i'm just thinking back, and i don't think i've ever bought potatoes at a grocery store.

i don't think i've bought a package of pre-cut french fries in upwards of fifteen years.

on the rare occasions that i'll buy a burger at a restaurant, i essentially never get fries.

i'd guess i might buy at most a poutine once a year, and over the last ten or so it's certainly been less frequent than that.

i'm more likely to get hash browns with a breakfast special. and, i guess i might get a small fry from time to time if i'm waiting somewhere.

but, in sum, i've probably had less than a bag of potatoes, in total, over the last 20 years.

listen: i'm sure we can find something to do with the excess product. there's lots of hungry people out there.

but, i can't think of a more high impact collective health decision than cutting potato consumption to almost nothing, permanently. it would be a godsend, for public health.

the demise of the potato industry would be an excellent opportunity to reclaim the growing space for a more useful produce.

potatoes really aren't very good for you.

so, i don't really have a lot of sympathy, here. we'd be better off if the demand for this product crashed permanently.

why don't they shift to growing more nutritious fruit and vegetables, instead?

https://globalnews.ca/news/6870689/coronavirus-canada-food-supply/

what this means is that standing two metres from each other at the grocery store is completely pointless.

https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/7/20-0764_article

google,

there is absolutely no possibility at all whatsoever that i'm ever going to pay the slightest bit of attention to your stupid, worthless advertising.

deal with it.

was the file malicious?

maybe if you work for adsense, it was.

it's a video codec for remote viewing through smplayer.

what you want to do is turn this off.

i'm going to shiver for an hour in anger and outrage over this.

google chrome just blocked a download because it was "malicious".

and, i'm about to throw this piece of trash in the fucking garbage.

listen, google. you don't fucking decide that. i decide that.

fuck off.

so, smplayer seems to run fine on xp, but in order to stream from youtube, i'd need to replace mplayer with mpv, and the latter will no longer work with xp.

so, i'm basically doing the same thing with this that i was with chrome, except that i'm less confident in this working, because i suspect youtube has already banned it.

ugh.

i'm going to try it, at least...

i'm not going to adjudicate this decision from a distance without the facts.

but, i will point out that approaching the issue case-by-case is far preferable in a free society - and that a few bad apples shouldn't be allowed to ruin the situation for everybody.

i would suspect that this is probably symbolic. i don't know...

i know i'd prefer to have not seen it happen, but i don't know the facts.

https://www.france24.com/en/20200426-sweden-cracks-down-on-bars-as-crowds-flout-corona-rules

this appears to be happening in new york as well, where herd immunity in new york city is being offset (or distorted) by a rising problem in buffalo. i pointed this out looking at the italian numbers - you need to be sure that you're looking at the data in a granular enough manner, to ensure you're not misinterpreting the interference patterns.

this is going to be an expected feature of this, as things develop - very localized waves, at the city or even neighbourhood level, rather than broad waves at the state, provincial or national level.

https://www.bridgemi.com/michigan-health-watch/coronavirus-surges-grand-rapids-area-bucking-trends-rest-michigan

and, i will refuse vaccination out of spite.

i'll take a jail sentence, in protest.

i'll go underground.

you won't get that needle in my arm without a fight.

if you're a capitalist piece of shit, go find the right companies to invest in...

but, again - if your body doesn't remember the antibodies when you meet this thing in the wild, it won't remember them when you get a vaccine, either.

i keep asking the question: what's really going on?

and, the incredible levels of stupidity and ignorance coming from these bodies is strongly suggestive of what was an early hypothesis: man made or not, it seems like big pharma is driving the response to this.

you're going to be immunized at great profit margins, whether you need it or not.

the choice that we have is between dragging the process out and maximizing exposure to the weak or hurrying it up and minimizing exposure to them.

i don't need to be an epidemiologist to tell you that there's a 100% chance that we'll get to widespread immunity before a commercially available vaccine is ready, regardless of what we do.

we don't have a choice between getting to immunity and waiting for a vaccine - you can't stop an airborne virus with a half-ass quarantine.

we're already most of the way there, despite our best efforts.

https://www.latimes.com/science/story/2020-04-25/could-a-controlled-avalanche-stop-the-coronavirus-faster-and-with-fewer-death

it'll be a sad day in canada when we deduce the liberals are just as fucking retarded as the conservatives are.

but, that day of reckoning may be nigh.

you can, in theory, at least teach the ignorant.

but eventually, after so much failure, there does come a time when you have to deduce that those who you initially thought were only ignorant are, in truth, surely stupid, as well.

liberal ignorance or conservative stupidity.

pick your poison.

i'm just going to undo anything you do, so don't waste your time.

so, it seems like this post:

when is the ndp going to get rid of jagmeet singh and put a serious leadership candidate in place, already?

