slowenough

Is that so? You're sure this is all about guidelines?

Seems like you didn't protect me from people throwing insults like this, and so then banning me while I'm defending against it, just makes you complicit in enabling their abusive behavior.

What will you create for yourself if that's how you moderate?

Probably just a jewelry box and some old letters.

This is really funny, I like this. This is so cool.

Yes, friend: https://github.com/dosycorp/robot-head

If you wanna play audio (yer username, c'mon), see: https://boogeh.com (audio works but is like 20 seconds lag as we encode it)

There's docker image linked there as well.

Hit me up if you have any issues: cris@dosyago.com or @browsergap on twitter. X

This is great. But could you explain what it actually does and how you developed it and are you earning money from it?

I got the same when I opened it using my browser. So I opened it in my "remote browser" (this is not a plug, just a help): https://free.cloudbrowser.xyz and it was much more usable.

A takeaway seems to be: if you're going to use AI in product, let the AI power a whole new type of product, not use it as a feature in an existing one.

Sure they did. Some anon was unhappy with that response. Could be main account of the throw but who cares? My repliy is directed at anyone unhappy with that response.

Don't blame me if you're unhappy with that response, "Anon" . You need to let people know what your pain points are. Not prepared to provide any details in your question? Then don't expect any details in a response, is that unclear to you? Your reaction is your responsibility, "Anon".

No I don't mean the automata rules, I mean the calculation describing how the cells move when you drag them around.

Possibly off-topic but who will be Sundar's successor? Who is likely?

When you drag the hyperbolic plane it moves and redraws. How is this translation of the cells calculation done?

This is very cool.

This just means another paradox of fake liberal ideology is showing.

It's not surprising if the strategies such as diversity quotas are not effective. Because they're not meant to be effective. They're meant to virtue signal. Ergo they are meant to only redirect people's anger towards an ineffective end, not to create an actual improvement.

For another example, take a prevailing narrative in fake feminism that continually tells women they are disempowered victims. This doesn't help bring balance, it only helps disenfranchise women.

Of course, if that were true, why would anyone believe any of these narratives such as diversity quotas? Because they provide the fake victim fake payoff: there's something very compelling about not having to be responsible for your problem but instead being able to blame someone else albeit incorrectly. It's very satisfying and an effective means to redirect anger towards a ineffective but satisfying ends. It's very compelling for people and gets them hooked.

Another place these fake payoffs are used to manipulate people is in terrorist recruitment. You can sublimate raw economic issues and individuals dissatisfaction into blaming and hatred towards another state, you can create armies of willing footsoldiers.

I'd suggest there's a further parallel between armies and the "Twitter armies": legions of ideologues willing to crucify anyone who dares disagrees.

So it's not surprising these so-called strategies do little effective. they're not meant to, they're meant to preserve the status quo. And they do that by the simple psychological mechanism of redirecting people's anger towards something ineffective.

There is a big reason but I don't know what you need so I can't say.

Don't blame me if you're unhappy with that response, "Anon" . You need to let people know what your pain points are. Not prepared to provide any details in your question? Then don't expect any details in a response, is that unclear to you? Your reaction is your responsibility, "Anon".

not that I know anything but it seems like the decision was complex both to create the Alphabet and now to kind of merge it under one CEO.

I think some of the reasons could be they no longer see a risk of anti Monopoly regulation targeting them so they don't need to keep everything so divided. they genuinely want to give Sundar a go. They need a process to gradually fade out The original founders, but also importantly ensure those founders isolate their risk from any future missteps the companies take, and vice versa.

maybe the two co-founders were simply getting in the way.

There is a big reason but I don't know what you need so I can't say.

this would be possible. you can create incognito tabs via right click. each of these has a separate ephemeral profile, so separate sessions and cookies. you could then modify the user agent and navigator platform for each of those different browser contacts. however they still all go over the same IP.

not sure how to make different IP per tab, but perhaps proxy settings are scoped to the browser context, so it might be possible, haven't read the devtools protocol deeply about that.

