Threads for stilbruch

  1. 9

    Q: Why bother? You can’t make a new browser engine without billions of dollars and hundreds of staff.

    Sure you can. Don’t listen to armchair defeatists who never worked on a browser.

    Armchair defeatist here 👋 I don’t believe it takes “billions of dollars” to create a new basic browser engine (i.e. HTML, CSS, JS); after all, there are already multiple projects doing exactly that (e.g. Netsurf and Dillo). I’m unsure however that the newer technologies like WebGL, WebDRM, WASM, etc. can be implemented completely in a feasible timeframe. You’d wind up with a browser that’s nice for reading news sites and maybe watching Youtube, but anything more complex would be at least partially broken. Maybe someone more knowledgeable can correct me on this.

    1. 28

      You’d wind up with a browser that’s nice for reading news sites and maybe watching Youtube, but anything more complex would be at least partially broken.

      Sounds great to me.

      1. 22

        Worth noting that the SerenityOS browser has some support for JavaScript, WebAssembly, WebGL, websockets, and other “modern” Web features. They plan to eventually support web apps like Discord, since that’s where they chose to host their community (/me sighs).

        Wrote my thoughts over at https://seirdy.one/notes/2022/07/08/re-trying-real-websites-in-the-serenityos-browser/

        1. 7

          Sounds great to me.

          Indeed. Sites who qualify for 1MB Club would probably work well.

          Case in point: My own site is generated via Hugo. The markup is very very simple. I’ve added a splash of (ready-made) CSS, but that’s mostly to get a nice typeface and neat margins – the stylesheet is not at all required to read the text, and there’s no JavaScript in use.

          And I’m far from alone in building sites like this.

          1. 6

            While it may sound great to you, it’s going to kill adoption if a new browser doesn’t have sufficient parity. And given how much Google is driving the specs these days and forcing everyone else to play catch-up, I’m not really sure that independent browser engines can maintain meaningful parity.

            I also worry that the final Chrome/Chromium monoculture will arrive pretty soon regardless of what anyone does at this point.

            1. 19

              I highly doubt their goals or expectations are mass adoption. And if, like you say, there is no way to beat google anyways they might as well not worry about it and just make whatever they enjoy.

              1. 3

                I also worry that the final Chrome/Chromium monoculture will arrive pretty soon regardless of what anyone does at this point.

                ya me too. but efforts like these will do one of three things: 1) nothing at all to improve the march towards a chrome/chromium “death”, 2) delay it, 3) provide a viable alternative and a way out from it

                #2 and #3 seem highly unlikely, but I’d rather not give up all hope and accept #1 as our fate. But I’m one of those crazy people who would rather use/promote webkit, even if it’s not perfect, since its survival is absolutely necessary to reach #2 or #3 (even if #1 is much more likely at this point…). Ya, it’s a sad situation out there.

            2. 18

              The author worked on WebKit / Safari for a long time, so I’d trust his judgement a lot more than mine on the amount of work. I wonder how many of the older web technologies can be implemented in the newer ones. Firefox, for example, decided not to implement a native PDF renderer and instead built a PDF viewer in JavaScript (which had the added advantage that it was memory safe). It would be very interesting to see if you could implement the whole of the DOM in JavaScript, for example.

              1. 17

                You could have said the same thing about Linux. How is it possible for a hobbyist who had never had a real job to create an operating system that’s fast and portable? That’s for companies like Sun, IBM, and HP, which were huge Unix vendors at the time.

                I also found it funny that as recently as ~2009 there were knowledgeable people saying that Clang/LLVM were impossible. You could never re-do all the work that GCC had built up over decades.

                1. 2

                  Or KHTML…

                2. 10

                  That’s completely alright. Ladybird is a system made by its developers, for its developers. It does not intend to compete with other web browsers, and that’s okay. It’s the epitome of the https://justforfunnoreally.dev/ mindset.

                  1. 5

                    I also have a defeatist stance here. Various streaming services such as Netflix and Co are a hard wall since the web was made non-free and gatekeepers like Widevine (Google) don’t even grant pretty successful browser projects entry.