(https://dsdfghghfsdflgkfgkja.blogspot.com/2020/04/blog-post_13.html)

disappeared.

and then reappeared inside of the previous post:

as horribly ignorant as justin trudeau is, we don't need a return to conservative stupidity in this country.

what the fuck?

i've been clear with you, google - i do not tolerate deleted posts. and, i don't want you fucking with my writing.

so, fuck off.

the ndp should have won the last election, and would have if they had a serious leader.

when is the ndp going to finally get rid of jagmeet singh and put a serious leadership candidate in place, already?

as horribly ignorant as justin trudeau is, we don't need a return to conservative stupidity in this country.

https://www.google.com/search?q=%22pierre+poutine%22&rlz=1CALEAA_enCA898&oq=%22pierre+poutine%22

so, his concern is that it's disincentivizing people from working.

why is pierre poutine even being interpreted as a serious candidate?

the guy should be in jail.

lock him the fuck up.

https://globalnews.ca/news/6870332/coronavirus-freakonomics-conservative/

vlc is kind of bloated, by design.

i need something sleeker than that.

my 2009 version of vlc is clearly not cutting it.

i'm trying smplayer, first. i think it's most likely to work...

and, regarding the ads on this chromebook.

i don't watch them. if i can't skip them, i press the mute tab and multitask until they're done.

trying to force ads on people isn't going to make them more willing to engage with them.

i would imagine that youtube doesn't want you doing this.

but, this is likely to become more widespread than less so, so long as google insists on blocking such a wide variety of devices from the site.

it would be a lot easier if i could use a browser - but they won't let me.

i don't even run adblock on that machine because 99% of the videos i watch don't even monetize.

iirc, the problem i was having was with playlists, specifically. at the time, i had this giant playlist i was running through, and it just wouldn't stream right.

i'm not actually doing that, anymore; what i was doing when i switched over was watching all of the stanford videos since the beginning, in order.

so, for now, at least, i wonder if i could just try it again in the version of vlc in the image from 2009...

i want to find workarounds to make this old equipment work for as long as it can.

again: my primary concern is the environmental footprint.

i don't want to throw out good equipment that works and ruin the planet to buy more in order to make it easier to spy on me.

i had something called a tv card for a while in the 90s, which literally let me watch tv on my computer. this wasn't streaming internet - i plugged the cable line into my video card.

it worked flawlessly for years on a pIII with windows 98 and 64 mb of ram, which was a high-end machine at the time.

but, i can't event connect to youtube with a laptop that has a processor that is twice as fast and 4x as much ram?

it's ridiculous...

i think i'd rather get cable than buy netflix, frankly.

i mean, can you stream the news over netflix?

and, why don't i use netflix?

i wouldn't even want to watch anything on netflix. that's not about technology, and it's not about price, it's actually about what i'd want to watch vs what i wouldn't.

youtube has university lectures and independent documentaries and whatnot, and that's far more interesting to me than movies or tv shows. the fact that it's free is a bonus, sure, but the reality is that if you gave me an unlimited netflix account for free then i'd probably never use it - i'd rather watch youtube, anyways.

one of the things i was playing with a while back was the idea of using something like smplayer to access youtube instead of using a browser, but it wasn't there yet.

maybe it is now.

the actual problem is the ad servers. that is why you need ridiculous specs to do something you should be able to do effortlessly on a thirty year old pc, and just can't.

this shouldn't be this complicated, really.

my concern is not safety, or security - it's making the best use of perfectly good aging equipment, while minimizing the environmental effects of consumerism.

the laptop works perfectly fine. it's a pentium grade computer, with hundreds of megabytes of ram. compared to the devices that sent neil armstrong to the moon, this thing is a super computer.

but, i can't connect to youtube with it?

that's absurd.

i don't want a newer computer.

i want a lighter browser.

why don't i just use the chromebook?

the chromebook is in my bedroom, which is where it's going to need to be until i can build an image for the main laptop. i don't think there's anything wrong with the battery, but the operating system won't read it. so, the device is no longer mobile - it's in my bedroom, and it's plugged in.

i don't have any desire to buy a new battery, and i don't have time to learn how to reprogram the chip. buying laptop batteries is one of the worst things you can do for the environment. so, it's probably not going to have a battery for...for years, really. it may never get fixed...or, i may need to wait until google decides i can't use it anymore, and i have to flash the chip to turn it on, anyways.

this device was purchased for mobile use. i log in as a guest account, and i'll be turning it off as soon as everything else works properly, again.

i fundamentally dislike the chrome os, and i actually wish i'd have bought something else.

so, i've been eating in bed over the last few months as everything else has been broken or disabled, and am trying to stop doing it. that's the point of what i'm trying to do.

