Dude, that’s literally insane.

And for the love of all that is sacred, that first letter is not a D. And I don’t know what they smoked when creating it.

I couldn’t find a reference to Barbie in your link, or am I missing something?

Ah, because I used a translate app and wasn’t sure if it did it correctly. So as I found the translation funny, I wasn’t sure it was the same thing you were aiming at.

I googled a bit, and perhaps this statement comes from this old Reddit thread here in the first comments.

There it’s mainly used as a joke to describe how Windows is just very backwards compatible in general. The story might have stuck and warped a bit as like it really had a reference to that Barbie game.

‘backdrop’?

It’s a ukulele.

dodo / pepe as well

Well, in my experience it’s mostly interaction bugs. Quite noticeable when you’re used to Chrome not having these issues.

Desktop runs great, but Firefox on Android seems to be noticeably buggy here and there sadly. I still use it, but I can imagine that might drive people out of the ecosystem.

Many people get used to the synchronization of their passwords / bookmarks cross-channel. More advanced users have a separate password management for this I’d figure, but that’s not the default for 90% I’d guess.

You’re willingly confirming something you rate as sensitive, trying to bring more credibility to it by being an extra shout and referencing a virtually unverifiable needle in a haystack ‘authority’ as Google, but find the sensitivity a reason for not sharing your information.

How can you reason like this?

Wintereenmas ducks quickly

It’s better than the native Mail app by Apple.

And even that’s only in the optimistic situation where you can always fully trust “1”, also in the future.

a criminal always returns to the scene of the crime

He leans on it, don’t you see? That’s his lean-knee-wee-nee.

Now try it with kids or a partner who works in health care. Personally I was quite strict like you, but had it a couple of times due to external factors becoming internal factors.

Heaven forbid even more, a masstectomy.

Do you have a source for that? I cannot find anything about it online in Google, Wiki or even in ChatGPT delusions.

That’s a fair point. And I believe AI should be able to combine legal material to create illegal material. Although this still feels wrong, if it excludes suffering in base material and reduces future (child) suffering, I’d say we should do research on it at least. Even if it’s controversial, we need to look at the rationale behind it.