https://theyesmen.org/sites/default/files/styles/max_width_850px/public/2020-11/hallib-whatnoahknew-Slide33.jpg

True, I was ignoring the distinction between the supply of shitty web pages and the supply of attribution-recording advertising opportunities provided through them. Not quite the same thing even if they do seem likely, as you proposed, to be closely correlated in the scenario where Mozilla’s product somehow ends up surviving to become a hugely influential new ad platform.

I assumed that PPA was the new game in town.

It kinda feels like you didn’t read what I wrote. That very assumption is what I was calling optimistic. Unrealistically so, I think.

It doesn’t require any esoteric scientific knowledge to see the glaring error in that headline, just clear thinking. Trees and land absorbed a lot of CO2 last year. It’s just that they released almost as much elsewhere due to forest fires and so on.

It seems remarkably optimistic to think that this stuff will shift the supply supply curve of advertising to the right, lower barriers to entry for spammers, and crowd out quality content.

This would require increasing the number of people willing to accept that their web browsers are made by an ad company, that they’ll be subjected to all the ads, and that the software they use is designed in part to measure and analyze the audience of which they’re a part so that data can be sold to advertisers. I don’t think there’s room for that number to increase much further.

More likely, the only substantial result will be Firefox losing ground even more quickly in the battle against a Google monopoly on web browsers and either someone else comes along to take up the fight or we’ll have to give up this “world wide web” thing and go back to writing our comments on bathroom walls, if there are some left that aren’t covered in ads.

The alternatives for Mozilla are: A) Try to become an advertising company, or B) Don’t.

Pleroma and Misskey users literally off the chart

Did this highly scientific study contemplate the possibility that this is in part the result of people feeling like they’re more justified in turning to piracy if a game is burdened with Denuvo?

Spoiler: It does not, so far as I can tell at first glance. It appears that the model is constructed entirely from DRM-crippled games that got cracked, and then then the estimate of how much revenue would be lost by going DRM-free from the start is extrapolated from that based on the assumption that it makes no difference. Maybe it’s true, but the acknowledgement that it “can and often does cause problems, and some developers have chosen to avoid Denuvo altogether because it had such a negative impact on how well their game would run” sort of suggests otherwise.

https://abs.freemyip.com:84/share/_5WuM4QF — be careful following strange links you found on lemmy, but this appears to be the pdf.

It appears to be @linuxprepper@podcast.james.network for those who want to follow it.

To have it post to lemmy I believe you’d just need to address things to e.g. @fediverse@lemmy.world

Isn’t this basically just the old trick of estimating (x * y) as (x + y - 1) when x and y are somewhat close to 1?

I had gotten into the habit of watching world average sea surface temperature neatly charted over at https://climatereanalyzer.org/ and wondering if it will ever go back to levels closer to what used to be normal.

Since 26 September the data is unavailable due to hurricane damage. So there’s one indicator that’s not looking entirely healthy.

a ‘semi-dystopian’ future, with famines, conflicts and mass migration

The world is facing a semi-dystopian present.

You seem to have javascript disabled. Please note that many of the page functionalities won’t work as expected without javascript enabled.

Fortunately, the page did its job just fine and was able to tell me to use javascript blocking without needing javascript to do it.

I missed the Internet Archive yesterday when @pluralistic@mamot.fr casually mentioned “Keppler illustrations for Puck” as if we’d all know what that meant and the best-looking link that came up on search was to a collection of them there.

This helps protect our community.

Ah, so it’s not you coming up with the stupid excuse that they have legit reasons to think the user might be a nefarious “bot”, you’re just passing along the stupid excuse as you interpret it from the meaningless message direct from Google. That explains where you got the idea that “viewbots” had anything to do with it, I guess.

It’s not just you. I’m tired of the whole team of people who are always standing by to bring out similar excuses any time someone decides that in their quest to stop invidious from existing — or whatever google is actually aiming at — it’s acceptable to just mass-block all the VPN users as collateral damage.

I suspect the VPN was used to bot

There are plenty of sources, including even in this thread, indicating that that this is not the problem. Quit making excuses for them.

People have to understand the concept of the fediverse

That’s the argument. Do they, though? I sure didn’t when I first signed up.

Okay I watched the few seconds of video at the end of a three-hour long video apparently about Facebook where he mentions “federated social media using open decentralized technologies such as activitypub” as it is known. The ratio of time and effort he’s inclined to devote to each topic speaks for itself. My understanding of what he says: “Sounds complicated. I’m not touching it until all my friends are already there.”