost that nothing’s gonna help you get it back.

They’re a public company, they’re required by law to share financial info.

Do you perhaps have better data though?

Farmers would disagree

Love it

You can’t just say that and leave come on

What about a CDN for JS libraries?

What about YouTube embeds?

What about images from Imgur?

Why should all of this be handled by me, on my domain?

It’s illegal if the fact that a service fee would be added wasn’t shared before ordering (on the menu / by the waiter /…)

So how is this related?

He might’ve borrowed them from a library.

OpenAI could’ve trained on borrowed ebooks as well

Knife, scissors, stuff like that probably

lmao you’re so wrong on ads being more profitable than premium, especially on a per-user basis

According to this you can expect to make around $18/1000 views. That’s with 55% going to the creator and 45% to Google. Which means that Google makes around $14.5 per 1000 views.

Coincidentally, that’s also rougly the price of YouTube Premium. Are you telling me that you watch a thousand videos per month?

They might be allowing them to run the boxes for free, but the ISPs are saving money on bandwidth, too.

Get enough users for the ISP to care and they’ll work with you. Otherwise, you probably don’t have all that many users to begin with, so the overhead that maintaining and distributing these boxes would create wouldn’t be worth it anyway.

Yeah, fair enough I guess. Depends on her intent, which would be impossible to prove

Could be fraud, she took the money under a false premise.

Hard to say though, not a lawyer

Worst case, they can keep chugging along without any changes, except maybe stopping the donation “nag”.

It’s honestly kinda perplexing.

Everyone keeps talking about taxing the rich but when someone offers to give a nonprofit we all love a billion dollars it’s suddenly the worst thing on the planet.

If the deal were real of course