|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: The digital computer explained 1962 [message #416830 is a reply to message #416810] |
Mon, 26 September 2022 23:18   |
Quadibloc
Messages: 4399
Registered: June 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Sunday, September 25, 2022 at 1:16:36 PM UTC-6, Peter Flass wrote:
> All those videos come with ads. I can ignore ads on a web page, but I have
> to sit through them in a video. That’s just me, though, don’t stop posting
> interesting links.
If your browser is Chrome, yes, you are helpless. If it were Firefox, you would
have alternatives.
John Savard
|
|
|
|
| Re: The digital computer explained 1962 [message #416870 is a reply to message #416788] |
Sat, 01 October 2022 22:01 |
|
|
Originally posted by: Dave Garrett
In article <87edvw89mm.fsf@usenet.ankman.de>, ank@spamfence.net says...
>
> On Mon, 26 Sep 2022 20:18:25 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc wrote:
>>
>> On Sunday, September 25, 2022 at 1:16:36 PM UTC-6, Peter Flass wrote:
>>
>>> All those videos come with ads. I can ignore ads on a web page, but I have
>>> to sit through them in a video. That?s just me, though, don?t stop posting
>>> interesting links.
>>
>> If your browser is Chrome, yes, you are helpless. If it were Firefox, you would
>> have alternatives.
>
> Have an youtube-ad-blocker in Chromium here too.
The uBlock Origin Chrome add-on is a very effective ad blocker, but
Google's getting ready to implement changes that will seriously cripple
ad blockers:
https://arstechnica.com/?post_type=post&p=1885554
--
Dave
|
|
|
|
| Re: The digital computer explained 1962 [message #416872 is a reply to message #416870] |
Sun, 02 October 2022 03:09 |
Andy Burns
Messages: 416
Registered: June 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Dave Garrett wrote:
> The uBlock Origin Chrome add-on is a very effective ad blocker, but
> Google's getting ready to implement changes that will seriously cripple
> ad blockers:
The danger of allowing a chromium based browser monoculture to develop ...
use firefox!
|
|
|
|
| Re: The digital computer explained 1962 [message #416875 is a reply to message #416870] |
Sun, 02 October 2022 12:53 |
D.J.
Messages: 821
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Sat, 1 Oct 2022 21:01:07 -0500, Dave Garrett <dave@compassnet.com>
wrote:
> In article <87edvw89mm.fsf@usenet.ankman.de>, ank@spamfence.net says...
>>
>> On Mon, 26 Sep 2022 20:18:25 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sunday, September 25, 2022 at 1:16:36 PM UTC-6, Peter Flass wrote:
>>>
>>>> All those videos come with ads. I can ignore ads on a web page, but I have
>>>> to sit through them in a video. That?s just me, though, don?t stop posting
>>>> interesting links.
>>>
>>> If your browser is Chrome, yes, you are helpless. If it were Firefox, you would
>>> have alternatives.
>>
>> Have an youtube-ad-blocker in Chromium here too.
>
> The uBlock Origin Chrome add-on is a very effective ad blocker, but
> Google's getting ready to implement changes that will seriously cripple
> ad blockers:
>
> https://arstechnica.com/?post_type=post&p=1885554
I don't use either Chrome or Google.
--
Jim
|
|
|
|
| Re: The digital computer explained 1962 [message #416974 is a reply to message #416788] |
Tue, 11 October 2022 23:03 |
|
|
Originally posted by: phigan
On 2022-09-24, Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> wrote:
> As no one seems to watch videos when I outline their content, I don't,
> and just post the link. :-)
I, for one, appreciate the outline of the content with the links :).
Also, another couple options for ad-free Youtube viewing is sending
the Youtube links to Kodi, or using NewPipe mobile client.
|
|
|
|
| Re: The digital computer explained 1962 [message #416975 is a reply to message #416974] |
Wed, 12 October 2022 05:34 |
Harry Vaderchi
Messages: 719
Registered: July 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Wed, 12 Oct 2022 03:03:15 -0000 (UTC)
phigan <phigan@bbs.penisys.cf> wrote:
> On 2022-09-24, Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> wrote:
>> As no one seems to watch videos when I outline their content, I don't,
>> and just post the link. :-)
>
> I, for one, appreciate the outline of the content with the links :).
