I got a MacBook a few weeks ago, first Apple computer I have ever owned. I was so surprised when I plugged my 4K monitor into it, there didn't seem to be a way to run it at native resolution and all the text was aliased.
The Goodison Park (built 1892) away dressing rooms are really Spartan and uncomfortable. They are poorly heated, are right under the stand (noisy), there's only one toilet etc.
I don't think Everton's home record can really get that much worse when they move into their new stadium next season though.
Some of the All or Nothing documentaries that cover Premier League teams include a lot of footage in the away dressing rooms, and they are almost all bad (though Goodison was weirdly cavernous and looks more annoying than normal).
Exactly how they are bad changes, though - when you take the Emirates Stadium (Arsenal's home ground in London) tour, for instance, they actually include some details about how the table in the middle of the away dressing room is designed to be uncomfortably high in a way that keeps team members from making eye contact, which is something that the stadium designers thought would be annoying. At one point, at least, the self-guided tour narration actually included a comment that Pep Guardiola hated the layout.
I toured Stanford Bridge in the middle 2010s, they actually found uncomfortable away dressing rooms weren't the most effective as it either got the other team to go out and start warming up or riled them up.
When Mourinho started he brought in a sports psychologist who made the dressing rooms slightly heated with light pink walls and a comforting atmosphere. They ended up going 2+ years without a loss at home after that.
Google Search has been in decline since they came up with Google+ and removed the Plus Operator from Google Search at the same time (and replaced it with quotes that don't do the same thing). About 13-14 years ago.
I haven't found quoting helps much. I also feel like i shouldnt have to craft search queries with a lot of inurl or other tags or quoting. Kagi just seems to work better. Its worth 10$ a month to me to not have to worry about it, I use search engines a lot.
I have been using search for engines for 30 years, my queries are not vague, i put as many keywords and "inurl"s and whatnot in as i can manage. I dont use kagi blocklists. Google results for my specific queries are garbage. I am much happier with kagi. If you are happy with google, thats fine too. Perhaps we are just in different bubbles and mine are not well served by google.
> i put as many keywords and "inurl"s and whatnot in as i can manage
More keywords does the opposite of narrowing the query. Unless you use quotes and/or other operators, it’s enough for the document to contain only one of your keywords (anywhere, including meta tags) to be a match. Hope this helps.
If you use Kagi and visit any sites with google analytics etc. then you are paying Kagi with your bucks AND Google with your profile.
Oh and you can use Google completely anonymously. You can't do it with Kagi. All your searches go with your billing address (but you can trust Vlad they won't ever use it to profile you).
Maybe the aura of superiority from paying $10 per month for something 99% ppl don't pay for blinds you to the above facts.
It costs money to run a service. If you are not paying for that service, there is an obvious incentive to monetize your data. If you are paying a reasonable price for a service, that business can sustain itself without using advertising.
Your billing address is not something advertisers can use to track you. Sure, if you use Kagi to commit crimes you may not be anonymous to the police. But there are a lot of people who do not want to be profiled by ad networks, yet do not consider providing their billing information to be a privacy issue.
Your comment about "the aura of superiority" is dismissive and a little confrontational. The commenter you were responding to was clear about why he likes Kagi - better results. I agree with him.
I find that searches for product reviews and similar commercial terms have much higher quality results than google. I also find that I get better results when I am searching for errors or lines from logfiles. Even when quoted, I find that Google will often return results that partially match my quote ignoring the important part, which makes the search useless.
> If you are not paying for that service, there is an obvious incentive to monetize your data.
And it goes away if you pay for it?
> Sure, if you use Kagi to commit crimes you may not be anonymous to the police.
The "nothing to hide" arguments, gotcha.
> But there are a lot of people who do not want to be profiled by ad networks
And using Kagi helps with that how? You know that if you open any website from results, you are still profiled by ad networks?
> Your comment about "the aura of superiority" is dismissive and a little confrontational
I was replying to someone who accused me of being superior (because I know how to use Google? lol). Garbage in, garbage out.
> Even when quoted, I find that Google will often return results that partially match my quote ignoring the important part
As I said, if there is no exact match I see "no results for your search". It is a daily occurrence. It smells of planted misinformation, sorry. Considering you are a newly created account as well.
