|
|
abmv wrote: u could watch random videos once in a while and also subscribe to some random channels
plus you could reset your ad tracker id periodically and set ad to non personalized
How do you do that?
As to ad-blocker, I am not sure whether I tried once and it was suboptimal and I justify myself later, or if I prefer to have ads in order to sponsor whatever I am watching... either way, today, I rather not use ads blocker.
|
|
|
|
|
you can do that from https://adssettings.google.com/authenticated?hl=en
the id reset i think is for the youtube app, so you have to do it their in the privacy settings..
watching random videos and subscribing to random add noise to the algo.
you can have multiple browsers like chrome /chromium and setup ad block on one of them and try not on your main browser if u wish
Caveat Emptor.
"Progress doesn't come from early risers – progress is made by lazy men looking for easier ways to do things." Lazarus Long
|
|
|
|
|
Actually I went back to that page again in a more refresh state of mind. Totally underestimated it originally!
I was able to get rid of the top 2 obnoxious ads, yeah! Might have to study that page gain to remove more stuff! 
Thanks heaps man! 
|
|
|
|
|
just came across https://freetubeapp.io/about.php not tested could be a test subject
Caveat Emptor.
"Progress doesn't come from early risers – progress is made by lazy men looking for easier ways to do things." Lazarus Long
|
|
|
|
|
Interesting.
As a side note, I am not entirely against ads, since they pay (minutely?) the youtuber.
But ads are becoming more and more obnoxious. As in 2 in a row, longer, and increasingly poor taste - like they purposely target me with things I don't like hoping perhaps, I will finally click them this time!?
(I guess this is the push for youtube red... nut I resisted and subscribe to Nebula instead!)
|
|
|
|
|
In my student days, I read a 3-part article series in one of the ACM publications, I believe that it was Communication of the ACM. In these articles, a couple - both with a high university degree in software development - building a new home decided to automate absolutely everything that could possibly be automated (at that time). The articles described first the design of their basic software and hardware, how it was build in the first stage. Then came the second stage: How to make it absolutely foolproof. If my memory is correct, the second stage cost three times as much to realize as the first stage.
I completed my studies in 1983, and read these articles late in my studies, in the university library copies of the publication, so I never had a hardcopy of my own. The date of publication must have been somewhere from 1980 to 1983.
Does this ring a bell to any of you old timers? Or do you have access to a searchable archive of ACM publications from those years, so you can look it up? I'd really like to pick up these articles again, to see how much home automation has progressed (or not ) in forty years!
|
|
|
|
|
They are still working on the foolproof part. But the universe keeps coming up with better fools.
If you can't laugh at yourself - ask me and I will do it for you.
|
|
|
|
|
https://dl.acm.org/magazines
"Before entering on an understanding, I have meditated for a long time, and have foreseen what might happen. It is not genius which reveals to me suddenly, secretly, what I have to say or to do in a circumstance unexpected by other people; it is reflection, it is meditation." - Napoleon I
|
|
|
|
|
It's not something I have heard of but the parallels with modern software development are interesting -
I have just spent 27 hours doing software security training and the training was what I would consider "the basics" and language/platform/framework agnostic.
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”
― Christopher Hitchens
|
|
|
|
|
trønderen wrote: How to make it absolutely foolproof. If my memory is correct, the second stage cost three times as much to realize as the first stage.
I can't remember the full passage in Mostly Harmless, but Douglas Adams wrote Quote: A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools.
He then went on to explain a company's brand new HVAC unit that was so completely foolproof that they sealed all the windows shut. He went on to say that when something that is completely foolproof *does* fail, it is impossible to fix. The inevitable failure of the HVAC unit led to riots.
Anyway, you made me think of that, and then that made me smile. I have nothing to offer in the way of help, other than a gentle suggestion to give Mostly Harmless a read some time, if nothing else because it's funny.
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
|
And then there's this about Ken Olsen --
In 1977, referring to computers used in home automation at the dawn of the home computer era, Olsen is quoted as saying "There is no reason for any individual to have a computer in his home."
|
|
|
|
|
There was a similar series in Byte at about the same time - look up Steve Ciarcia's Circuit Cellar.
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.
-- 6079 Smith W.
|
|
|
|
|
I guess that makes the rest of us Customer Failure Generalists?
|
|
|
|
|
Marc Clifton wrote: Customer Failure Generalists
Only a double negative. What you want is
Supplier Failure Generalists
Software rusts. Simon Stephenson, ca 1994. So does this signature. me, 2012
|
|
|
|
|
That sounds like it has to be a euphemism for something.
I wonder what kind of person applies for such a position?
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
|
Or in the case of a small town:
Someone’s lover.
That way you have the town paying for the love nest!
|
|
|
|
|
honey the codewitch wrote: I wonder what kind of person applies for such a position?
Very oddly, he has a degree in geography (one can get a degree in that???) from University of Alberta, speaking of Canada. 
|
|
|
|
|
I guess you must have hard headed customers?
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks god. This will change everything! 
|
|
|
|
|
So you hired someone to handle the support calls?
If you can't laugh at yourself - ask me and I will do it for you.
|
|
|
|
|
Code words for "do it yourself".
"Before entering on an understanding, I have meditated for a long time, and have foreseen what might happen. It is not genius which reveals to me suddenly, secretly, what I have to say or to do in a circumstance unexpected by other people; it is reflection, it is meditation." - Napoleon I
|
|
|
|
|
Have heard of a post called "Customer Happiness Officer".
The opposite of this is "Employee Sadness Officer".
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
