

I think another thing IBM was counting on was OS/2 Warp came out about 6 months before Win95 so folks were expecting a radical change in OS.


I think another thing IBM was counting on was OS/2 Warp came out about 6 months before Win95 so folks were expecting a radical change in OS.


“but at least you got free email and a homepage so you could put up HTML pages with animated GIFs“
Aw happier days. So much creativity and the ability to communicate with other humans. Meeting randoms was a fun gamble!
95% of people would put an “Under construction” gif and never another update to that web space.


The first web browser was free!! NCSA Mosaic! However since few new users had download capabilities (because they never used command line FTP before), there were software distributes making copies and selling those on store shelves for a few dollars.
To beat Netscape, Microsoft bundled Internet Explorer with the third edition of Windows 95.
Not quite accurate. Yes, at the time Windows 95 came out Netscape Navigator Personal Edition was selling on shelves for about $40-$50. If you bought Netscape Navigator Gold, it came with the Netscape browser and and WYSIWYG HTML editor which was a big deal back then because otherwise you’re using notepad to make your website.

Other WYSIWYG HTML editor sitting next to this on the self would be products like Hotdog or Hot METAL Pro:


However, Windows 95 at launch did NOT ship with Internet Explorer. For the launch release of Win95 to get Internet Explorer 1.0 you had to buy the addon package “Microsoft Plus: Companion for Windows 95” for $49:

Internet Explorer 1.0 sucked and Netscape was far superior for the day.
One other artifact from those days. There was another GUI operating system that was still around back then called OS/2. This was an IBM product from the 80s, and the last gasp of it occurred right before Win95 came out. IBM released OS/2 Warp (OS/2 3.0). A good chunk of the marketing was that it contained web browser (called WebExplorer). There were unsavy users buying OS/2 Warp thinking it was just an application when it was a whole replacement operating system.



It depends on what you mean by robotic mowers. If you mean motors that drive the wheels and you don’t have to walk behind them (or sit on them), yes, these exist without any cloud service. However, if you mean autonomous, then I don’t think those are here yet. The non-cloud robot mowers use human held remote controls.
I can think of one that is autonomous and doesn’t require the cloud for operation, but does require the cloud for the inital setup and mapping. Once it has the map loaded in, it doesn’t need an internet connection.


That pretty well describes 1st generation robo mowers: lawn roombas.
Thankfully they’ve evolved significantly since then and are on 4th generation tech now.


I’m thinking of moving from my higher paying career field to one that will pay me a nearly break even salary (for this living area) because my heart just isn’t in this anymore.
How close are you to retirement? If you increased savings from [high paying career], how much longer would you have to work at it before you could stop working altogether?


I’m old enough to be experiencing this, but I actually like it like this. I had zero desire to own a Labubu when they came out recognizing it as just that generation’s flash-in-the-pan fad like beanie babies was for my generation.
So many online services are sold for things I do not care about so I have zero to manage on those.
I’m not seduced to buy the “latest slightly incremental increase in performance” item for 99% of products out there because I have something that does the job for me already.
Some of today’s pop music styles I don’t like, but there’s thousands of hours of music I do like (including a chunk of new stuff) so I’m not put out.
Its actually kind of great to be immune to so much of the advertising thats out there today because you simply don’t want what they’re selling because they’re targeting the younger generation.


Most people in their 40s are concerned about their plans for retirement are on track when they should be worried about their telomerase.


“Green technologies” won’t solve it when a lot of them aren’t green,
Sure, I’m not talking about greenwashing products though.
the profit motive still rules humanity.
This is perfect example supporting my argument. Solar power is cheaper than any fossil fuel. The profit motive, in this case, is for the green tech.


You’re free to hold your own model, but I’d question some of yours.
I’d say we haven’t so much turned around as veered off to skirt along the edge until we’re about to hit the next one. There is a real chance we’re going to end up not being able to diverge and actually go over the edge.
That’s a different edge in a different direction. There’s certainly an element of inertia to large, extinction level events, but not all extinction level events share that same inertia. As an example, nuclear war and climate change don’t share the same path of humanities destruction.
If it when that will happen is impossible to predict before it’s too late though.
Humanity is pretty good and being able to predict things which will negatively effect us. We’re just not great at stopping doing those things that cause those negative things.