I have and stopped. A few people said that domain blacklisting is the killer feature worth $10. Well, actually it felt like paying to do work and locking myself in. You need to maintain those lists, new spam websites appear daily, and it does not really matter if you use precise queries. Most people don't know that Google is capable of them and Kagi capitalizes on them
I don't use the domain blacklisting at all, encounter spam ~never, and almost always get what I'm looking for in the top 5 results.
1) Google now requiring special skill to use is a totally legitimate way in which Google is inferior
2) I'm actually quite good at Googling and know much of the advanced syntax -- still sucks as of a few years ago!
Obviously people's mileage may vary, but if anyone else is reading this and hasn't tried Kagi: you should. It is unambiguously and inarguably worth trying.
> I don't use the domain blacklisting at all, encounter spam ~never, and almost always get what I'm looking for in the top 5 results.
I encountered spam with Kagi half a dozen times. It was labeled "trustworthy". It is 100x worse than just seeing spam. Having to pay for it just adds insult to injury.
If there is a search engine it will be gamed. What we need is not trust the algorithm but have a good query mechanism.
> Obviously people's mileage may vary, but if anyone else is reading this and hasn't tried Kagi: you should
If your searches are uncomplicated and you are okay relying on algorithm without thinking, absolutely. buy it for your grandma and set it as her default search? 100%. But if you are a power Google user, you will be disappointed.
I thought you use Kagi. It's the label on the right of search result. When I used Kagi it could change color depending on how good Kagi thinks it is (I also remember a bar indicator under it but maybe something changed again). You click on it and you can downrank/uprank the site. If I wanted to really have only good results I would have to do it every day. I'm sure it was good for Kagi because they used it for their crowd sourced ranking but I didn't feel good doing it and paying for the privilege.
I left after I noticed that Google gets me mostly the same results. Plus I have more privacy and less tracking across all web if I don't need to leave private mode.
> literally no one is gaming a search engine with like 0.01% market share.
Kagi is a front-end for google and other search engines. Gaming google and bing is literally gaming kagi.
Except you can leak data even if you don't hold it. You are focusing on data at rest. Not storing the data obviously helps massively, but a bug or maliciously inserted code could lead to user data becoming compromised.
In my opinion, if a bug report is crap, it is perfectly acceptable to politely say so with a canned response and then close the issue a week later if better information is not forthcoming. Declaring 'issue bankruptcy' shows that you do not care about your users time and tells me that I should not trust your project.
Nit: the application the author describe doesn't even publish the request using RabbitMQ, as far as I can tell—they publish the request with a simple HTTP request. They use RabbitMQ solely for scheduling the "Check if this task is done yet" job every ~5 minutes. I haven't used RabbitMQ myself, but it does sound like kind of like a square peg / round hole situation to me.
I've built systems similar to this dozens of times and what they're doing makes no sense. Use a database table to store the state of a given job and query it. Super fast, efficient and you're not hiding state in what should be an ephemeral part of your infrastructure.
The MQ is great for scheduling jobs, passing data between different parts of a given process and generally detaching systems. However fast it is not, unless you're using something like Zero MQ for slow IPC.
I was also surprised by that but there may be some slightly unusual background reason for that that simply doesn't get mentioned. Superficially it sounds like the author should just... do the HTTP request? Since they're waiting for the response anyway
I'm not sure the exact idea here because they said something about retrieving PDF and JSON data, but a big reason for not doing this is normally that some calculation or whatever takes a lot longer than you want a HTTP request to take. So you effectively push the work off, and then the user comes back at a later time and something has been processed and they can see the result.
Almost twenty years ago, I was on a team that built a bunch of health care apps where we had significant, robust mainframe business systems that we needed to get in front of both internal staff, external providers, and the public. So yes, those systems definitely used a whole lot of messaging and in my career since I saw repeats of those patterns not only in that industry, but also financial services, telco, and lots of other places I stopped along the way. Anyplace you’ve got hulking business systems with lots of rules, it’s common to have messaging in between there and the web, and for various distributed applications to talk to each other.
reply