                    But then maybe it’s time to just leave that stuff behind us anyways.

                    1. 4

                      While this is certainly true, using a browser as a user agent for hypertext documents and not as a cross-platform application runtime is a worthy exercise on its own. IMO, of course.

                      1. 2

                        WebDRM is likely the killer because it’s stupid :-/

                        But Kling spent many years working on webkit and khtml, so the layout and rendering of the bulk of html and css shouldn’t be a problem for him alone. Bigger issues I suspect will be xml, xslt, and xpath :-D

                      1. 5

                        OMG-DESIGN-2: Less is more

                        And yet, the page which is essentially just a text document with a search bar does not render without JavaScript

                        1. 5

                          Website doesn’t work without JavaScript

                          1. 1

                            On the topic of criticizing design,

                            .content :is(blockquote, p, ol, ul) {
                              max-width: 64ch; /* or 60-70 */
                            }
                            

                            would go a long way towards readability–the lines are way too long. The rivers from justified text makes it harder to read too. Another offense is using <blockquote>s for admonitions/call-outs as the spec says these elements are for quoting sources–and the who-to-blame is limitations with Markdown for not supporting these kinds of elements (good thing there are alternatives).

                            The blockquote element represents a section that is quoted from another source.

                            Content inside a blockquote must be quoted from another source, whose address, if it has one, may be cited in the cite attribute.

                          1. 5

                            This is inexcusable.

                            What is? That alpine contributors disagree with you?

                            1. 6

                              I don’t think that’s the most charitable interpretation of what the quoted bit means. Later in the paragraph you quoted, the author says:

                              Accusing a contributor of ignorance is inexcusable. Comments like this have no place in open source contributions:

                              SysTemD is the STD of operating systems. There is no “one little poke”, you can’t be a little bit pregnant.

                              That said, the repo’s owner already told the person who made the STD comment that they were out of line, and a lot of the other reactions were politely negative.

                              More broadly, I agree with several other people here that it’s not necessarily politics or unfair for developers to reject something someone wants.

                            1. 11

                              Situation: There are 15 competing standards.

                              1. 31

                                that’s a lazy response - the problem is there are 15 competing implementations and zero standards. i really hope this blocks endeavour succeeds.

                                1. 2

                                  Though there are also standards?

                                  1. 2

                                    Are there?

                                    1. 6

                                      From Block Protocol Spec:

                                      Blocks are web components.

                                      So, a block is literally using an existing standard.

                                      There are standards for other things as well. Packages? For web things? That can include type information, data structures, code? Reminds you of one or several things? Protocols? ActivityPub comes to mind, but there are others as well. Likewise for structured data. Essentially, pulling together existing standards to unite them.

                                      I’ve commented elsewhere, to me personally, this looks a lot like a specific thing aimed at CMS-like things, the article mentions Wordpress, note taking apps, kanban boards etc. Sure, it would be nice if something like this worked okay, but what would happen is an app would support this, but they’d also want to support old-school Wordpress plugins so now I have to support both, right? Which is what the original XKCD is about, isn’t it?

                                2. 6

                                  I haven’t seen a remotely similar attempt at standardize something like this outside of platform specific stuff. Curious if anybody has examples.

                                  1. 7

                                    Well, OpenDoc. It ran on Mac, Windows and OS/2. But it wasn’t related to the Web at all.

                                1. 4

                                  It looks cool… and I really like the old school design rather than the „modern“ flat one… but do you expect this project being more successful than e.g. Window Maker?

                                  1. 9

                                    Seems like the author is working on the project out of enjoyment, not to “be successful”

                                  1. 2

                                    Modern hard drives have more than enough memory to handle your big fat binary and network is fast

                                    I’d say the cache still matters quite a bit, and “the network” is not that fast for most people

                                    1. 5

                                      TLDR: Doing undefined behavior can cause unexpected (undefined?) results. Therefore: “don’t write C code”.

                                      1. 8

                                        It’s more: there is no way of expressing an API in C that does not involve undefined behaviour if you use it wrong, therefore use a language that can express this kind of API in such a way that incorrect use is a static type-checking error.

