In these discussion threads I always see people mixing call/gps functionality (which is genuinely useful, especially in case of an emergency, and not addictive) with social media. You can have one without having the other. Instagram didn't come with your phone, you installed it. So, don't.
There's a lot of people who show up in these threads whose only coping strategy is to go cold turkey. Maybe that's good advice, but it's not the only advice. There's no reason you can't carry a smartphone in your pocket without it becoming a pacifier.
Devil's advocate here: addiction is tricky. There's no reason you can't carry around a pack of cigarettes and not smoke them, either, but in practice that strategy would not work for many smokers. Cold turkey isn't the magic bullet, but try whatever you suspect might work.
Believe me if you have the first thing the latter things will eventually follow. At least in the EU "universally mandated" has been a reality for a very long time.
There are many places with mandated ID. Can you mention one in which any of the others on the list have "eventually followed"? You are presenting speculation as unavoidable fact.
If WhatsApp disappeared today, over a billion people would lose their main communication channel with friends and families, and millions of businesses in emerging markets would lose a primary sales channel.
If crypto disappeared today, what would be the real-world effect? How many people would be inconvenienced in some other sense than "bummer, I hoped this would make me rich"? How many actual businesses would be impacted?
I've seen some concern voiced over counterparty risk in private credit contagion into public markets. Counterparty relationships are not uniformly visible across the financial landscape, so it is conceivable someone accepts a counterparty position on an instrument where crypto is pledged as an asset. This instrument is presented as a different asset obscuring the crypto, a tower of downstream instruments are constructed on top of that original instrument, and tranches leak out into a bunch of other more tradfi instruments.
I've yet to see evidence that this is widespread in practice. Though admittedly there is a lot that can go on in private credit that is out of reach from public analytics.
Even if there was contagion risk however, I don't expect extinction level financial system damage. Total global crypto valuation at peak was around $1T USD depending upon who you ask. Global software industry alone is around $10T USD. If crypto goes to zero tomorrow, it would be life-alterting to many people, but most of the world would go on about their lives.
More value has been erased from global equity markets this year than any hypothetical crypto-to-zero scenario, and while the consequences won't be pleasant, in the developed world if you have saved up 1-7 years of living expenses you will barely notice the recession currently inbound.
>The press is doing their patriotic job protecting United States government and US citizenry dutifully through its thorough reporting as given by the 1A.
This comment demonstrates a tremendous amount of naivete about the Cpython runtime. After PyObject itself, the GIL mutex is probably the next most important data structure in the entire codebase. It's not "someone not being bothered to write thread-safe software." It's not something you can hide behind a flag. It's central to the entire cpython data model and any library which relies on releasing the GIL.
The closest anyone has come to removing the GIL is the Gilectomy project by Larry Hastings, and it's unlikely to ever be upstreamed unless it could be somehow made to work with libraries that rely on assumptions about GIL mechanics (eg numpy).
I guess it would have made more sense for me to say "Python C extension developers".
I don't find multithreading in languages without particular support easy at all, but I have become better at it. It is possible and sometimes necessary. It seems like the prevailing attitude in the Python ecosystem is weird, a kind of sour grapes thing, i.e. "Python doesn't have good multithreading support, but multithreading is ugly and error-prone anyway and the alternatives are almost as good or better".
Usually when I've needed more parallelization I've allowed more processes and for slow methods, there is threading available (this doesn't overcome the GIL but allows those methods to independently operate). It seems like the biggest reasons to focus on removing the GIL are single-process applications or machines where memory is constrained (so you don't want tons of processes consuming it all). Are you in one of those situations or is there another scenario that is impacted by the GIL?
I suspect Substack vary their element names (e.g., the "2_6UY" and "2DQPj" strings in the above list), so that substring matches as I've used in my CSS example should be more robust.
UBO uses the Easylist blocking syntax which ... I can't seem to find documented, so I'm guessing as to the specific patterns. Corrections/clues welcomed.
Substack also gets lots of revenue from subscriptions. If that's not enough to keep the platform up then perhaps they need to try to take a bigger cut (or not offer service to authors who have too few subscribers).
There's no reason for authors (who are Substack's customers) to want to make the platform more annoying for readers (some of whom are the author's customers). If the author is not making enough money (perhaps because Substack has started taking a bigger cut to cover costs) they need only to improve their writing and/or put more of it behind the paywall in order to get more subscribers.