what i'd have to do is turn the machine off and move it into the kitchen every time i eat, which means i couldn't pause the lecture halfway through, which is what i'm trying to facilitate.

so, there's basically no way to use this device for that purpose at this time - and it's not what i want to use it for, anyways.

i don't even really understand why chrome would need to use encryption to go to youtube.

what is being encrypted, exactly?

i'm just watching lectures at stanford. i don't care if hackers steal the information, so long as they don't slow down the stream. but, i'd suggest that it would be faster if they'd just go there, themselves.

i'm going to end up moving to linux....

i have a stack of ancient pc ram, but nothing for the 90s laptop.

so, we're going to have to find a version of chrome that works, for now. youtube won't run with scripting off.

so, i woke up and googled coronavirus like i have every day for however long, now and realized something...

i don't even care anymore.

just let me know when it's over.

i started updating chrome sequentially from 4 upwards and ended up blocked from accessing youtube by the server. i'm not sure what to do next if that's not temporary.

but, i'm very close to refocusing and it's what i really want to be doing, right now.

i'm going to need to make some calls early in the morning. right now, i want to find an acceptable solution with the 90s laptop and get to work on finishing that master document for 01/14.

this really ought to be taxable, if the government is treating them as a business (which is what they actually are.)

https://globalnews.ca/news/6869703/coronavirus-wage-subsidy-parishes/

chrome 4 is fast, but it doesn't have the right encryption algorithm, it seems.

let's try a few, and work my way up.

let's hope there's a little less spyware, as well.

old versions has lots of old versions.

let's give this a try.

i mean, that's the reason that chrome is workable on this thing and firefox isn't - i can get to youtube on much older versions of chrome, and need relatively new versions of firefox.

maybe there's a plugin. but, i'm so low on ram...

it seem like chrome had h.264 support in 2009?

i wonder if i can find a version that old.

firefox 28 loads well on the 90s laptop, but youtube won't default to the webm codec, so the minimal version i have to run to get to youtube is firefox 46. with versions of 46 or higher, the html5 video works, but the javascript constantly hangs, which is probably a processor issue, rather than a ram issue.

it's still at 256 mb. i should look into ordering something from ebay, which is probably both my best and only option with a laptop that old. it's probably going to cost something like $20 for 1 gb of ram. but, i might also even have some of the right kind of ram, too. i don't even know...

the comodo fork seems to be trying to access a lot of system files that i've purposefully removed, which is worrying me a little. these look like ie files. so, i'm going to back away from this.

i'm going to try chrome again, after i check to optimize for the best version.

everybody thinks their situation is urgent.

whether it is or not needs to be up to us to determine.

when somebody shows up here and tries to cross in illegally, what they're saying to us is "i'm too important to wait in line. i'm more valuable than anybody else. i am entitled to immediate service.".

and, frankly, that's not very endearing.

i just want to address a point i'm making about forcing migrants to come in the front door.

am i not denying the hardships that they're going through? well, i'm directing them to the proper application process, i'm not denying them offhand. so, your argument essentially reduces to urgency, and, yes, i am going to push back against that, because everybody's situation is urgent in their own way, and to decide that your own situation is more urgent than everybody else's without consulting anybody or leaving it up to analysis is actually pretty selfish, isn't it?

we've got thousands of people sleeping on the streets here. are their situations not urgent?

so, what gives you the self-importance and flat out gall, really, to show up here uninvited and demand that your issues are prioritized?

queues suck, but they're real. i would support prioritization, at some level - but, as the sovereign nation, that decision needs to be in our own hands, and not decided by the people seeking refuge.

my understanding is that a lot of people get here and are shocked to come face to face with the homeless population; they don't expect that - they expect a disney reality, with gold-paved streets and free money raining down from the skies. and, that's partly our own fault for mismarketing ourselves, going back a very long time.

equality runs in every direction.

that was the last one.

but they came back for one more, roughly a year later.

well, kinda.

like?

elmocare will make you strong!

you want a few more?

trust me, i'm pulling out the best ones.

oh, you idealists.

if the stereotype is that americans are vain and self-absorbed and shallow....

you'd think it's obvious, right?

salons? it's practically the definition of unimportant labour....these are the least important workers on the planet...

but, no.

it's consistent - last thing to close, first thing to re-open.

it's just weird.

frankly, i wouldn't even want somebody doing half of these things for me; it would kind of gross me out.

why would they re-open the salons first, of all things?

this reliance on other people for basic hygiene seems to be strangely widespread in the united states.

i wonder if it's ultimately a legacy of slavery, because i don't think people anywhere else in the world put that kind of importance on paying other people to groom them.

whatever you think of all of this nonsense, you'd think that something as frivolous and intimate as a salon would be the first thing to close and the last thing to re-open - if not based on the science, then at least based on importance.