                                        It’s worth noting that C++11 is the first version of C++ in which it was possible to implement a type-safe printf.

                                      1. 2

                                        I would like a Xorg that is easier to build and doesn’t do so many things I don’t need. I understand why some of those things are there historically, but it’s one of the last remaining resource hogs on my system and I am sure there is some way to slim it down.

                                        1. 16

                                          The most interesting part is this tool:

                                          https://github.com/GoogleContainerTools/distroless

                                          Pretty amazing small images.

                                          1. 20

                                            The devops people are slowly rediscovering static linking

                                            1. 10

                                              The main advantage of distroless seems to be dynamically linking glibc properly in a minimal container.

                                              1. 16

                                                what if the container was a file, and the file was an executable. that’d be pretty minimal. they’ll get there some day…

                                                1. 14

                                                  And then the cycle will begin again. “Hey I have this file but it doesn’t run because it needs to be in the presence of this other file”.

                                              2. 4

                                                I am not sure what you mean. Static linking was always an option at different levels. Single JAR file is a statically linked package for Java apps for example. You can do the same thing with AWS Lambda packages (single zip).

                                                1. 11

                                                  At least last I checked, a JAR file is a self-contained package but not actually statically linked. All the class path lookup stuff is still done, dynamically, when the program is run.

                                            1. 5

                                              well this is what proprietary software is like, what did you expect?

                                              1. 5

                                                I think non-whitespace characters would be a better metric. Those java lines are very dense. Even so, comparing one project by one author doesn’t give a very useful statistic.

                                                1. 4

                                                  (`source code here`).replace(/[\s\n]*/g, “”).length

                                                  Python - 4542

                                                  Typescript - 4558 - +0.3%

                                                  Go - 4736 - +4.2%

                                                  C# - 4992 - +9.9%

                                                  Java - 5426 - +19.4%

                                                  1. 1

                                                    I agree on the density. The python lines seem like they are half as wide as the java lines. Plus python has two lines between functions whereas the java code has one.

                                                    One minor nitpick on the python code: it looks like you could use data classes. Would remove a couple of LOC.

                                                  1. 1

                                                    Neat! Objective-C also got its start as a preprocessor (also using the @ token.) And so did C++, come to think of it.

                                                    Why did you decide to use the existing “auto” for cleanup, instead of a new word like the de-facto standard “defer”? Just to avoid adding any reserved words to the language?

                                                    1. 1

                                                      :-) My purpose is explicitly not to build this up into a new language, because if you can use a new compiler there are better options out there already.

                                                      As for using auto, you are exactly right: it was to avoid adding keywords.

                                                      1. 2

                                                        Why use keywords in general? For a preprocessor or wouldn’t it make more sense to add a #defer?

                                                        1. 2

                                                          There is the issue that existing editor modes are likely to mis-indent such lines. It would be a deal breaker for me to require custom editor settings.

                                                    1. 15

                                                      Please consider signing the open letter against these changes: https://appleprivacyletter.com/

                                                      1. 10

                                                        Are you going to post an open letter for Microsoft, Google, DropBox, Facebook, Twitter, and all the other companies who have used the exact same database for this exact purpose for the last decade?

                                                        1. 8

                                                          Which provider has previously used this list against images that aren’t stored on their infrastructure?

                                                          1. 4

                                                            Images sent via iMessage are stored on Apple’s infrastructure.

                                                            1. 1

                                                              I think the question had implied “stored in plain text”. iMessage doesn’t do that.

                                                              1. 6

                                                                Right. So, every other provider has direct access to your photos, and scans for CSAM with their direct access. Apple, rather than give up their E2E messaging, has devised a privacy-preserving scheme to perform these scans directly on client devices.

                                                                I really don’t understand how Apple is the bad guy here.

                                                                1. 4

                                                                  Other providers that scan cleartext images are off the hook, because they’ve never had E2E privacy guarantee.

                                                                  [smart guy meme]: You can’t have encryption backdoor if you don’t have encryption.

