freebuju

My bad. I thought you were saying you had issues with getting vaapi to work on Firefox. Tough luck getting any hw video acceleration in Linux outside of x86_64 and vaapi capable chips.

You can give Chromium a try. It has unofficially supported hw video decode capability. Though in my experience, out of the available browsers, Epiphany had the most robust hw video playback support due to gstreamer integration.

Google's FLoC was proposed openly as this one is. Everyone and their grandma was up in arms about it. Why give Mozilla a free pass? What is so special about this proposal?

They've taken Google's money before. Why not siphon off Meta before the company crashes and gets liquidated. /s

Am glad Mozilla's true commercialization intentions are coming full circle. They recently introduced Firefox suggest[0]. Maybe they can finally retire the privacy-first corporate-goobly talk they have been parading for quite some time and join the adtech space as a fresh objectively neutral player.

[0] https://blog.mozilla.org/data/2021/09/15/data-and-firefox-su...

This ban was presumably done under the same guises as the one done for Huawei. I don't see anyone shedding tears for Huawei.

To be fair, we have given Bitcoin more than enough time to mature into the ideals Nakamoto had envisioned. Can we just call it a failed project and move on to cryptos that actually deliver on the promise.

This was my thought too but I can't seem to find anything from Spotify's new policy that touches on content removal for subjects unwilling to appear on a recorded podcast. Maybe legal disputes could be playing a hand here, however the timing is too convenient. Easiest answer seems to be Spotify is doing some cleaning on their yard after the recent backlash.

I share a similar story to yours. For a while, I used to call Spotify the 'Joe Rogan app' because that's all I ever used the Spotify app for.

It's because of JRE that I discovered this whole new world of podcasting.

So, the so-called low transaction fees is not standard. In essence proving itself to be a gimmick...

Except the most usable crypto today which is Bitcoin, might cost 15$ to send someone 5$ today, maybe 20$ tomorrow depending on the ever flactuating gas fees. I wouldn't describe this as low transaction fees nor in any way efficient. Crypto right now is at best an inflationary tool good only for profiting off market speculation. It will never be as good as fiat or any other financial products based on fiat for the foreseeable future.

To be fair, the herd immunity idea was floated around quite early in beginning of the pandemic. But it was quickly thrown out when governments saw the infection rates and deaths spike up. Ever since, vaccination has been the dominant (hammer) solution for the virus. (Vaccination) Has been the background track for this pandemic and still is to date. Natural immunity is only coming back because Omicron is not as deadly as the previous strains. It was never an option before.

I think I got what you narrated. The element of surprise is your response to recognizing MKBHD's content playing at an unexpected unusual venue.

Instead of that suggestive ad being inserted into the video. Why not use auto-play or recommended videos section? Suggested videos in the menu work great, better even, in your case scenario for content discovery.

I don't watch YouTube with ads and I don't subscribe to YouTube Premium but I pretty much doubt in-video content suggestions disguised as ads will do a better job of predicting what I'll watch next over menu video recommendations.

No. You are just a MKBHD fan. There's nothing more to it. Someone else who doesn't know who Marques is will see a talking head interrupting the relaxation video. For the restaurant owner, it means they cannot rely on YouTube to play requested video content as commanded. This proves the point even further, technology instead of being smarter in the case of YouTube here, has grown to become an annoying anti-consumer product that constantly moves in the opposite direction of the user.

It's not just a Twitter problem. Every major corp out there seems braindead on this issue. One would have thought that even major news publishers would at the very least whitelist their paywall on covid news coverage stories.

Maybe true but how can you audit this?

Kind of reminds me when one of the foremost mRNA researchers, Dr. Robert Malone was temporarily banned on LinkedIn regarding his views on the vaccine. While speaking at a JRE interview, he says later on after the ban, LinkedIn (probably after public backlash) sent him an apology letter, quoting they could not assemble a team (or they themselves were not) qualified enough to fact-check him. Let that sink in for a moment...

When did we turn to social media spaces to get our health facts from. Fact checking from big tech is the silliest thing normal people have embraced on the Internet. Kind of loony when you think of the historical context of the internet.

Never. Unless I accidentally hit rm -rf on my system. Even though it is easy to recover as I have backups automated to my external drive as well as on cloud, it will take me a few hours to return my system configuration back to its original state and this is not fun, not anymore.

Not in OP's shoes but maybe they used to enjoy the convenience of being able to just watch Friends on Netflix. Or maybe they login to their Netflix on an "un-approved" device such as an Ubuntu PC and Netflix deems this bad so they get capped to 480p video streaming. Or just maybe, whatever price is deemed appropriate for a NF subscription is no match for the volumes of content available on the other side of the high seas for free.

You are right. Had a brain fart moment there. Still a good place to check as some of these official statements from the two leading public health bodies communicate the agreed-upon response to the disease.

