tcfhgj

19 ms·

481.
by tcfhgj 11mo ago
Somehow I doubt it is. People are capable of selecting phones, phone network providers, e-mail providers, Internet providers, but selecting a server for mastodon is too complicated? Don't buy it
482.
by tcfhgj 11mo ago
human rights and sustainability also
483.
by tcfhgj 11mo ago
how is clicking a heart or a star - depending on the UI - unintuitive?
484.
by tcfhgj 11mo ago
how do you measure "too complicted"?
485.
by tcfhgj 11mo ago
evidence?
486.
by tcfhgj 11mo ago
works with Firefox + uBlock Origin + canvas blocker
487.
by tcfhgj 11mo ago
My hoster wouldn't take me down though. Instead it will protect me for free: https://www.hetzner.com/unternehmen/ddos-schutz
488.
by tcfhgj 11mo ago
> you let a simple DDoS attack spiral out of control so bad that your host is refusing to run your website anymore. you don't have control about them in the first place
489.
by tcfhgj 11mo ago
> Bugs and vulnerabilities are always being found none which haven't been there from the beginning
490.
by tcfhgj 11mo ago
Unlike buns, software doesn't deteriorate
491.
by tcfhgj 11mo ago
well, shouldn't not-up-to-date code use the corresponding compiler flag instead of someone starting a greenfield project, who might then write outdated code?
492.
by tcfhgj 11mo ago
1. It doesn't give you that necessarily, see Go. 2. Rust doesn't have memory management like in C. In Rust, abstractions and the compiler manage memory for you, except when you opt into C-like memory management using unsafe. 3. Th
493.
by tcfhgj 11mo ago
It is not
494.
by tcfhgj 1y ago
IMHO every app benefits from memory safety. Memory safety doesn't only have security implications, but reduces crashes, misbehavior and corrupt data. You don't want either in any software, which has to fulfill a task in a producti
495.
by tcfhgj 1y ago
> Every time a language in the same space comes they get asked if they are memory safe? So what? It might be shocking for you, but every new messenger gets asked if it supports e2ee these days. Why shouldn't people want to know abou
496.
by tcfhgj 1y ago
once in university
497.
by tcfhgj 1y ago
this isn't the case anymore, now they are independent clients
498.
by tcfhgj 1y ago
> How can one possibly square those two pieces of data to point at rust somehow fixing the "memory safety vulns"? The code base contains Kotlin and Java as well
499.
by tcfhgj 1y ago
fewer features and lower resource usage on phones? understandable on the desktop client? nah
500.
by tcfhgj 1y ago
> Google has no intention to verify the content of sideloaded apps, just that it is signed by a real person, for accountability. for now
501.
by tcfhgj 1y ago
> Every time I use it, it has some huge box over a third of the page saying I must "verify sessions". do you use element web on the phone? > It's incredibly slow to propagate messages. was > Initial set up is very co
502.
by tcfhgj 1y ago
you can still use all of them to write windows apps, even though they might not receive the latest & greatest shiny features
503.
by tcfhgj 1y ago
afaik UWP still works though, and switching to WinUI3 is mostly just updating the namespace of your windows components
504.
by tcfhgj 1y ago
it's simply just cheaper, and almost nobody is going to ditch WhatsApp for it, so it's a no-brainer for companies
505.
by tcfhgj 1y ago
this means WhatsApp is the easy choice, but nobody forces you ... yet
506.
by tcfhgj 1y ago
not perfect? yes terrible? no way
507.
by tcfhgj 1y ago
What is the alternative? Additional 100k cost per year vs time, energy and hardware for billions of users?
508.
by tcfhgj 1y ago
> It’s just that consumers don’t really care for the most part, so the cost is basically $0. It's zero, because most people cannot just not use WhatsApp, M$ Teams, etc. because WhatsApp has a monopoly on their centralized garden. It
509.
by tcfhgj 1y ago
If companies needed to pay ressource usage of their apps, the digital world would look nothing like today
510.
by tcfhgj 1y ago
Why are you forced to be in parent group chats?

More ›