                                                                  Apple’s E2E used to be a strong guarantee, but this scanning is a hole in it. Countries that have secret courts, gag orders, and national security letters can easily demand that Apple slip in a few more hashes. It’s not possible for anyone else to verify what these hashes actually match and where they came from. This is effectively an encryption backdoor.

                                                            2. 3

                                                              If I understood what I read, although the private set intersection is done on device, it’s only done for photos that are synced with iCloud Photo Library.

                                                              1. 2

                                                                Apologies to all in this thread. Like many I originally misunderstood what Apple was doing. This post was based on that misunderstanding, and now I’m not sure what to do about it. Disowning feels like the opposite of acknowledging my mistake, but now I have 8 voted based on being a dumbass 🙁

                                                                1. 2

                                                                  iCloud Photos are stored on Apple infrastructure.

                                                              2. 4

                                                                This page gets the scope of scanning wrong in the second paragraph, so I’m not sure it’s well researched.

                                                                1. 3

                                                                  how so? can you explain?

                                                                  “Apple’s proposed technology works by continuously monitoring all photos stored or shared on a user’s iPhone, iPad or Mac, and notifying the authorities if a certain number of objectionable photos is detected.”

                                                                  seems like an appropriate high-level description of what is being done, how is it wrong?

                                                                  1. 7

                                                                    I may be wrong but, from what I understood, a team of reviewers is notified to check manually the photos once a certain number of objectionable photos is detected, not the authorities… If (and only if) the team of reviewers agrees with the hashes matches, they notify the authorities.

                                                                    This is a detail but this introduces a manual verification before notifying the authorities, which is important.

                                                                    From MacRumors:

                                                                    Apple’s method works by identifying a known CSAM photo on device and then flagging it when it’s uploaded to ‌iCloud Photos‌ with an attached voucher. After a certain number of vouchers (aka flagged photos) have been uploaded to ‌iCloud Photos‌, Apple can interpret the vouchers and does a manual review. If CSAM content is found, the user account is disabled and the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children is notified.

                                                                    Link to the resource: https://www.macrumors.com/2021/08/05/apple-csam-detection-disabled-icloud-photos/

                                                                    1. 1

                                                                      Second paragraph of the AP article

                                                                      The tool designed to detected known images of child sexual abuse, called “neuralMatch,” will scan images before they are uploaded to iCloud

                                                                      This resource from Apple also states that only images uploaded to iCloud are scanned.

                                                                      1. 2

                                                                        This quote you cite figures nowhere within the page.

                                                                      2. 1

                                                                        Apple’s proposed technology works by continuously monitoring photos saved or shared on the user’s iPhone, iPad, or Mac.

                                                                        Only photos uploaded to iCloud Photos are matched against known hashes.

                                                                    2. 4

                                                                      Or just don’t buy an Apple device. Do you really think a trillion dollar company cares about digital signatures?

                                                                      1. 6

                                                                        I think this is a good statement of intent though.

                                                                        I just bought an iPhone 12 and would be otherwise unlikely to be noticed as a lost sale until the iPhone 14~ since most people don’t upgrade a single minor version.

                                                                        Giving them warning that they have lost me as a customer because of this is a good signal for them. If they choose not to listen then that’s fine, they made a choice.

                                                                        Also the more noise we make as a community; the more this topic gains attention from those not in the industry.

                                                                        1. 4

                                                                          I didn’t mean to make some sort of “statement” to Apple. I find that idea laughable. What I meant is that if you are really concerned about your privacy to the point where scanning for illegal images is “threaten[ing] to undermine fundamental privacy protections” (which I think is reasonable), then why buy Apple in the first place? This isn’t the first time they have violated their users’ privacy, and it certainly wont be the last.

                                                                          1. 6

                                                                            What’s your proposed alternative?

                                                                            I think Apple making a stance on privacy, often posturing about it a lot, does cause a lot of good will and generally those who prefer to maintain privacy have been buying their products. (myself included). You can argue that it’s folly but the alternatives are akin to growing your own vegetables on a plot of land in the middle of nowhere connected to no grid (a-la rooted android phones with f-droid) or google owned devices which have a significantly worse privacy track record.