As a child in the 70s, I was sure we were going to wipe ourselves out in global thermal nuclear war. The Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty instead took the nuclear cores from thousands of American and Russian missiles and consumed it in civilian nuclear power plants for electricity. If you had told my 10 year old self my game console would be running on decommissioned Russian nukes, I wouldn’t have believed you.
The rapid technological advancement of green technologies (especially them being financially cheaper than fossil fuels) gives me hope humanity (and most of the species of Earth) will survive climate change.
So, yes, we might indeed still wipe ourselves out, but we have on many occasions, as a species, stopped at the brink and turned around to go back to safety.
us: “The package contains no lithium batteries. Here’s a list of the contents on the customs declaration and a receipt for the duties paid.”
them: “I have to bring my own box?! Isn’t it your job to give me one for free? Also, whaddayamean I can’t send cigarettes to my nephew back in my home country?!”
Because normalcy is subjective to each of us. If an unmade bed is normal in my house, then the unmade bed is what contributes to a sense of normalcy for me.
If those are the advantages then the same advantages could be accomplished by daily filling a cup with water, pouring out the water, drying the glass and putting it back in the cupboard. I’d argue the cup with water is far less effort and yields the same results.
Yeah but none can say who is pretending to be kind and who is authentically kind.
Right, which is why when people are kind no one is called out for being kind as their “true colors”. You’re understanding my position well. Its only when deception is revealed that “true colors” phrase is appropriate.
This interpretation doesn’t leave room for “kind” people to ever get angry or have a moment of weakness where they’re unintentionally mean. That’s just a recipe for horrible mental health.
I don’t usually associate “true colors” phrase with a moment of weakness. I would think its the more unforgivable things that rank as someone calling out your “true colors”. Example: If a person says they treat everyone with respect equally, but then uses racial slurs against people of color then that would be that person showing their “true (racist) colors”.
A regular person will never have a racist-moment-of-weakness. A racist hiding their racism will though. That would be their “true colors”.
Thats the wrong understanding. You can absolutely be happy and kind with those being your true colors. However, someone pretending to be kind then turns out to be angry and mean, that is that person showing their true colors of not being happy and kind. The colors aren’t the emotion, the colors are your authenticity whether happy or angry.


DenverCoder9 strikes again?
I mean when, let’s say, I have one day, a week or a month left to live suffering from an illness
The likelihood you’ll have any clue your going to die in such a short time as a month is extremely low. You’re much more likely going to die in an instant through fatal injury or bodily failure like a heart attack or brain aneurysm. Lets say you live to 85 years old and are finally dying of something entirely predictable for old age like congestive heart failure or late discovered end-stage cancer. You’re going to be long past having any energy or ability to do anything about without help.
If you actually get some kind of clear guidance you’re going to die from a prolonged (meaning not instant) ordeal, you’ll likely be in hospice where they will give you amazing narcotic drugs in whatever massive doses you need so you feel no pain and are simply swimming in dopamine as your body gives out.
The takeaway is, there’s no point trying to spend your healthy hours trying to plan for something like this. No plan you can think of will be useful even in the extremely unlikely scenario, the conditions you imagine do happen.
/shitty conspiracy theory
…or was the constant exposure from X-rays keeping all of our cancer at bay. And with the removal of that lifesaving treatment, we’re all rapidly being overcome by our uncheck cancer.

Look at the data and see when LCD TVs first entered the American consumer market. With the removal of CRTs, our cancer rates exploded!! Coincidence?! (yes its just a coincidence)
Not positive, but probably never. The explanation is even more weird. Given 50 billion years, the Earth rotation would slow and would become tidal locked so that one side of Earth is always facing the moon. The other side of Earth would never see the moon. However, in only 5 billion years our sun will expand and engulf all the inner planets including the Earth and the moon.