Due to journo's lazyness headline became misleading: in Belarus votes are not really counted anymore. Like literally, numbers are taken out of thin air. So it's not like "referendum approves" anything - it's Lukashenka decides
Headline is misleading, and should be corrected. Not being American I went to look for the context, and the issue is about selection of books for educational system. Not about banning. Whether it is a successful way to shape better students is a interesting question to discuss. But fact is that all taxpayer-funded education all over the world includes selection of books for pupils.
For starters, let's read as written: I didn't say beautuful. Second: ok, replace ads with landscaping. One note though: ads pay for themselves, will it work with landscaping?
Telling "lure you attention" is just a way to frame it. There are plenty of evidence that visual monotony has negative effect on mind, and FWIW in most modern urban environments (blocky, and painfully uniform) ads often do a little bit of favor by providing variance. I've been to places where street ads are heavily regulated to the point it's noticable that there are less billboards and they are more plain. Unless those are full of historical baroque, gothic/art nouveau buildings it absolutely doesn't make it more attractive (I support restricting ads in historical towns).
As for claim about accidents: how about murals, decorative lights on houses, big brightly lit windows?
I doubt there was a global women poll on this issue. And strongly suspect even if existed it wouldn't show that majority of women even care. You are welcome to change my mind
Your stance looks self-contradictory. An introduced change either brings enhancement, or not. In the latter case you wouldn't expect anybody to be excited. It means one only gets dopamine boost when getting closer to a goal set, i.e. the feedback works absolutely right. If after a bunch of such changes one arrives at "barely working" it indicates poorly defined goal, and/or lack of underlying knowledge. And has nothing to do with length of compilation. Actually, that's what we can expect from beginners, right? With quicker feedback they, most likely, will have a chance to absorb knowledge quicker.
It's really easy to avoid intrusive ads these days: don't waste any time on TV, sign out of social platforms, use Brave, or any browser with adblocking - you're 99% done with it. As for more subtle kinds of advertising, banning it would require killing media, publishing, entertainment, and even large swaths of education.
Marketing texts happen to be misleading more often than not. But this exact excerpt you cited looks innocent to me. "Significantly" is subjective, of course, but other than that it's correct.
When you criticize you have to concentrate on what you see as wrong (i.e. weakest points) unless you plan to write a full review of review, so "cherrypicking" sounds rather unwarranted here.
I found that between "I already have it digital", and "I will have it digital once I get to a scanner with a paper-feeder" the distance is too big to my liking. Also it's easier to name/annotate my handwriting (to make it searcheable) right after I finished scribing, then to sort out a whole notebook later. That said, I can imagine a paper-fed scanner to be well enough solution for many people, who already have an easy access to it.
Web browsing on e-ink is widely known to be barely usable, and not what e-readers are made to do. So usage of "even" word is hard to explain here really.
At least in terms of law as it's applied it's definitely not true. Either your sources are not correct, or "circumvention" is described very differently in other places.
In 90s in my country it was a norm to buy potatoes directly from farmers. Many would find it funny that in richer places people pay more buying it washed, and sorted. However, as economical circumstances enhanced majority of urban dwellers started to pay more for washed, and sorted (and often imported, because you can't guarantee high quality of yield in any given year, at any given place) potatoes. You still can buy directly if you like, but nowadays it's mostly for students, and unsupported seniors. I don't know, maybe there's some sort of cartel conspiracy in US food trade, but consumers paying more for intermediary services is universal phenomenon. Likely after reaching some economical threshold, it becomes easier to spend for a bit of free time, and comfort.
On language you may be right. On currency, it's complicated. In economically unstable countries people generally prefer to count in USD, or EUR, especially if it's something which has to be paid across borders.
His statements make a lot of sense: the first language learned often has a profound effect on programming habits. That's why proverbs like "one can program in COBOL in any language" appeared.
I think it's a wrong kind of goal (or at least wrongly-worded). Trying to consume all interesting content will leave you with no time to use acquired knowledge, and overloaded mind won't be able to produce anything on top of it. Also, as other commenters said the amount of information constantly grows disproportinally faster than you can read.
That said if you want to increase your ability to get more X-related data through your brain, you have to reduce consumption of non-X-related data - usually the first candidates to sequester are social platforms, and news websites.