                                                                            1. 3

                                                                              You oughta update your intel about the “alternative” smartphone space. Things have come a long way from “growing your own vegetables on a plot of land in the middle of nowhere connected to no grid.” The big two user-friendly options are CalyxOS and LineageOS with microG. If you don’t feel like installing an OS yourself, the Calyx Institute, the 501(c)(3) nonprofit which develops CalyxOS, even offers the Pixel 4a with CalyxOS preinstalled for about $600.

                                                                              I’m running LineageOS on a OnePlus 6T, and everything works, even banking apps. The experience is somewhere between “nearly identical” and “somewhat improved” relative to that of the operating system which came with the phone. I think the local optimum between privacy-friendliness and user-friendliness in the smartphone world is more obvious than ever, and iOS sure ain’t it these days.

                                                                            2. 2

                                                                              It does seem folly to make a statement by not buying something, but consider this: When you vote, there are myriad ways that politicians have to dilute your impact (not going to enumerate them here but it’s easy to do). By comparison, when you make an economic choice, ever dollar is counted in full, one way or another. So if you vote, and you should, then there’s every reason to vote with your pocketbook as well.

                                                                      1. 31

                                                                        I prefer to see this type of project that builds upon what it considers the good parts of systemd, instead of systemic refusal and dismissal that I’ve seen mostly.

                                                                        1. 15

                                                                          Same. Too often I see “critiques” of systemd that essentially boil down to personal antipathy against its creator.

                                                                          1. 22

                                                                            I think it makes sense to take in to account how a project is maintained. It’s not too dissimilar to how one might judge a company by the quality of their support department: will they really try to help you out if you have a problem, or will they just apathetically shrug it off and do nothing?

                                                                            In the case of systemd, real problems have been caused by the way it’s maintained. It’s not very good IMO. Of course, some people go (way) to far in this with an almost visceral hate, but you can say that about anything: there are always some nutjobs that go way too far.

                                                                            1. 3

                                                                              Disclaimer: I have not paid close attention to how systemd has been run and what kind of communication has happened around it.

                                                                              But based on observing software projects both open and closed, I’m willing to give the authors of any project (including systemd) the benefit of the doubt. It’s very probable that any offensive behaviour they might have is merely a reaction to suffering way too many hours of abuse from the users. Some people have an uncanny ability to crawl under the skin of other people just by writing things.

                                                                              1. 6

                                                                                There’s absolutely a feedback loop going on which doesn’t serve anyone’s interests. I don’t know “who started it” – I don’t think it’s a very interesting question at this point – but that doesn’t really change the outcome at the end of the day, nor does it really explain things like the casual dismissal of reasonable bug reports after incompatible changes and the like.

                                                                                1. 4

                                                                                  I think that statements like “casual dismissal” and “reasonable bug reports” require some kind of example.

                                                                                2. 3

                                                                                  tbf, Lennart Poettering, the person people are talking about here is a very controversial personality. He can come across as an absolutely terrible know-it-all. I don’t know if he is like this in private, but I have seen him hijacking a conference talk by someone else. He was in the audience and basically got himself a mic and challenged anything that was said. The person giving the talk did not back down, but it was really quite something to see. This was either at Fosdem or at a CCC event, I can’t remember. I think it was the latter. It was really intense and over the top to see. There are many articles and controversies around him, so I think it is fair that people take that into account, when they look at systemd.

                                                                                  People are also salty because he basically broke their sound on linux so many years ago, when he made pulseaudio. ;-) Yes, that guy.

                                                                                  Personally I think systemd is fine, what I don’t like about it is the eternal growth of it. I use unit files all the time, but I really don’t need a new dhcp client or ntp client or resolv.conf handler or whatever else they came up with.

                                                                                  1. 4

                                                                                    tbf, Lennart Poettering, the person people are talking about here is a very controversial personality.

                                                                                    In my experience, most people who hate systemd also lionize and excuse “difficult” personalities like RMS, Linus pre-intervention, and Theo de Raadt.

