They probably meant that Muhammad was on his way to become a prophet and a future leader who would lay the foundation of the Islamic empires that would span around most of the world (while at the same time, Europe's decline had begin).
Can't you still design such softwares for opensourcing, by storing the business rules or domain knowledge in a database that is proprietary and whose data is not shared with the open source code?
There is no "ad-free" YouTube. Even if you pay, you will still see ads - https://old.reddit.com/r/youtube/comments/1gnaetv/paying_to_... ... (ofcourse, those who pay will only see "premium" ads, befitting their financial status, unlike the cheap, ordinary every day ads for the lower class masses). Note that paying for YouTube doesn't prevent collection of your personal data (i.e. profiling). A comprehensive blocker like uBlock Origin helps prevents that to some extent by blocking the trackers.
I've been paying for years, I can tell you the only ads I see are sponsored and embedded in the video. Off YT content like NFL is not a proxy for the Premium experience, that's not what paying the $14/m is getting you
The NFL is an extra package, costs more, and comes with different terms. The NFL is a media / entertainment organization that exerts significant control over their content and the ads around them.
NBA is similar, they made their players leave Bluesky because the NBA has deals with other media / social companies. These company's control extends beyond the TV to the players themselves.
Planned Obsolescence. Increased battery consumption = reduced battery life + user hostile repairability = new purchases. I've seen so many iDiots purchase a new iPhone when their battery conks out because the cost of repairs and original battery "doesn't justify it".
That's what Sciter does - https://sciter.com/ - it just gives you a lightweight HTML / CSS / Javascript "webview" engine for layout and rendering. Like you pointed out, that should be enough. But corporates want a "webview" that is an OS so that they can do everything with Javascript on it (hence why embedded Chrome with NodeJS is so popular).
The onus should be on the job provider to care for their employees too. They have a responsibility to ensure their employees are not physically harmed while they work. And to help or compensate their workers for any work injury. Right? Why not use the same criteria for psychological harm too? They should be provided psychological counselling. And note that this is not a new industry.
Call me cynical, but from the comments online, I think this research is being used for propaganda marketing to push for MV3 adoption - to assuage the lay users that all the hue and cry is for nothing and they shouldn't abandon Chrome, and to provide an excuse for other browsers holding out to embrace MV3 completely. (Don't be surprised if Firefox suddenly changes its mind and decides to fully embrace MV3 and drop MV2).
Here is the actual research - Privacy vs. Profit: The Impact of Google's Manifest Version 3 (MV3) Update on Ad Blocker Effectiveness - https://arxiv.org/html/2503.01000v2
> This study comes with several limitations ... this study faces limitations related to the dynamic behavior of websites and extensions ... Second, consistent with previous research, the automated browser-based experiment does not replicate all aspects of user interactions, such as visiting sub-pages of a website’s homepage, which introduce different trackers than the website’s homepage ... Third, the study explores ad blocker effectiveness using a European IP address and default ad blocker settings on a select sample of websites, focusing on display ads. As a result, the web’s long tail is under-represented. Consequently, we cannot rule out that MV3’s 30,000-rule limit could disproportionately affect less popular websites that rely on rarely used rule ... Because EU traffic often involves GDPR-driven website changes that reduce third-party activity irrespective of consent, baseline ad and tracker counts are lower ... Fourth, our study cannot exclude that any future changes to the Chrome extension ecosystem might hinder ad blocker effectiveness, as feared by some ad blocker providers ...
Note that the intent of this study was to determine if MV3 ad-blockers are as effective as MV2 based ad-blockers. Nobody has said that MV3 cannot be used to block ads or trackers. What they have always criticised is that it makes it harder to do so than MV2, and the difficulty of implementing dynamic filtering with it gives the advertisers an upper hand over adblockers.
When the ad-block extension developers tell you that MV3 cripples their extension and makes it harder to block ads and trackers in your browser, who are you going to believe - the experts at blocking ads and trackers or a corporate who makes its money from data harvesting and online advertising and has a real incentive to cripple ad-blocking on browsers?
> What they have always criticised is that it makes it harder to do so than MV2, and the difficulty of implementing dynamic filtering with it gives the advertisers an upper hand over adblockers.
it's more than this
the filter list is now bundled in extension, which has to be approved by Google
so they're now the gatekeepers of the filter list updates
so to stop youtube adblockers, all they have to do is:
- design a countermeasure
- deploy it
- don't approve updates until the next countermeasure is ready
> Don't be surprised if Firefox suddenly changes its mind and decides to fully embrace MV3 and drop MV2
Firefox could also deploy MV3 with the new restrictions removed of course.
But Firefox is a bit of an unknown now that they're cuddling up to the ad industry and coming up with their privacy preserving attribution stuff. This is a problem for me because privacy isn't the only issue with ads. I don't believe in a win-win for the ad sponsored web.
The only reason the US and Europe are targeting TikTok is because they don't own the platform. Facebook and WhatsApp (owned by Meta) are responsible for so much hate politics and social unrest around the world (Facebook and Genocide: How Facebook contributed to genocide in Myanmar and why it will not be held accountable - https://systemicjustice.org/article/facebook-and-genocide-ho... ). Amazon, Google and Microsoft helped the Israelis conduct the genocide in Gaza with their AI tools (UN Calls Out Google and Amazon for Abetting Gaza Genocide - https://progressive.international/wire/2025-08-26-un-calls-o... ). But all that's OK.
The US government would have to demonstrate improving people's lives to get votes if they couldn't campaign entirely on hate politics. Obviously they prefer the hate politics and ragebait attention algorithms. That way they can funnel billions of dollars to themselves and their buddies instead of wasting it on services supporting US citizens.
Yeah, I don't like the reason either. They should've just banned TikTok day 1 as reciprocity with China banning our sites. Instead it was allowed until it started promoting wrongthink.
The US government banned tiktok because it was the only major platform that didn't censor information and footage of the Gaza genocide, but I don't think the same reason applies to Europe.
reply