sanguinepar
Now
•
100%
Thanks! That was near Dundee about 9 or 10 years ago.
sanguinepar
Now
•
100%
Thank you really glad you liked it - whatever time of day it is :-)
Just for you, here's my favourite sunset pic I ever took:
Love it when this happens to the clouds. Purple and red and yellow and on fire...
sanguinepar
Now
•
100%
Any chance we'll be able to stop videos being classed as Shorts? It's infuriating not to have the choice.
sanguinepar
Now
•
100%
Can the mind vomit?
sanguinepar
Now
•
100%
They turned 30 and kept selling records :-)
sanguinepar
Now
•
100%
You maniac, you made up! God damn you all to hell!!
sanguinepar
Now
•
100%
Oh really? That's cool, thanks for the info. Language is so fascinating 👍
sanguinepar
Now
•
100%
Yeah, I was thinking I might. I ly thing is, I haven't got all the books, nor do I have a website on which to host such a list. However I might still have a go 👍
sanguinepar
Now
•
100%
Meant to say in my Nero Wolfe comment - there's a Lemmy community for interesting words at !wotd@lemmy.world - it's not very busy, but still.
sanguinepar
Now
•
100%
Yeah, I'd say so. Maybe something like "Take it easy" would fit better.
sanguinepar
Now
•
100%
I'm currently reading through all of Rex Stout's Nero Wolfe mysteries, and one fun feature is that he almost always includes one or more very obscure words. It's a nice little thing to look out for.
In the one I'm currently reading it's, "peculate," meaning to embezzle or steal money. Others include:
- Plerophory - Fullness, especially of conviction or persuasion
- Apodictically - From apodictic: clearly established or beyond dispute
- Usufruct - The right to enjoy the use and advantages of another's property short of the destruction or waste of its substance
- Acarpous - Not producing fruit; sterile; barren
- Yclept - By the name of
- Eruction - A belch or burp
I had a look to see if I could find a full list but sadly not. However most Wikipedia entries for the individual novels include a section called, "The unfamiliar word," if you want to find more.
sanguinepar
Now
•
100%
There used to be a Scottish football ⚽ player called Kevin Twaddle. Always amused me.
sanguinepar
Now
•
100%
Would "Have a good one" maybe serve that purpose? It's not exactly the same, but similar sentiment.
sanguinepar
Now
•
100%
I suppose it could endanger them if it was coffee, or something worse. And there's always the possibility of copycats. Idiotic thing for a fan to do.
sanguinepar
Now
•
100%
Maybe it's just me, but I read that quote as if Ronaldinho had died and Arteta was paying tribute to him! Just checked, and thankfully he's alive :-)
sanguinepar
Now
•
100%
No need, not enough people on Lemmy anyway. Plus men-only groups often degenerate into paranoid misogynistic nonsense (like going on about blue and red pills). But I'm pretty sure you knew that already. And even if not, don't ask, set the terms for people to say no and then whine when they do.
sanguinepar
Now
•
100%
Yep, and thanks, I should have done that myself. Although setting that up as the default search takes a little more detail.
sanguinepar
Now
•
100%
Not sure if this will help for that specific search but I recently discovered a change that you can make to your browser's search defaults that makes Google search a lot better (for me at least), stripping away all the AI stuff.
Details in this thread: https://lemmy.world/post/19104187
sanguinepar
Now
•
100%
No.
sanguinepar
Now
•
100%
Oh wow, that's great, I didn't realise it was back on the agenda - thanks a lot! 👍
That said, I found this line a bit surprising: "it’s not a goal to make it feel like you’re not in Firefox."
That's a shame, because being able to have a website run as if I'm not in a browser is exactly what I want to achieve! Still though, at least they're looking at the concept.
