on my firefox, on click, it switches to the tracking url (there's an onmousedown event). It does use the ping attribute on chrome.

There's another plant, Onagawa, which is closer to epicenter than either Fukushima and experienced bigger tsunami yet it survived just fine.

>but on BSD and its variants like MacOS, the session ID isn’t present or always zero

Don't know about macOS, but session ID/pointer does present on FreeBSD and OpenBSD.

Here's difference between airpods and plastic bottles:

> They can’t be repaired because they're glued together. They can’t be thrown out, or else the lithium-ion battery may start a fire in the garbage compactor. They can’t be easily recycled, because there’s no safe way to separate the lithium-ion battery from the plastic shell.

It would be interesting to ask Apple how much they manage to recycle from the AirPods and how. Would that be asking too much from the article author?

It's not something that Apple openly markets as being a reason why you should buy them so my guess would be a lot less than you think, because of cost to do so.

Whereas with Macbooks they openly tout that https://www.apple.com/environment/

"Built to last as long as humanly possible." -- Apple

That doesn't sound like an Airpod to me.

No it doesn’t, agreed. But I imagine the design constraints for a notebook vs. wireless headphones are pretty different. I am amazed that the thing can be built at all.

Not supporting it means sites without tracking have better user experience. Now tracking is natively supported, everyone can just start doing tracking without any of the disadvantages.

That argument would carry weight if you could point to sites that deliberately avoid outbound link tracking because of the impact on the user experience. I've never heard of any.

That's not what GP was saying. They were saying that given two websites, one that doesn't track and one that does, the one that doesn't would have a better user experience as a side effect, which would give it a competitive advantage in this "department" over the one that does track. So, all things being equal, users would choose the one that doesn't track for the simple virtue of it giving them a better experience.

This argument appears multiple times in this thread. However, realistically I've never seen a mainstream website that was drastically disadvantaged by their tracking mechanisms. I'm concerned that a lot of the tech savvy people who are making this claim may be working on severely outdated machines for which this makes a difference. With even the cheapest Dell computer sold today, it doesn't really matter, which is why everyone is tracking everywhere. I'm not a huge fan of ping, but the idea that websites are going to choose not to track with JavaScript based on the bad UX on a years old Core 2 Duo is just absurd. The economic incentive you are imagining does not exist, thus ping isn't truly eliminating a critical UX difference between tracked and untracked websites.

TL;DR ITT: "Link auditing / ping will eliminate the disadvantages of tracking!" - Ad Industry and sites that serve tracking: "What disadvantages?"

Sorry, is it

xz + yz = x(y + z)

when using operators?

That seems wrong.

I don't know any Lisp, but I would decode

    (= (* x (+ y z))
       (+ (* x z) (* y z)))

As

  x*(y + z) = x*z + y*z

e.g. (+ y z) means you add y and z with highest priority.

That is probably not a statement of equality, but a boolean test for it.

Well, technically it solves to x = z when y <> 0 and any x, z when y = 0 though I'm not sure if that's the original intention.