From what the article says, it’s actually a pretty cool way of improving desalination plants. They use the left over brine, from desalination, that has a very high concentration of salt, and use it as the high salt concentration side, with regular seawater being used on the other side. This both gives them free energy and reduces the side effects of pumping that extremely salty water into the sea by diluting it.
Yeah but my understanding was that an important part of the EU is the negotiation of trade deals that regulate tariffs, and that the countries more or less gave their sovereignty in that area to the EU. Maybe I was mistaken?
Wait, how does this work? I am for the EU to retaliate with tariffs against the US, but how is Poland able to do it by itself? Isn’t the EU supposed to have a common trade policy?
I personally don’t have a need for it, but if someone has a 4K 120Hz TV or monitor without DisplayPort that they want to use as such, it’s kinda stupid that they can’t.
Except that AMD doesn’t support HDMI 2.1 on Linux (not their fault to be fair, but still)
Hosting costs heavily depend on the type of service, YouTube’s costs are very much not negligible, but it is true that for most sites it is very cheap. But hosting costs aren’t the only cost, many sites provide useful reviews, news, or testing that costs them money to produce, which they pay for with ads. Yes, some sites survive using alternative payment methods, but I’m skeptical that this can scale to the rest of the internet. My fear is that we’ll end up in a situation where 90% of the internet is just YouTube, Facebook, Reddit and other giants and people get all of their news, reviews and other information from those sites, which I think is worse than having ads.
I’m not advocating for you being forced physically to watch ads, I’m saying that as it stands, ads are the payment method and you actively blocking them means you’re not paying for what you’re using. I’m not criticising people for that, I’m simply stating a fact. If everyone on the internet was to use adblockers, most of the web would die out, and first to die would be actually useful sites that provide helpful information that they invested time and money into making, such as news, review sites, etc. Perhaps the threat of adblockers itself is benefitial for the internet as it might force websites to find alternate, better payment methods, but I don’t see what you could replace ads with since people won’t be willing to pay a monthly subscription for every site they visit, and most people won’t pay for donations if you try a donations based model.
I know I’m gonna get a lot of hate for this because everyone here despises ads, but I can see an argument for it. I don’t know if it is legaly sound, but morally, it boils down to the fact that you are literally using a service without paying for it. The website is offering you a product and the payment is ads. If you don’t want to pay for it, don’t use it, otherwise you really are just stealing it (even if that “stealing” costs very little to the site). I personally use an adblocker and agree that ads on most sites are obnoxious, but I also feel like people make adblockers out to be completely black and white, which they are not.
For me, the best way I can describe what it feels like for me is: I can imagine an apple and I get a feeling as if I was seeing it, but I don’t actually see it. I don’t see an image in front of me. I only feel like I’m seeing an image, and I have to focus pretty hard to see anything in detail, but I can still use it to, for example, try and manipulate something in 3D, or try to remember what I was doing on a given day by trying to walk back through a place. I don’t know under what category that makes me fall under.