jraph

45 ms·

421.
by jraph 1y ago
That's not always enough, sometimes you need some code simulating the "deny all" clicks or tweaking CSS class lists on the body and html elements. Otherwise, you might end up with some unscrollable page because for instance t
422.
by jraph 1y ago
Crossing my fingers for you mates!
423.
by jraph 1y ago
uBlock Origin's cookie banner lists do this.
424.
by jraph 1y ago
> My least-favourite is websites with the "Pay or OK" model Which doesn't respect the GDPR. > As an aside, is anyone else getting LLM-writing-style vibes from the linked page, or is that just me? The multiple 3-item lis
425.
by jraph 1y ago
Browsers have no way to determine what code or cookie is tracking and what isn't, and if websites are not targeted, they don't have any incentive to tell browsers "oh, this is for tracking, and this, no, it's not for tra
426.
by jraph 1y ago
uBlock Origin's cookie banner lists do this without AI.
427.
by jraph 1y ago
note that the GDPR doesn't make a difference between cookies and browser fingerprinting. It doesn't concern itself with the technical details. Whatever applies to cookies also applies to browser fingerprinting.
428.
by jraph 1y ago
Then enable the cookie banner lists in uBlock Origin. Do expect occasional breakages and remember to temporarily disable the blocking to get through.
429.
by jraph 1y ago
Existing binaries don't stop working, but adapting your infra to get the update can take some time. Without other elements, it's definitely not nice to stop releasing the binaries out of the blue, especially for a security fix. To
430.
by jraph 1y ago
Hey, tone down, please. Also, have you, for some reason, totally missed the first point in my comment? > Do you know their reasons for discontinuing? Are you even entitled to know that? It's their private matter. Fully addressed in
431.
by jraph 1y ago
We also find the Wiktionary definition [1]: > One who does not contribute or pay appropriately; one who gets a free ride, etc. without paying a fair share. Which I believe is a bit more generic (giving back might not be the only way of b
432.
by jraph 1y ago
To me, there are two aspects: - if you rely on something, you should make sure you can reasonably rely on it (indeed, for instance by paying someone) - if you provide something, even for free, you should expect people will rely on it and yo
433.
by jraph 1y ago
Rant about the concept of open source freeloaders: there's no such thing as open source freeloaders. If the license explicitly gives you the right to use the stuff for free, there's nothing wrong in using this right. While it woul
434.
by jraph 1y ago
The title of the HN submission might look a bit misleading. It's easy to misinterpret it and think MinIO stops being open source (which would be a bigger deal IMHO). I think this would be better: "MinIO stops distributing free Doc
435.
by jraph 1y ago
That's a slow process and you need someone to do the packaging, either yourself or a volunteer, and this for each distro. Which is not trivial to master and requires time. The "new" qualifier in the parent comment is key here
436.
by jraph 1y ago
I think many (most?) non tech people don't even know that Amazon is first and foremost a cloud provider (and one of the biggest at that, if not the biggest) and that its market thing is almost a side activity at this point.
437.
by jraph 1y ago
> Baguettes aren't for show/tourism, it's a staple of french food Indeed. So much so it's often a pain to find good whole bread outside cities. I was being a bit facetious. More seriously, the issue with baguette &#x2
438.
by jraph 1y ago
If you mean free as in "free software", not really. 1. The philosophy is completely different: https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.... 2. Technically, mostly but not quite; there are t
439.
by jraph 1y ago
Yep, the Sybase Open Watcom Public License. The OSI considers this license open source [1], the FSF and major distros don't [2], including Fedora [3] and Debian [4]. It is notably used by the Open Watcom C compiler, which is used to co
440.
by jraph 1y ago
Yeah, buy one baguette once for the folklore, and then buy good (whole, optionally levain-based) organic bread that lasts days.
441.
by jraph 1y ago
I was using it on way lower spec machines than that (including a Pentium II machine with 256M of RAM), Firefox handled 10 tabs well at the time. On Linux though, and blocking ads.
442.
by jraph 1y ago
I've used Firefox since version 1.5. I don't remember it being bad around version 3.0. There's a long time during which Firefox was somewhat slow, and I remember the spidermokey team releasinf the famous Are we fast yet websi
443.
by jraph 1y ago
I don't think the chrome dominance is a result of the IE hate. Firefox briefly dominated the web in between. Chrome dominance is a result of Google wanting to control the web and its dominance in the ads and search areas.
444.
by jraph 1y ago
La Poste might have invented the first non-vegan stamps in history. I hope they don't turn rancid.
445.
by jraph 1y ago
Again, that's a terrible presentation of the situation. It makes me look like I defend AWS. That's like saying that although I could, I won't vote for candidate C who is against the freedom of the press when candidate C would
446.
by jraph 1y ago
> So do you also see what I meant about both permissive and copyleft licenses giving up some freedoms? You can't have it all. Not a fan of the framing but I get your point (of view). > For ongoing freedom, If I was choosing betwe
447.
by jraph 1y ago
> MIT does not give software freedom to all users of the code Okay, I would agree more with this phrasing. That's the issue I have with permissive licenses. > NDAs aren't there to protect freedoms, they only remove freedom.
448.
by jraph 1y ago
Right! Interesting, thanks. Hadn't thought about Ghostscript!
449.
by jraph 1y ago
> For several Amazon Linux AMIs, yes and yes! Okay, I believe you, I'm not familiar with this. I'd still be interested in knowing which specific AGPL software Amazon would use themselves (note, I'm sure they distribute AGP
450.
by jraph 1y ago
>> the users won't enjoy software freedom with that result > That's the part I was talking about. > So I don't know why you started your post with "No." You are mixing two different users. FreeBSD user A

More ›