That's fair, it was based on a similar browser called Arc that had ambitions to reinvent browsing. That one was chromium based though and maintenance stopped when they wanted to create another AI powered browser. Then the Zen people recreated Arc as an open source browser based on Firefox. I was already used to Arc so Zen was familiar.
I think there are a lot of benefits to the way the UI is laid out, give it a try you without changing any defaults for a week or so, you might get hooked.
What is your issue with multi monitor setups? On my Mac and Linux machines I have no issues
It has a strong focus on workflow improvements. I love the way it handles pinned tabs where third party links open as a modal and you can reset the tab with a middle click. It also has very good workspace management and useful keybinds.
Please try Zen browser. I can't go back to any other browser since I switched
Hey, a fellow Protomen fan! There's literally dozens of us
Maybe I'm misunderstanding then.
My interpretation of the comic is that the woman's first instinct was to feign interest to prevent any toxic behavior being directed to her. Then the man told her to disregard that and simply reject him which she does, then her instinct is proven right.
That to me signifies that she did not feel safe to reject him.
The way I understood your argument is that this fear of rejecting a man from panel 1, or assuming a bad reaction is "sexist" because "Men are not a monolith". I'm not sure this is appropriate to the point the comic is trying to make.
If you think that the appropriate answer to "women feel scared to reject men because of common toxic behavior" is "but its not all men"... I'm sorry to call you out but you're part of the problem.
Instead of being defensive, try to see it from their point of view and accept that something is messed up where a lot of men are like this. And I don't agree that women that are rejected react like this. Quite the opposite actually.
It's an undeniable reality that women get unsolicited advances from men multiple times a day, whereas the opposite is not true.
I understand your point, but it does not matter whether men are panel 1 or 3, when the interaction is short you can't tell which reaction it will be. The problem is that panel 3 men exist at all, and that society normalizes it to be like that. "Men will be men" and all that is the problem. I totally get why women would be guarded because of it. Our job as men is to point out toxic behavior when it happens. That's it.
I think you put your finger on exactly what his happening here. Justify the lack of subscriptions to the investors by promising them revenue will go up when people start accepting the price hike and subs go up again (which we all know will happen anyway)
The company was recently sued for creating a platform using almost exclusively child labor
The problem is while their target audience is kids, it is heavily monetized and created a market and economy around child created content. It is also impossible to moderate and became a cesspool of predators.
The game itself is comprised of an infinite number of mini games you can try, most of them created by children. Some of them are of a sexual nature and not safe for kids. This makes it really easy for a predator to set up environments where they can groom children.
The players can buy robux with real money and spend this to advertise the games they create, or buy customization items or game passes. They also earn robux when people play their games to incentivize them to create more content. Because of this the company is being sued for essentially child labor, where all their profits revolve around child created games
When I was younger I would also play modded games and create content. I dont think there's anything wrong with that. But the fact that the game monetized it to such an extent is wrong in my opinion. With the predator problem as well it makes it a really unsafe playform for children. As a parent I would never let my children play this.
It feels pretty silly to protect UI design to that extent. It's as if I started designing a website for a client, someone passing by took a screenshot and showed someone my design. Then I sue that person for... not keeping design secrets? I dont understand how apple can prove any damages besides maybe being owed the ad money on that video. And even that is a stretch, and not worth the lawyers' time in my opinion.
I think it will become easier and easier to generate content tailored to individuals and all that noise will make it harder for human created content to pierce through, until it becomes too impractical to create and distribute content. Then it will take some kind of quiet revolution where everyone starts rejecting all forms of technology as overstimulating, and move towards simple communication devices to try and connect with each other.