I've decided (after seeing the advice repeatedly!) to try and move away from Chrome and use FF instead. However I've immediately come across an issue which is a bit of a deal-breaker for me, and although I've looked into it, I haven't seen an answer anywhere. One of the best features in Chrome is the abilty to create a shortcut for an individual URL. This shortcut can then be placed on the desktop, start menu or quicklaunch toolbar (Win 10) and opened as if it were a program in its own right - so, no URL bar, no tabs, no bookmarks, just the site content. I use this method every day for a number of different sites - Outlook, Gmail, Calendar, Keep, Sheets, Docs, etc, and it's perfect. So much so that I usually forget that I'm technically opening all of these in Chrome at all, not least because the site favicon shows in the taskbar in place of the browser logo. So, I assumed that FF would be able to do the same thing... but apparently not. Am I missing something? I've found people discussing old features like SSB (site-specific browsing) and PWA (progressive web apps), but as far as I can tell all work on this in FF has been discontinued. I would maybe just put up with this, and use Chrome shortcuts for these sites, and FF for everything else, except that links clicked from within them will open in Chrome intead of FF, which makes for a confusing experience. Anyone know of a good solution to this? Thanks in advance!
Or at least that's what Google says they are... :-)
Already getting sick of seeing 'AI' results at the top of a search when all you want is a link to a site? I just discovered [this article](https://www.cnet.com/tech/services-and-software/take-google-back-to-1998-how-to-get-10-blue-links-in-google-search-results/) showing a way to not see it (although it doesn't disable it altogether). TLDR: * In Chrome open settings menu, choose Search engine on left menu and scroll down to site search * Click Add button and choose a name (eg Old Google, Google Web or whatever) * Add a shortcut word (eg web, og, or whatever) * Add this URL string: https://www.google.com/search?q=%s&udm=14 * Save that, and now if you search for something and use the shortcut word you set you'll just get proper results, no 'AI' shown * Or, if you don't want to have to add a shortcut word, you just make that search your default (use the 3 dot menu next to the name you set) and all searches will show that way, no shortcut word needed. *EDIT - meant to add that there are detailed instructions for Edge, Firefox and Safari in the article if you don't use Chrome* Hope that helps someone - I really don't like all that extra nonsense when I just want a link to a site that I know exists! [Obligatory - "or don't use Chrome/Google...", I know - but people do, so this might be useful]
Just wondering if anyone knows of a way to do this? Here's my use case in more detail I have a laptop and a PC, with the laptop connecting to one of my 2 monitors via an HDMI splitter. This allows me to use my PC on both screens most of the time, but then quickly switch one monitor to show the laptop, when required. Only thing is that doing that causes all PC windows* on Screen 2 to jump to Screen 1, while Screen 2 now shows the laptop's windows. That's fine, and I get why it does that (effectively the PC thinks I've disconnected Screen 2). \* (usually it's a bunch of Chrome windows, 5-7 of them - for work/multi-client reasons this works best for me and my PC handles it fine) When I switch the HDMI splitter back, all PC windows remain on Screen 1, while Screen 2 is once again showing my PC desktop, but with no windows. Ideally all windows would flip back to where they were before, but I don't think there's a way to do this, and again, that's fine. My next preferred option is to be able to able to move all Chrome windows over from Screen 1 to Screen 2 quickly - and this is what I'm looking for advice on. I can't seem to find a way to "select" all/multiple Chrome windows and shift them to Screen 2, but it feels like there must be a way? Any help greatly appreciated :-)
www.theguardian.com
Not much for a mention for TP though, but in case Josie fans are interested :-)
www.theguardian.com
More sad news, as Gene Parmesan/Colonel Mustard himself passes away. RIP Martin 😞
Sorry Norway. Our jammy win in Oslo robbed you of a chance to experience a major tournament. Instead, your place went to a badly organised rabble, with no urgency, no ambition and not even basic ball control. You should have been in this tournament, and that disgraceful excuse for a Scotland team should have been languishing in 3rd or 4th. How in god's name did we beat Spain? Sorry Norway, you deserved better.