I like this a LOT

What about defanged?

What sort of person hours went into this?

Sorry, yes you must type protocol/scheme. Sorry I did not think of FQDN as enough. I'll add the issue now, thanks! :)

Also, it's not obvious, but you can reload by right clicking to get context menu -> selecting "realod", or you can click on the "->" button to the right of the omnibox/address bar.

If you look a little closer, and spend a little more time, I think you'll find it does have "at least have some of the same basic functions as my typical browser."

Um, that's awesome! Thanks!

Damn, that's a good idea. Thank you. :) Reheadless. Frankenchrome... Anyone got some good names?

Thanks, what's been the biggest horror for you? The page is what I was going for. So there's that, and ah... horrifying you is a bonus, I guess?

I don't know much about doing contemporary design, and I think I can emulate something. Maybe you can suggest a landing page this should look like and I can copy that style? I would appreciate it. Up to you :)

Thanks. There were some good points raised there specific to the secure remote isolated browser use case.

I'm posting because it's clear that this is more than just a security product. It's a UI and backend to use headless chrome like a regular browser, except in the cloud instead of your device.

sometimes I get lazy and creative about HTML/CSS. "I don't wanna work out how to get it just there...okay RTL, done!" :)

Don't hit the free demos too hard. I made the instances alot smaller since last time. Just posting because it's clear that this is more than just a security product. It's a UI and backend to use headless chrome like a regular browser, except in the cloud instead of your device.

Apart from security, or automation (not finished that part yet), I don't know why you might want this, but I thought it was cool and so I'm sharing it because you might need it for something.

well I like your crazy idea. why not offer me a job?

Why? Because they hit a ceiling of the paradox of development. Development introduces problems that their current system cannot fix, and they face crisis: either breakthrough the ceiling or fail. Usually breakthrough is associated with figuring a new ways to extract more energy from the environment (industrial revolution).

This is cool. But some criticism. UI seems a bit janky. Results are good but visually presented in a way it's hard to tell each result card from the next. Cliqz is a bad name, even tho you may want the world to be a cyberpunk dystopia where renegade hackers control the outposts of civilization, Google has not fallen yet, pick a name the 99% can relate to. And get Machiavellian ... if you're really gonna beat Google, you're not gonna do it with hippy tactics, no love flowers light or manifestos. You have to get evil and more evil than Google. You have to out evil the big evil.

Realistically if I were trying to beat Google I wouldn't be building a search engine. What can you offer that they can't? And if you even begin to compete with them there, what steps can they take that you can't recover from?

Instead, I would focus on beating them first, building search later (if search is what you actually care about). What's Google's weakness? Figure out "the cord that makes them run" (to paraphrase Meredith Vickers in Prometheus) and relentlessly attack that (legally, of course, this is business not cartel turf war). I have no idea what that might be, but Rome fell, IBM fell (well, stumbled, I guess?), so Google must have its Visigoths or Bill Gateses or whatever.

You built something cool, that replicates the functionality (80%). Cool. Good for you. You proved you can do it. Now decide if you really are serious about "beating Google", and figure out an effective way to do that. Search engine is not the way.

Anyway, Google built the (past of) search. If you really wanna do search, build the (future of) search. I dunno, like AR/VR search? Search for FBs AR platform? I have no idea but text search on WebPages is the past. Google already won. Get over it and move on. Build the future, or go build a better steam engine, you know, for like fun and stuff. Because it's cool, but it won't ever beat Google. Sorryz Cliqz

Quite bizarre: https://internetoracle.org/bestof.cgi?N=676-700

Copying some BASIC programs from some magazine (PC World?) onto "QBASIC" in DOS on an IBM 286 in the early 90s. Or entering x86 ASM via debug.com in DOS from the computer manual (which contained a section on how to program using debug). I can't remember which was first.

Edit: It's interesting a lot of people seem to have a similar experience (thanks BASIC!). I thought there'd be more "I played with JS in the browser in early 2010", or "I attended a programming bootcamp after studying law to get an engineering job" type experiences as well.