Firefox doesn’t explain how to do this at all, but it is possible. Make a bookmark with the URL you want, and set the keyword to whatever symbol you want ti start it with.

For example,
Name: Scryfall (or whatever you want)
URL: https://scryfall.com/search?q=%s&unique=cards&as=grid&order=name
Keyword: s
Then type “s Birds of Paradise” to get the result you want.

I did the same with Reddit and it worked on my end. If it doesn’t work for you I’d be happy to help you figure it out.

It’s also possible on mobile, and it’s actually even easier: Settings>Search>Default Search Engine>Add Search Engine. Then you can type your search and choose the engine from a dropdown menu.

I don’t know exactly what Chrome does but Firefox lets you sync tabs, history, bookmarks, and saved logins and card information.

They actually had this in Europe and just discontinued it.

I’d be willing to bet that for most Americans the main barrier to commuting by bike is the threat of cars and lack of bicycle infrastructure as a whole.

I ride my bike to class often, and when I do it’s great. Well-maintained trails and frequent bike racks make it very convenient. My college is good with bicycle infrastructure, and I happen to be lucky that there are good trails between my apartment and campus. A faster ride would be nice, but I don’t see it making me bike more often. It wouldn’t affect the things that prevent me from biking on the days that I don’t: weather, time of day, or how I feel physically.

Despite how much I bike to class, I’ve never biked to the grocery store, restaurants, or any other place that’s not on campus. This is because I’d have to ride on busy roads without bike lanes. Once you get closer to the center of the city, there are bike lanes, but they’re just painted. Actual separated bike lanes basically don’t exist in the US, which means that cyclists are still at risk of getting hit by cars even when bike lanes are present. A faster bike wouldn’t fix this. Investment in infrastructure would.

I do understand the appeal of eBikes and I recognize them as a viable alternative to cars. But I only think people will make the switch if they live somewhere that’s already got the necessary infrastructure to make their commute safe and efficient. This is not even close to the majority of Americans. If we want people to move away from cars and toward bikes, we need to think of infrastructure first and the bikes themselves second.

There’s lots of stuff that could be considered innovation that is intentionally stifled due to competition laws or security concerns.

I agree that some innovation can be harmful. I guess what I meant was “we should avoid disincentivizing innovation unless necessary.” The way I see it, though, job lots from automation is both inevitable and fairly easy to fix (as you said, UBI), so there’s no reason to try to stop it from happening.

Really, I think automation should be encouraged. It frees people from usually-undesirable jobs and allows them time to pursue different careers or other interests. As long as we have ways to deal with the unemployment I think it’s a huge positive for people.

they should have to continue paying taxes for those roles because the newly unemployed will need government support.

I fully agree that there will need to be a tax increase to cover support for the newly-unemployed, but why not make that a general increase on businesses and wealthy individuals? If anything, this would be and incentive for automation as a way to decrease rising business costs.

Innovation has removed jobs before, and we dealt with it. I don’t see businesses being taxed for using computers instead of human calculators. I don’t see why this innovation is different.

I disagree. We shouldn’t be disincentivizing innovation. Taxes on business and the wealthy should increase regardless of their use of automation.

Did you look at the link posted? I’ve never seen a door handle like that, and I’m not even sure I would realize it was a lever if I saw it. It looks like a static part of the door to me.

I do agree that I’d probably end up pulling on it after some searching, but it wouldn’t be the first place I’d go.

Not necessarily the creation of plastic–I agree that it’s very beneficial–but the management of plastic. As we’re seeing now, plastic can be very destructive to life when it’s used and disposed of irresponsibly. The filter in this case is being able to use plastic for its good without letting its harmful aspects get out of control.

Do you think there should be cotton in our hearts too? Just because we wear something doesn’t mean it should be inside our bodies too.