I have the issue that I find Reddit extremely useful to become proficient.

I knew what problems my tomatoes were having the moment it started. I learned about blueberries needing something stronger than coffee.(and more)

I learned what microcontrollers are popular in the enterprise world by lurking.

I got some extremely useful information in a table form which was impossible to find in a Google search.

I suppose I just need to stop browsing the popular feed and it would always be useful.

I completely and totally disagree. Reddit is of no benefit for anything you could just Google. Reddit's commenting dynamics create a false consensus around whatever the first thing that a bunch of people who Googled it can not disagree to. That's bad enough but when you start talking about subjects that have any degree of subjectiveness people's desire to have their world view confirmed abounds and it becomes even worse.

Pick a subject you're very familiar with the nuances of and start sorting comments by best, go straight to the bottom and among the low quality junk you'll find that there are tons of valid and well informed opinions that get rejected because they required more nuanced thought to understand than a bunch of amateurs who just googled it could muster or wasn't 100% compatible with the ideology of the group at large.

The net effect is that you get "if you just Googled it yourself" quality answers (pretty much every "open to the internet riff raff at large" platform has this problem to an extent) but sent though a filter that removes a substantial fraction of the opinions from people who actually know what they're talking about. Frankly the chans are better in this regard because the only mechanism for disagreement is to reply and the content of replies makes the nature of agreement/disagreement pretty obvious.

As bad as HN is about rejecting anything that doesn't fit it's narrow ideology about how the world works it at least usually doesn't reject things if they're technically correct. The same cannot be said for Reddit.

If you want professional advice you need to go somewhere with some sort of permanence and a higher bar to entry (i.e. the people who wind up there have actually care enough about the subject that they sought the place out), traditionally forums fill this role.

I find this completely wrong. Every time I want to answer a question, googling it will give me 2-3 pages of SEO hypercharged shitty articles that take way too long to go into the point.

Compared to opening 2-3 reddit threads you get 20-30 opinions all without filler and get to then form your meta opinion on that. Its absolutely magic!

And yet... reddit is still probably better than the alternatives.

Half of what I search for nowadays has a "reddit" version tacked on the end in googles auto complete. That is, people are deliberately searching for results to questions explicitly from reddit and it's popular enough that it's surfacing in googles autocomplete.

The only other site that gets that kind of treatment is stackoverflow.

This really is no surprise. So many threads on the front page shocked at the evils of Facebook and Apple.

All were predicted given their past record.

Don't buy from bad companies and this isn't an issue.

... except when the non-bad company you bought your DK-1 from gets bought by a bad company.

Non-bad companies could set up "will not get bought by Facebook" poison pills. Say they will release all IP to the public domain when acquired by Facebook. Enforceable contract with a third party.

Your local nerds warned you. The internet warned you. People need to take responsibility for choosing Apple.

I've been completely disconnected to Hollywood as I've found better content on YouTube.

I admittedly like non fiction, and my wife likes the occasional comedy. Both of these are often better than anything you can get from Hollywood because it's more niche.

I guess I don't understand the problem. People really like their old school classics?

Don't all users understand this before giving Apple money?

No sympathy here. Make people use web apps instead of feeding the beast.

Good luck with web apps on iOS. Safari is a shitshow with more serious bugs than anything else I know of. You can report bugs, and maybe someone working on WebKit will look at it in 5 years, and maybe it will be fixed in 10 years. And then probably appear again in the next iOS version.

Either Apple is incompetent, or they're making/keeping it bad on purpose.

Basic feature support is missing too. Every native app can do push notifications and so can every other browser, yet Apple still haven't added support for it in Safari.

Can't you install chrome?

All browsers on iOS use a Safari webview. iOS does not allow the installation of competing browser engines. So, no. It may be called chrome, it may look like chrome, but it is Safari, with all the limitations that implies (and a few extra limitations as a webview, just for good measure).

Apple does this on purpose to push people to use native apps, and then they lock down access to a market of 1 billion people to their whim of the day.

Edit: another poster pulled the trigger at the same time as me, will leave my comment for good measure.

And even Microsoft let people install browsers that didn't use IE as a base.

All browsers on ios use the safari engine. Only thing chrome can do is sync your bookmarks.

I think they go a bit more advanced than that - IIRC they use their own networking stack.

But yeah the rendering / JS interpreter is all Safari.

Voting and currency are 2 real world situations.

Bitcoin isn't convoluted or far fetched even if you really want to disagree.

It's nuclear chemistry proof (unlike gold), and outside the reach of government.

Its no more outside the reach of government than you are.

Voting sounds like a terrible use case for traditional bitcoin style blickchain. Am i missing something?

Lol! That is suspiciously specific.

You didn't need to say illicit funds. It's useful to move money without having to use a bank or government money.

It may be useful, but the generic case of transfering money is generally (but not always) not an example of a low trust situation.

Paying off ransomware software is.

And we can see this in the fact that buying goods and services from traditional (not darknet) vendors is still very hard with bitcoin. Paying randsomware in bitcoin is standard.

For most goods and services there are desirable properties to intermediaries in terms of fraud detection, refunds, etc. But it is ultimately reliant on the ultimate source of trust deriving from governments and banks.

If you are a bank or government you have to look out for yourself, and so a fair amount of blockchain hype specifically addresses the low-trust transactions they encounter. There is some quiet adoption happening globally, and mostly invisibly to consumers.

The side effect, of course, is that it's easy for anyone to do bank-like things with the tech, including ransomware.

I'm with you. If someone votes for someone, they should also be held accountable for their Politicians actions.

Is there a rational reason behind this? The hyper scary emotional reaction is to close everything down, but given the at risk population is well understood- is this a money grab?(less brick and mortar costs)

The 70 year old professors and obese 50 year old professors clearly are able to online teach, why make everyone lose?

Heck if students went to college we'd get closer to herd immunity.

This is more likely to be marketing than reality. If he really works 100 hours a week.

Maybe modeling rockets in Kerbal is part of that 100hrs of work.