Yes. I think we’re missing each other pinpointing details while meaning the same. Every browser has it’s defaut or “standard” style, nowadays even adapting to the system theme and trying to guess if to use day or night settings etc. Nevertheless it won’t break lines in a reasonable way, won’t deal with footnotes in an acceptable way and either break the layout of pure text pages or the layout of illustrated pages. HTML5 makes these specific things somewhat better as it allows realtively advanced document structure but nevertheless, a few lines of CSS to reflect at least the prinipial character of the document are unlikely to hurt anyone in a worse way than a one-style-fits-all layout for everything will hurt tha vast majority.

That’s not even convincing pedantery. Nobody would assune that a browser’s standard style might be an RFC, IETF- or in any way official standard,

I don’t think. You can’t prove I do! Leave me alone. You’re one of them! I knew it all the time.

Yes , I can read books. I even read one or two of the 1200 around me. Those with the fuckpics and some of the funnier ones, like “Phänomenologie des Geistes” by Hegel. I wouldn’t have if they had been layouted using browser standards.

ASCII?! Useless, modern witchcraft! Devils work! Give me CCITT-1 or give me death!

Oh, come on. You really want some at least readable output. Things like image borders, consistently positioned images/diagrams, line breaks and page borders. Some whitespace and indentations, too. You just can’t read a couple of pages full of unformatted raw text without massive eye fatigue. I’m all for dumping JS and excessive frameworks, I’d prefer well-formed XHTML over any of that clients-side scripted crap, but totally rejecting CSS is pointless zealotry.

Wo mein geld?

Well, missing pronoun, ignoring capitalization… actually you owe us 10€. Haha! Nobody expects the German inquisition!

CSS on the other hand is quite essential to separate layout from content. Which is a good thing, so I can’t really think of a reason for a “no-CSS” rule. Specifically if you can use inline styles as well but in a way more messy way.

What is much harder to take is the hypocrisy in the media about it. It’s not that anyone wouldn’t know what’s going on - it’s just that anyone saying it aloud will be shouted down, blocked and banned by the legions of hypocrits. That said, you can fuck yourself, nationalist asshole.

The new German government argues that it is entitled to do this because Germany is land-locked

WTF? I am pretty sure that last time I looked, there was the north sea sitting at the northwestern rim of the country. Directly there where the land ends. One might fall in and drown if there were not all the signs reading “Swimming strictly verboten! Es wird scharf geschossen! Der Bundesgeneralbademeister.”. Or similar. Maybe no signs, but definitely the norrth sea. In the northeast the situation is basically the same, just less dramatic because the baltic sea is just knee-deep at its’ deepest point. Whatever, I am positively certain that Germany is not landlocked. I also doubt that the German government really said it was. It’s just too obvious, even for a novice chancellor’s apprentice like Merz.

This isn’t the US’ war, why would Trump be making any demands?

Because he sees a chance to profit. His war or not, Trump wants his cut. Or else. He’s got a right on his cut because he’s the president. The best president ever. Everybody knows that.

This and only this is a valid case of cultural appropriation. Acquiring copyright for work in the public domain and denying legitimate use. Having a hairstyle somebody else does not like has nothing to do with it. Nor does an artist’s ethnicity, surface color or sexual orientattion. These are just pretexts for self-declared “defenders of the faith” to discriminate arbitrarily agains whoever they want.

“Open source”, well nice for them. Since it is simply another platform selling other peoples’ music online that doesn’t have any effect on their customers. The plans they are offeriing to musicians seem almost predatory to me. Seems like they found some way to financially profit from the fediverse. Nice for them, again, but does this really provide value to anybody else? I don’t see where this is really attractive to anyone despite lots of babbling about the “fediverse musicians community”. Who or what ever that might be.

Sure, but expectig turn-key solutions from the end- and contentless rows of self-help guides isn’t quite effective unless you hit the one in a dozen that actually was written with the intent of being helpful instead of making easy money from other peoples troubles. And the OP seemed to point into that direction.

The real “self-help secret” is “self” and hardly a secret. It’s the first bloody word in “self-help”. The real problem is that people event want someone else to do their self-help for them. The second problem is that they don’t even see the fucking paradox in it. Thinking is hard. Let’s go shopping…

Simple solution. Don’t use Gmail at all. Unless you’re really keen on someone else reading your mail, of course.

Great plan. Even better than I thought.

Not even in the days of the cold war there was remotely enough bunker capacity for everyone. What for anyway? Want to spend the next 100 or 1000 years in a subterranean hole? Good luck with that. Waste of money and resources but probably just the pipe dreams of some beaurocrat in a mostlly irrelevant institution.

You probably aren’t. You’re on somebody’s side who described OpenAI’s point of view. You won’t have an independent opinion before you’ve read at least one different source. One that is not owned by a huge media conglomerate, that is. Everyone seems willing to make up their minds after somebody somewhere told them something without verification. That’s how you’re getting a poorly informed half-wit without an idea of critical thinking.

Chinese hoax. Probably.