zlacker

[parent] [thread] 10 comments
1. wackge+(OP)[view] [source] 2026-02-04 16:35:44
Link which doesn't directly support website owned by unscrupulous trillionaire: https://xcancel.com/runasand/status/2017659019251343763?s=20
replies(3): >>throwa+Rf >>forgot+wi >>appare+hp1
2. throwa+Rf[view] [source] 2026-02-04 17:45:38
>>wackge+(OP)
Good reminder to also set up something that does this automatically for you:

>>46526010

replies(1): >>JimA+W11
3. forgot+wi[view] [source] 2026-02-04 17:55:36
>>wackge+(OP)
I actually think it is fitting to read about a government agency weaponized by an unscrupulous billionaire going after journalists working for an unscrupulous billionaire on an unscrupulous trillionaire owned platform.
◧◩
4. JimA+W11[view] [source] [discussion] 2026-02-04 21:17:37
>>throwa+Rf
I generally avoid extensions that can read all sites (even if technically necessary), so use the suggestion found here [1] instead.

A few bookmarklets:

javascript:(function(){if (location.host.endsWith('x.com')) location.host='xcancel.com';})()

javascript:(function(){if (location.host.endsWith('youtube.com')) location.host='inv.nadeko.net';})()

javascript:(function(){if (location.hostname.endsWith('instagram.com')) {location.replace('https://imginn.com' + location.pathname);}})()

[1] https://www.reddit.com/r/uBlockOrigin/comments/1cc0uon/addin...

replies(1): >>Alive-+cI1
5. appare+hp1[view] [source] 2026-02-04 23:22:43
>>wackge+(OP)
There are trillionaires?
replies(1): >>alpini+ms1
◧◩
6. alpini+ms1[view] [source] [discussion] 2026-02-04 23:42:00
>>appare+hp1
I guess technically musk rounds to a trillion. 852B acc to Forbes
replies(1): >>appare+cZ1
◧◩◪
7. Alive-+cI1[view] [source] [discussion] 2026-02-05 01:43:55
>>JimA+W11
Wow, where did these come from. these are great alternatives, especially the youtube. I like using the duck player but that's only in that browser.

For example duck://player/fqtK3s7PE_k where the video id in youtube url https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fqtK3s7PE_k

But it doesn't have that overview page like inv.nadeko.net does

◧◩◪
8. appare+cZ1[view] [source] [discussion] 2026-02-05 04:14:27
>>alpini+ms1
That would be some aggressive rounding.
replies(2): >>alpini+HV2 >>antonv+mn3
◧◩◪◨
9. alpini+HV2[view] [source] [discussion] 2026-02-05 13:07:45
>>appare+cZ1
Yes and no. Obviously it’s unusual rounding or I wouldn’t have said “I guess technically,” but rounding is all about domains and relevant precision. To be honest, when someone says “billionaires” I don’t assume that the number 1,000,000 is a meaningful hard cut off. I assume we’re talking about the ones who are three orders of magnitude up from “millionaire” and orders of magnitude work by rounding from .5.
replies(1): >>dragon+2w3
◧◩◪◨
10. antonv+mn3[view] [source] [discussion] 2026-02-05 15:46:29
>>appare+cZ1
What's $148,000,000,000 between friends
◧◩◪◨⬒
11. dragon+2w3[view] [source] [discussion] 2026-02-05 16:36:04
>>alpini+HV2
> orders of magnitude work by rounding from .5.

No, orders of magnitude are exponential, not linear, so conventionally “on the order of 1 billion” would be between 100 million × sqrt(10) and 1 billion × sqrt(10), but “billionaire” isn't “net worth on the order of 1 billion” but “net worth of 1 billion or more”, or, when used heirarchically alongside trillionaire ans millionaire “net worth of at least one billion and less than one trillion”.

[go to top]