_phaq

4 ms·

1.
by _phaq 8y ago
Actually consented, as in understood the implications and freely decided that Google should have this data, probably none. That would take a lot of generosity, especially to pay that team of lawyers and technical experts, so that you have a
2.
by _phaq 8y ago
No one forces you to use the feature, just because it's there. Other people do find it useful and they have every right to do so.
3.
by _phaq 8y ago
> It seems wilfully destructive to remove something that is depended on by so many without making sure there's a replacement in place first. Could cut straight to the GNOME logo after that sentence. This is sort of what they do, yea
4.
by _phaq 9y ago
Externally "testing" a filesystem isn't exactly easy either. If an error occurs, there's not gonna be an exception thrown that you can send off to telemetry. If you're lucky, your customer notices that files are mis
5.
by _phaq 9y ago
> It is personality focused, and sexual appeal is going to be part of it. Well, exactly that is debateable. Sexual appeal is often coupled with a completely flat or acted personality. And if they have somewhat of a personality, then usua
6.
by _phaq 9y ago
* Can be self-hosted. * Queries other search engines besides just Google. * Has more search options.
7.
by _phaq 9y ago
Well, most design people also have side projects, be it a Tumblr page or an endless supply of drawings that they just do to improve their drawing skills. But that's different from helping an (OSS) application look good. For that, you h
8.
by _phaq 9y ago
The fear is that this makes it far too easy to use DRM for webpage owners. Previously, you had to pull in a slow-ass Flash-plugin or similar, which was very much known to bring all kinds of security issues. Now you just say "DRM this&q
9.
by _phaq 10y ago
DuckDuckGo is also mostly just a meta-search engine. They do have their own webcrawler, but most results are still sourced from Yahoo!, Bing and the like.