I think browser vendors need to provide more advanced controls for people who want it. Give us a whitelist mode where every feature besides base HTML is turned off, unless we explicitly add the site to our whitelist. I want checkboxes that say only these websites allow: cookies, javascript, images, css, etc.
No need to reinvent the wheel, the browsers are fine, but they open the floodgates by default. I think content providers have abused this to the point of breaking the web. Similar to the ad networks... abused it the point of absurdity, so now you are all permanently blocked, because you couldn't have any common decency. Block it all by default, whitelist what you want.
Beware: micro sometimes inserts invisible characters into your files. I never figured out why, and it seemed to only be on Debian.
I lost 2 days to troubleshooting weird problems, until less revealed some configs had little droppings of random text sprinkled throughout. I opened them with micro and everything looked fine... then I opened them with nano and I could see and remove the extra characters.
Micro has a great user interface, really. I wish that I could use it, but I don't think it's wise and I will stick with standard nano for quick edits.
Could those be non-breakable space characters? Alt+Space generates them in many environments. That caused a lot of grief on MacOS for me until I added a rule in Karabiner to disable the feature.
Do you remember what version that issue happened on? Were you using unicode characters or a non-UTF8 encoding? That sounds like an annoying issue and it would be great to fix it.
This was in 2018, not sure which version. UTF-8 across the board.
I don't remember the details, unfortunately. I think there was a pattern to it, like they were control characters or something. But it silently inserted them, and they were not visible within the editor, but they were visible in nano/less/etc.
Did they just appear as space characters, or did they actually not take up any cells in the editor? Currently some non-displayable characters are rendered as spaces, which is not ideal. I will look into displaying non-displayable characters in a special way (perhaps as `^@`, similar to how Vim does it, or with �, which is meant for this purpose).
I think they were appended to the end of each line, so unfortunately that would make it non-obvious that something was there. If they were rendered as spaces that would explain not being able to see it. Displaying them as � would be an improvement.
Again, this was awhile ago, but I don't think they were single characters, it was a sequence of characters.
Is it possible that it was a matter of changing the line endings? Some applications can be quite sensitive to different line endings… sounds suspiciously like that?
I observed the reverse on Windows. A Powershell profile file edited on vscode, when opened on micro, shows an invisible character (I thought it was space) after every character in it.
It really isn't as good. I want DDG to be awesome. I'm not in the Google ecosystem, and don't care for their business practices. I would be happy to dump them.
But Google search is noticeably much, much better. They've got us over a barrel.
I kept seeing comments on HN about how DDG was as good as Google, so i've switched on one of my machines. It isn't.
For stuff that doesn't matter too much, or is an easy search, i use DDG, then fall back to Google if i don't find what i need. For anything serious, i just open up a Google tab :(
Well, sometimes what you're used to matter too. For me DDG is better (expect for local searches, in which case I've got to include my city's name).
Every time I search anything in someone else's computer (with google) I find it much harder to find what I'm looking for, sometimes I can't find and just go to DDG.
The only times I use !g is when I find some pretty obscure programming errors and no (useful) results on DDG, and only once in a while google is able to find anything better, usually the results are the same.
It's interesting that there are such diverse experiences of DDG vs Google. I'm also in the camp of finding DDG to be better at finding what I'm looking for.
I wonder if the difference has to do with variations in search strategy or interests, or a combination of both. In any case, DDG does seem to have been improving, and I don't see any reason to believe that the trend won't continue. Particularly since Google seems hell-bent on making their search useless.
I share the same sentiment. I'm not even a graybeard yet, and I'm sick of the work culture/environment/processes. I'm in my late thirties, so I'm somewhere in the middle.
I've been around long enough to recognize that older, more experienced people are incredibly valuable to learn from. They also have one thing you can't shortcut: perspective, and knowing where the bullshit is and how to avoid it. There's shit I'm just not willing to put up with anymore, that I would have been eager to do in my twenties. It wears you down.
Definitely frustrating for anyone not on broadband. There are more of us than you'd think. It's a giant 'fuck you' from the software industry, real world efficiency be damned.
Totally agree. Updated to Catalina recently and on top of the huge patch size the update client doesn't seem to have any retry mechanism built in. Connection drops 9.9G into a 10G download? Too bad, start over. Just a simple wget -c would do. Incredible.
I wonder how many real word resources are wasted over this. It costs money to serve that data, it costs money to download that data, it congests the network wherever that data is being routed, it consumes energy however that is generated in the region.
Windows Update does this too, if the transfer fails it starts from zero. Multiply this by... what, a couple million times for each update?
I assume they run the numbers and it's cheaper to just dump all the data and run things inefficiently, compared to having teams deploy it correctly. It's just a waste though, and it pisses off your customers.
My personal monthly usage is in the 100G region; this particular failed update has cost me 20G of burned bandwidth. Where I live around 2% of the country doesn't have access to decent broadband. Since these updates are released every 2 months or so in a very back-of-the-envelope fashion failed updates amount to 0.2% of the country's total bandwidth usage. I might be an order of magnitude off but that is still an incredible waste.
Maybe they did run the numbers, but the amount of engineering effort required to fix it is absolutely minimal (couple of lines...). A significantly worse outcome for society as a whole at the cost of a try-catch block.
I'm sorry for that. As Streamable states: ads will be shown as soon as video becomes popular. But they didn't state exactly how popular. I couldn't find any other convenient method to embed small animations with fine quality and ability to pause them. Any recommendation is appreciated.
Unity editor is more stable. Unity editor is more performant.
UE4 is easier to work with in the long run. I find that Unity is just missing stuff, or has half-baked solutions that change. UE4 already has this stuff included as core product.
Unity is more approachable, has better docs, but slowly falls apart. UE4 is less approachable, has worse docs, but becomes better to work with over time.
But, it all depends on your use case, and what you need out of which tool. I have worked in Unity 4/5, UE4, Source, and Source 2 as of recently with the HL:Alyx tools.
Unrelated side not: Source 2 tools are pretty slick! But they don't have general licensing yet... if they announce that, my next project might be in Source 2 instead of UE4. Something about that Quake/HL legacy code that is always more comfortable than Unreal.
No need to reinvent the wheel, the browsers are fine, but they open the floodgates by default. I think content providers have abused this to the point of breaking the web. Similar to the ad networks... abused it the point of absurdity, so now you are all permanently blocked, because you couldn't have any common decency. Block it all by default, whitelist what you want.