                                                                                    I think it’s fine to call out abrasive personalities. I also appreciate consistency in criticism.

                                                                            2. 4

                                                                              Why?

                                                                              1. 7

                                                                                At least because it’s statistically improbable that there are no good ideas in systemd.

                                                                                1. 1

                                                                                  Seems illogical to say projects that use parts of systemd are categorically better than those that don’t, considering that there are plenty of bad ideas in systemd, and they wouldn’t be there unless some people thought they were good.

                                                                                  1. 2

                                                                                    Seems illogical to say projects that use parts of systemd are categorically better than those that don’t

                                                                                    Where did I say that though?

                                                                                    1. 2

                                                                                      I prefer to see this type of project that builds upon what it considers the good parts of systemd

                                                                                      Obviously any project that builds on a part of system will consider that part to be good. So I read this as a categorical preference for projects that use parts of systemd.

                                                                              2. 2

                                                                                There have been other attempts at this. uselessd (which is now abandoned) and s6 (which still seems to be maintained)

                                                                                1. 4

                                                                                  I believe s6 is more styled after daemontools rather than systemd. I never looked at it too deeply, but that’s the impression I have from a quick overview, and also what the homepage says: “s6 is a process supervision suite, like its ancestor daemontools and its close cousin runit.”

                                                                                  A number of key concepts are shared, but it’s not like systemd invented those.

                                                                                  1. 1

                                                                                    s6 I saw bunch of folks using s6 in docker, but afaik that’s one of most not user friendly software i’ve been used.

                                                                              1. 13

                                                                                Congratulations to the author on winning an imaginary argument

                                                                                1. 18

                                                                                  Immediatly after the Secret Service confiscates his devices on Apple’s request:

                                                                                  I would need to buy a decent replacement. I decided to go to the Apple Store and see what was in stock

                                                                                  1. 16

                                                                                    I think we need a word stronger than naive here.

                                                                                  1. 8

                                                                                    Happy to see that kernel developers are staunchly defending their email-based workflow, and there is no real threat that GitHub will become the core development infrastructure.

                                                                                    It’s strange to me that the article frames GitHub as an alternative to email that is better suited to “one-off” contributions. One of the problems with GitHub development is that you can’t contribute without a GitHub account, whereas email based workflows generally don’t require any subscription or account with the project to contribute. In that way email is actually better for one-off contributions.

                                                                                    If new contributors have difficulty getting “set up” to submit patches in the right format, maybe it would be good to have a bot that monitors a newbie contributors mailing list, identifying problems and suggesting fixes for emails that don’t meet the project standards. Keeping it email-based seems like a much more realistic way to help newbies learn about the kernel development process, rather than giving them the false impression that Linux is a GitHub project.

                                                                                    1. 6

                                                                                      Show of hands: who doesn’t have a GitHub account for reasons other than ideological? Even if I refused to use GitHub for my own projects, I’d end up with one purely for contributing to projects. (And it’s still a better experience than email.) It’s not like making an account is a huge barrier either.

                                                                                      That, and it’s not like GitHub is doing anything dastardly with your account either.

                                                                                      1. 18

                                                                                        Anyone who Github has banned or who they are legally forbidden from working with as an American company.

                                                                                        1. 9

                                                                                          I do have a GitHub account, but I use it to open issues.

                                                                                          My problem with these changes is not that GitHub is good or bad, but rather an external company becomes a dependency.

                                                                                          If gcc does something bad, no worries, we can fork it, but if GitHub does something bad, we cannot.

                                                                                          If it matters that much, I would suggest to run a GitLab/gitea server.

                                                                                          EDIT: P.S., I have friends who don’t have GitHub accounts, not beacuse of ideology, but beacuse GitHub does not allow them, they live in places like Iran. Also: sometimes Mother Russia blocks websites like GitHub :)

                                                                                          1. 4

                                                                                            That, and it’s not like GitHub is doing anything dastardly with your account either.

                                                                                            Of course, Microsoft would never!

