It's still in their docs, too: https://www.w3.org/2023/Process-20231103/#implementation-exp... "are implementations publicly deployed?"

It's our failed state, so what do you expect?

https://aegis.ifkee.de at least has a copy that builds on contemporary Linux.

It's more a UX problem than a technical one, so simple "why not X?" technical proposals tend to be incomplete.

And because there are way too many ways to confuse people with similar looking characters, the domains can be typed in and converted appropriately, but some webbrowsers ensure that you notice if something is off with www.bаnkofamerica. com (www.xn--bnkofamerica-x9j. com)

"presumably paid for her time" is an interesting insinuation, as it disenfranchises her of her voice just because somebody put a camera in front of her. Do you think she wasn't paid some consultancy fee for dealing with that Wired journo? Do we have to figure out now who paid more?

One of the reasons IEEE mentioned is that it's a bad representative for contemporary digital imagery (resolution, color range, etc), so that alone is reason enough to look for alternatives. The most recent statement of the model is "let's retire [it]," even before she didn't seem to care much.

I suppose the interesting question is why you're so hung up on having that photo in new scientific publications.

That said, it's mostly water under the bridge right now, and it isn't applicable at all for the "reference image for computer graphics papers" situation unless somebody starts rewriting all the old papers to reference a different image:

A "somebody needs to do something" mandate would likely lead to new versions of the old papers in which the image is removed without replacement. The "do it right" solution would lead to people replicating the research with different material, which might not even be for the worst - but I see no chance that will happen at scale.

Right now, sound engineers, not incompetent at all, optimize CDs for the CD audience (and for the most part, they preferentially buy "louder," even if they'd deny it if you ask) and vinyl for those freaks who maintain their diamond needle.

So vinyl sounds better _because_ it's a hipster medium.

That's not what the post said. Just that, before Islam was even a thing, those countries that Jews lived in which these days are considered "Muslim countries" were broadly "pagan" and/or "christian", depending on time and location.

As for your assertion of no christian countries thousands of years ago, where you state yourself "Armenia converting about 1715-ish years ago": That's thousands of years (as in: more than 1000)

There was the DNT header. Few sites acknowledge it (and thanks to those who do!), and when Microsoft went against spec by setting it default-on in their browser, advertisers whined that they can't see informed consent anymore and just shut down the whole initiative. Note: Microsoft is also in the advertising business, so if you're into that, that might be another angle for your favorite conspiracy theories.

Finally, there's consent-o-matic, available as browser extension for various browsers, and it lets you state your preferences. https://consentomatic.au.dk/ Would it have been better to integrate that into browsers properly? Sure. But the social and economical dynamics being what they are, this is probably the best we can get.