My life is locked into one gmail account. All my notifications, passwords, bank statements, invoices, to and fro emails from exes, etc. etc. come to this gmail account. I have to rewind too much of my time to go to every place that uses my gmail account and change it. I can't do it. I'm locked in for life.
And now think what would happen to you if your Gmail account was locked. No recourse, no response except form mails saying "your account is banned because it's banned." No way to recover any other account using it as recovery mail. No way to access your records or email history. Maybe locked out of your phone too. You're boned.
That's what made me extract myself from Gmail. I created my new email address and forwarded my Gmail account to it, and then for every email coming to the Gmail address I updated the sender with my new address. It took me about six months before all my important mail was using my new address, but it actually wasn't that hard and I feel hugely less vulnerable to Google's whims.
Edit: At the same time I also started using a proper password manager, making me again much less vulnerable to losing an email account because I no longer rely on resetting passwords to get into my multifarious online accounts.
If your account is banned do your auto reply(canned responses) stop working? Coz that would be a proper stop gap to tell important people(job offers/contact requests for eg) to your website/email you actually use etc.
Presumably it would be set up before-hand? If you preferred the other email, you might deprecate the gmail account and set up an auto-reply for all traffic to update contact information. It would require giving up gmail early. The question would be if auto-reply keeps working after being banned
Your solution is (was?) to use your own email address (with your own domain) with email forwarding to your gmail address. This way you do not make your gmail address public, and can move frontends easily.
This does not solve the fact that your email archive is in gmail though.
It's really not that hard. I'd used gmail since early 2000s and it took me one long afternoon a couple years ago to switch basically everything to fastmail. Probably helped that everything I cared about was already a record in keepass though.
I have my bank statements in an email account by a provider that is unlikely to ban people for questionable and unrelated offenses.
(You can totally get banned from Google's entire platform if you do something wrong on the Play store after e.g. being pressured to do so by your employer.)
Most of my private email communication (which has dwindled to a tiny number of messages per month) is on GMail.
I've also got a couple other addresses in addition to that.
I also have email addresses on my own domain, but I don't know if I'm going to keep that domain forever, as it costs a lot of money.
> You can totally get banned from Google's entire platform if you do something wrong on the Play store after e.g. being pressured to do so by your employer.
Devil's advocate: that possibility strengthens your position when your employer tries to pressure you to do something neither you nor Google find acceptable.
I was just as entrenched but am about a year into a gradual transition. Signed up with another email provider with an address @ a domain I own, transferred my entire mail history, forwarded all incoming gmail emails to new provider, updated all public facing contact @s to new address, switched mostly to open source email clients, all new accounts are made @ the new address, old ones stay @ the old one. It's not perfect and it's not trivial but it's 100% worth it.
For once. Get a domain and a paid mail account with fast mail/Zoho/gsuite. Slowly transition to the new inbox by moving over the emails. It will take sometime, possibly months, and you might never be able to close the gmail inbox but it will be fine. You’ll never need to do such a transition in life again.
The author says .... "and the actual pesticides used today are mostly relatively non-toxic to humans."
Nothing can be further from the truth. Most (in fact all) pesticides used are designed to kill biological cells. So pesticides do not distinguish between a caterpillars cell or a humans. All pesticides are harmful to humans, some in tiny doses, some in large doses.
> Most (in fact all) pesticides used are designed to kill biological cells
You can make pesticides based on hormones of the target insect. Those pesticides do not kill cells.
Insects are kind of like little biological state machines, with hormones controlling the state transitions. A pesticide based on those hormones can mess up the timing. For instance, suppose you have in insect the munches on your crops all summer, then when it gets cooler and wetter lays its eggs and dies, leaving the eggs to repeat the cycle next year. A hormone-based pesticide might be able to make them lay the eggs early, when it is too warm and dry for the eggs to survive and when things that might eat the eggs are active.
I can't state how wrong you are. Believe it or not, different classes of life have different cells with different DNA. They use different pathways for almost everything.
As such, they are not equal. Specifically, insect cells are generally "more advanced" than ours (have more recent "basic" genes, more accurately adapted to their environment, tougher, ...), a lot smaller, ...
Bacteria are far more different from us than that, as are spores, other plants, ...
So yes, there are a LOT of compounds that throw a wrench into, say, insect procreation but have no known effect on humans.
Paywalled. Small article. Copy pasting entire article as comment.
-----------
BRUSSELS—The European Union plans to hit Alphabet Inc.’s Google with a record antitrust fine of €4.34 billion ($5.06 billion) on Wednesday, according to an official familiar with the matter, a decision that could loosen the company’s grip on its biggest growth engine: mobile phones.
A formal decision—which would mark the EU’s sharpest rebuke yet to the power of a handful of tech giants—is set to be taken during Wednesday morning’s meeting of EU commissioners following a presentation by competition chief Margrethe Vestager, according to the person. No discussion of the decision is expected, the official said.
The EU’s antitrust regulator has been looking into whether Google had abused the dominance of its Android operating system, which runs more than 80% of the world’s smartphones, in order to promote and entrench its own mobile apps and services—particularly the company’s eponymous search engine.
Google, which can appeal, has rejected the EU’s case since the bloc issued formal charges over two years ago. Google says Android, which is free for manufacturers to use, has increased competition among smartphone makers, lowering the prices for consumers. Google also says the allegation that it stymied competing apps is false because manufacturers typically install many rival apps on Android devices—and consumers can download others.
The fine would top the EU’s €2.4 billion antitrust decision against Google just over a year ago.
Wednesday’s expected ruling would be the latest in a series of decisions in which the EU has cast itself in the vanguard of a backlash against U.S. tech superpowers, on issues ranging from competition to taxes to privacy. Ms. Vestager has become the face of that battle, arguing that regulators must do more to restore fairness to the digital market.
The EU’s executive announced Wednesday morning that Ms. Vestager would give a press conference at 7 a.m. ET.
Write to Laurence Norman at laurence.norman@wsj.com
I hadn't heard about this. They've sued several companies whose names end with "book". Apparently a lawsuit coming from FB is scary enough that they've acquiesced and changed their names, without standing up in court. Replacebook!
This does kind of start to adopt a counter-accusative tone, which could be interpreted as negative. Though it would entirely depend on context. The expletive just makes it sound angry overall.
"I don't fucking hate dogs!!" sounds like something yelled with a raised fist-finger in a dispute about dog shit on the lawn between neighbours in some lowly apartment complex.
Technically this isn't a double negative, but you are right that the negative connotation of "hate" is reversed by "don't".
"I don't have nothing" is a double negative. In "proper" English (whatever that means ;p) , the correct phrasing would be "I don't have anything" or "I have nothing".
If it’s costing you very little to maintain the site, don’t shut it down. Reduce the price. I’d suggest $50/year. Your current pricing is USD 20/month or USD 240/year. I feel that's high. Have a 'yearly pricing'. I have a single page site on squarespace (https://www.peopledock.com). I pay $60 per year once a year and forget about it. Paying month-on-month is a hassle for me.
I think the point here is, a Founder-VC is better than a traditional VC because the Founder-VC understands ”the life and art of being in the trenches”.
And we ship. It's hard to unlearn solving problems via software when you've done it, especially at scale successfully, and it makes everyone at the org (and soon in the founder network) more effective and frankly happier doing their jobs.