                                                                                            1. 3

                                                                                              I’ve been waiting for this supposed Microsoft intervention and haven’t seen it. Everything GH is doing now is what they’d have done when they were independent, good or bad.

                                                                                              1. 3

                                                                                                doing anything dastardly with your account either.

                                                                                                Idc about the quality of the service GitHub provides. You said they aren’t doing anything bad with your account (which to me means personal data)

                                                                                                This is right up Microsoft’s (or any big tech company’s) alley. You can claim they aren’t doing anything, but because it isn’t open source you are at their mercy.

                                                                                                1. 1

                                                                                                  Yeah most of the things that are bad about Github are equally bad regardless of whether or not they are a separate firm or owned by Microsoft.

                                                                                              2. 2

                                                                                                The dastardly thing that GitHub is doing is GitHub.

                                                                                                1. 1

                                                                                                  I can’t tell what you’re arguing. That GitHub actually is better than email for one-off contributions because it’s a better experience? Your other points seem to rest on that premise, which is clearly not agreed upon.

                                                                                                2. 5

                                                                                                  It’s strange to me that the article frames GitHub as an alternative to email that is better suited to “one-off” contributions. One of the problems with GitHub development is that you can’t contribute without a GitHub account, whereas email based workflows generally don’t require any subscription or account with the project to contribute. In that way email is actually better for one-off contributions.

                                                                                                  Exactly. This is why the Sane software manifesto requires that it should be possible to contribute without having an account at particular service and without having signed a contract with particular third-party.

                                                                                                  Dependency on centralized corporations like GitHub, Google etc. is Evil. Free software and internet needs rather more decentralization.

                                                                                                  1. 4

                                                                                                    I definitely also prefer mailing-list development. It makes much more sense when discussing changes iteratively, and the larger the change the more useful it becomes.

                                                                                                    Technically you still need to subscribe to the mailing list, unless you’re one of the fellows that still knows about gmane. And it does require some decent email client, to both handle the traffic and to make patch submission/retrieval convenient. Since many devs nowadays just use web-based clients, they see mailing-list based development as an annoyance, and that’s why it gets such a bad rep. This is not exclusive to kernel development. @calvin is also right in saying that almost everyone now has a github account for either work of issue submission, you actually have less friction using github than to subscribe to a high-traffic mailing list.

                                                                                                    It’s also true IMHO that the simplicity of github makes it easy to submit one-off patches, which is both a pro and a con. That’s fine for a typo fix, but it’s also too easy to see PRs with new functionalities, or bug fixes but with terrible code quality which the author has no intention to support beyond the initial submission: these are just a PITA for large projects, and raising the barrier to contribution does help weed them off.

                                                                                                    Kernel dev is not supposed to be easy, so having a non-zero barrier to entry is beneficial IMHO.

                                                                                                  1. 29

                                                                                                    For a month, we looked closely at the parts of the browser that were “sparking joy” for people, and the parts that weren’t

                                                                                                    “sparking joy” is not very high on my list of things I want a web browser to do.

                                                                                                    1. 17

                                                                                                      It’s a reference to Marie Kondo who found popularity with her methods of tidying up. She wrote a book and had (one? more?) popular reality TV show(s). She advocates for going through each of your possessions, asking if it “sparks joy” and to get rid of it if it doesn’t.

                                                                                                      While I got the reference, I’m a bit apprehensive of a new Firefox re-design. I feel like I just got used to the last one. Admittedly that one was sorely needed. This time around I feel like it’s coming too soon and will waste my time unnecessarily. Hopefully it will still be as customizable as before though, so I can put it all back the way I like it.

                                                                                                    1. 4

                                                                                                      At the end it says

                                                                                                      Meanwhile the average user still doesn’t know what a cookie is, and blindly clicks on the Accept button.

                                                                                                      This isn’t true. The beginning of the article even explains that it’s against the rules to emphasize accept over reject for cookies, which means the average user is going to click no. And why wouldn’t they?

                                                                                                      1. 7

                                                                                                        If that’s in the rules, it sure as hell isn’t followed. A lot of sites have a nice shiny “accept” button and a dimmer “manage my cookies” button.