Of limited interest, I'm sure, but I spent a bit of time working all this out, and wanted to post it before Scotland go 2 down after 5 minutes tomorrow and render it all moot... So. If Scotland lose to Hungary, we're out. No ifs, buts, or maybes. If we draw then we need at least 2 out of 3 scenarios to happen in order to sneak through: - Spain beat Albania AND Italy beat Croatia - Turkey beat Czechia AND Portugal beat Georgia - Denmark beat Georgia AND England beat Slovenia by 5 or more (I think) If Scotland win against Hungary then any 2 (or more) of these scenarios gets us through - Spain avoid defeat to Albania (Scotland would finish better than Albania and also better than one of Croatia or Italy, regardless of their result) - Netherlands beat Austria (Scotland would be ahead of both Austria and Poland) - England avoid defeat to Slovenia (Scotland would be ahead of Slovenia and also at least one of Denmark or Serbia). - There's also the possibility that Slovenia hammer England (Scotland could finish better than England on goal difference and also would be ahead of at least one of Denmark or Serbia) - Portugal avoid defeat to Georgia (Scotland would be ahead of Georgia and also ahead of one of Turkey or Czechia) - Even if Georgia did win, we could beat them on GD, but we'd have to thrash Hungary, so not likely. - No draws on match day 3 in group E. Doesn't matter who wins, as long as two teams do. - Or, if there are 1 or 2 draws in group E then it comes down to goal difference, so we would have to hammer Hungary, see above. And yes, I made a spreadsheet to work all this out... :-)
Come on Scotland fans, let's get this community up and running in advance of Scotland's forthcoming run to becoming European champions! 0' - Game has just kicked off, 0-0 15' - Decent start, couple of really good chances already for Hanley and Forrest, both probably should have been buried. 30' - Scotland in control, but can't get a shot on target. HT - Same old Scotland, never scoring... 58' - GOAL! Christie slams it home after getting into a bit of a fankle with Shankland (a shankle? A fankland?) Nice ball in by Robertson too. 85' - GOAL! Adams. I didn't see it, but apparently it was a good one 👍 ========================================================= Lineups: >Gibraltar (Manager: Julio Ribas, Formation: 5 - 4 - 1) **1 J. Hankins | 2 E. Jolley | 12 J. Olivero | 8 J. Scanlon | 6 B. Lopes | 4 J. Sergeant | 9 A. El Hmidi | 5 L. Annesley | 19 T. De Barr | 10 L. Walker (c) | 20 E. Britto** Subs *3 J. Chipolina | 7 L. Casciaro | 11 E. De Haro | 13 C. López | 14 T. Carrington | 15 E. Llambias | 16 J. Bartolo | 17 K. Ronan | 18 L. Jessop | 21 M. Ruiz | 22 K. Ronco | 23 D. Coleing | 24 E. Santos* ========================================================= >Scotland (Manager: Steve Clarke, Formation: 4 - 2 - 3 - 1) **21 Z. Clark | 22 R. McCrorie | 3 A. Robertson (c) | 23 K. McLean | 15 R. Porteous | 5 G. Hanley | 11 R. Christie | 14 B. Gilmour | 19 L. Shankland | 7 J. McGinn | 25 J. Forrest** Subs *1 A. Gunn | 2 A. Ralston | 6 K. Tierney | 8 C. McGregor | 10 C. Adams | 12 L. Kelly | 13 J. Hendry | 16 L. Cooper | 17 G. Taylor | 20 R. Jack | 24 C. Gordon | 26 S. McKenna*
www.bbc.co.uk
Could have done without this. Not that I rate Dykes all that highly, but we're already thin on forwards. Someone wrap Shankland up in bubble wrap!
www.theguardian.com
Great timing. Unless they're thinking they might get a new manager bounce without actually appointing a new manager?
www.bbc.co.uk
RIP Roger, thanks for Gunslinger, The Undead, Deathstalker and the Warriors from Hell and [so many more](https://mst3k.fandom.com/wiki/Roger_Corman#MST3K).
www.theguardian.com
FFS, not this bullshit again... Hopefully fan pressure can fight it off just like last time.
Example post: https://lemmy.world/post/14058825 I've no idea if this is technically possible at all, but on posts like the one above, where multiple images have been added, it would be really handy to be able to swipe between them as if they were in a gallery. At present it's a case of open one, close it, open the next, etc... Same for comments, not sure if that would be different than posts. Thanks :-)
How fucking great was that?? If you're going tomorrow night, you're in for a treat, what a set!
www.bbc.co.uk
Great news this, was such a shame to see the Filmhouse closed. So glad it's not been turned into a chain pub or something.
Now
SanguinePar
sanguinepar@ lemmy.worldCurrently modding:
Come join us if you're a fan!