Agreed, a bare utube link gets skipped, here.
> Also, another couple options for ad-free Youtube viewing is sending
> the Youtube links to Kodi, or using NewPipe mobile client.
I'm getting very fed up with them telling me my grammer is all done
wrongly.
--
Bah, and indeed Humbug.
|
|
|
|
| Re: The digital computer explained 1962 [message #416981 is a reply to message #416810] |
Thu, 13 October 2022 01:07 |
Robin Vowels
Messages: 426
Registered: July 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Monday, September 26, 2022 at 5:16:36 AM UTC+10, Peter Flass wrote:
> Andreas Kohlbach <a...@spamfence.net> wrote:
>> As no one seems to watch videos when I outline their content, I don't,
>> and just post the link. :-)
>>
>> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hTJi7Ct6MfY>
>>
>> Runs 16 minutes.
..
> All those videos come with ads. I can ignore ads on a web page, but I have
> to sit through them in a video. That’s just me, though, don’t stop posting
> interesting links.
..
I found that the MUTE button on the sound box is very helpful.
I can then look away from the screen and do something else,
until the ads are finished.
|
|
|
|
| Re: The digital computer explained 1962 [message #416982 is a reply to message #416788] |
Thu, 13 October 2022 11:54 |
|
|
Originally posted by: phigan
On 2022-10-13, Andreas Kohlbach wrote:
>
> /me too. But as no one commented on many links I posted where I outlined
> the content anyway I didn't in this case.
They can be appreciated without comments! :) Although, I must admit, I
missed them.
>> I'm getting very fed up with them telling me my grammer is all done
>> wrongly.
>
> ?
I said 'is' instead of 'are' in my original message.
|
|
|
|
| Re: The digital computer explained 1962 [message #416983 is a reply to message #416982] |
Thu, 13 October 2022 13:29 |
Harry Vaderchi
Messages: 719
Registered: July 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Thu, 13 Oct 2022 15:54:08 -0000 (UTC)
phigan <phigan@bbs.penisys.cf> wrote:
> On 2022-10-13, Andreas Kohlbach wrote:
>>
>> /me too. But as no one commented on many links I posted where I outlined
>> the content anyway I didn't in this case.
>
> They can be appreciated without comments! :) Although, I must admit, I
> missed them.
>
>>> I'm getting very fed up with them telling me my grammer is all done
>>> wrongly.
>>
>> ?
>
> I said 'is' instead of 'are' in my original message.
I wasn't having a go at you; the main advert I get from Youtube is for
a thing called "Grammarly".
--
Bah, and indeed Humbug.
|
|
|
|
| Re: The digital computer explained 1962 [message #416985 is a reply to message #416983] |
Thu, 13 October 2022 16:03 |
D.J.
Messages: 821
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Thu, 13 Oct 2022 18:29:42 +0100, "Kerr-Mudd, John"
<admin@127.0.0.1> wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Oct 2022 15:54:08 -0000 (UTC)
> phigan <phigan@bbs.penisys.cf> wrote:
>
>> On 2022-10-13, Andreas Kohlbach wrote:
>>>
>>> /me too. But as no one commented on many links I posted where I outlined
>>> the content anyway I didn't in this case.
>>
>> They can be appreciated without comments! :) Although, I must admit, I
>> missed them.
>>
>>>> I'm getting very fed up with them telling me my grammer is all done
>>>> wrongly.
>>>
>>> ?
>>
>> I said 'is' instead of 'are' in my original message.
>
> I wasn't having a go at you; the main advert I get from Youtube is for
> a thing called "Grammarly".
I've seen those to. Brand name, but its grammatically incorrect.
--
Jim
|
|
|
|
|
|
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