On Astral Codex Ten's piece, I assume you are talking about this one [0] The whole piece is such a doosie. Am almost sure 90%+ of the non-core audiences that landed on the page never scrolled to the end. If you are going to debunk a controversial subject, KISS. Not to say he didn't do a good job at poring through the numerous inconsistent data and studies carried out on the possibility of use of ivermectin for treatment. But am sure I came across some of his material on the interwebs.

Back to the source material of this post, FDA were completely malicious by tweeting that. Their linked post even goes to mention that taking ivermectin could be lethal for you.

What happens when the body whose sole job is to be the arbiter of truth and science regarding safety of drugs knowingly makes obviously dubious false verifiable claims? They are either knowingly participating in a lie or they are incompetent.

[0] https://astralcodexten.substack.com/p/ivermectin-much-more-t...

Am sure you can find plenty when you go down this rabbit hole but you can start here: https://twitter.com/us_fda/status/1429050070243192839

Flatpak is the future of Linux desktop applications for so many reasons, but among them it allows users not to be caught up in the dependancy mess that plagues Linux distributions. Some of the criticism here does not belong to Flatpak. E.g Fedora's weird duplication of repositories is exclusively a Fedora problem. Has absolutely nothing to do with Flatpak.

Applications such as VLC and GIMP which 'ship' with access to whole filesystem permission is an eternal dilemma. Would you rather the authors ship without access to this permission and break app functionality ? Or let them ship with restrictive permission and allow users to manually enable respective permissions to regain function when the software breaks? It is easy to see the feasible decision here that works for all parties here. The permission on the different accessibility store however has confusing labels on sandboxing, I agree with the point that the store should make this as clear as possible.

I think the bigger point the article misses is the ability to control these permissions at this level. Even if the software author ships 'dangerous' default permissions, the user can always revert this decision and sandbox it effectively if they so wish.

Flatpak is a crucial needed fix for the Linux package distribution problems highlighted elaborately by this article but in my humble assessment, the benefits to this solution massively outweigh the nuances such as the one the author mentioned about package sizes.

Are you using social media, correctly, as you put it.. Or. is social media using you?

I find that even if you go out of your way to sanitize and make SM useful to your needs. You can't do away with the unhealthy incentives around it and possible potential dopamine addiction.

Arch recently introduced a general prompt-style installer script that should be able to help you setup and install a working Arch on any system.

https://python-archinstall.readthedocs.io/en/latest/installi...

Google cannot secure your data against the real criminals. The 3 letter agencies.

Bang on! This just summarizes the experience of browser video hardware acceleration on Linux. Marred with bugs and incompatibility issues. Regressions are the norm for Firefox in this regard according to my experience using an Intel card.

Since announcing support for HW video initially on Wayland, Firefox has been off to the races on this [0]. Despite requiring lots of hacks to enable flags as you linked on the Arch Wiki, one of which now suggests disabling the sandbox for content processes and a major red flag, it somehow worked.

For one reason or another [1], Firefox chose to lock the video drivers to the old i965 drivers instead of choosing the newer iHD driver. A weird decision that still applies to current builds.

There have been incompatibility issues with video codecs. In my experience I can play h264 videos with hardware acceleration but not vp9 with the flatpak distribution. With vanilla package, both h264 and vp9 video is hw accelerated.

I could also have sworn that video acceleration support has gotten worse over time since the introduction.

I now get a weird artifact at the bottom half of the screen only when watching YouTube videos. [2]

Video hardware acceleration is not entirely doomed on Linux. Even if Chromium does not want to make any move toward this direction in this century. Gnome web or rather Epiphany has stellar video acceleration support by using Gstreamer plugins. So it is possible to get hw video working on a browser.

[0] https://mastransky.wordpress.com/2020/06/03/firefox-on-fedor...

[1] https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1619585

[2] https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1724663

If you were to ask me. Kids should be given less and less access of social media apps like these. Social media might have some good positive use cases but for the most part it is problematic and tends to err on the negative side. Recent studies have shown that Instagram has harmful and negative effects on teenagers. What makes you think it is okay to ignore this alarm?

Remember. Kids are using Instagram because a guardian/supervisor has allowed them to.

Instagram for Kids is a cheap attempt by Zuckerberg to groom young minds into assimilating into the sick digital abyss of social media. Not because we want to make safe spaces for kids. Nothing about unrestricted access to Instagram-like apps is safe, let alone positive, for young minds.

There's privatezilla too. If you consider Microsoft Defender (real time scanning & sample submissions) to be a spy tool, there are easy scripts available to permanently disable it, apparently recent Windows versions decided not to honor instructions disabling WD via registry or local group policy.

You won't be able to sign in until you change the IP address to match the account's origin country. And this annoying dance is to be expected at least every couple of weeks.

Not if they manage to pull off Instagram for Kids

I don't think am being unreasonable. There is nothing stopping you or any user from consuming the product without proof of government ID. Besides social media networks get hacked all the time.