I've got Palemoon, but I only use that for accessing ancient management GUIs that require SSL but can't speak modern dialects of it, or looking at local files with Flash in them. LibreWolf tracks Firefox upstream, and is generally within a minor version or two of current. Presumably Google's prickery toward it is based on detecting its user-agent string or its failure to implement desired tracking functionality. I haven't dug into the problem much.

Also, the problem isn't that the captchas don't work -- it's that Google feels the need to serve them in the first place, accusing me of "unusual network traffic" that "may violate our terms of service."

... and then they'll fuck with the search engine to make it less useful to anyone using products that they haven't made deals with.

Already working on that. Google Search in LibreWolf has recently started throwing a bunch of captchas saying "We've detected unusual traffic from your network." Sometimes solving one captcha gets you search results, sometimes it just keeps throwing more. I assume I'm supposed to use a more tracking-friendly browser, but I typically just use a less tracking-oriented search engine.

Looks interesting. Unfortunately it only wants to show me items near the geolocated endpoint of my VPN. The "browse other towns" thing lets me pick one from a list then demands a login, preferably via Facebook, to see anything.

... and of course I shouldn't reply from my phone, where I don't get an edit button to fix the missing less-than sign. Anyway, the 90nm demo is pretty impressive, if it actually produces amounts of light visible to the naked eye. And even if it doesn't, it may have applications in instruments.

Nanometer micrometer.

https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fyoutu.be%2FOPeny2iS43I%3Ft...

We mostly didn't. People who don't like the idea of us paying for a thing once and enjoying it forever, at home or in the car or on an airplane, did. And people who like to sell dysfunctional garbage software and make it market-worthy in the updates.

Too bad dual-layer DVDs, at least consumer grade ones, tend to have lifespans on the order of 5-10 years. And the rest of consumer-grade recordable video media doesn't do a lot better.

"Just stream it," the kids say. Streaming is garbage, you have to jump through hoops to get the content you want to pay for in the quality you want, and good luck if you wish to watch it on an airplane, and your access can be revoked on the whims of the studios or streaming services.

If you're going to buy and pay for physical media with the intention of having access to it forever, rip it. Encode it in the highest quality format you can, store it on reliable storage and keep backups, because hard drives die too.

In the eyes of some backward countries, that makes you a criminal. Which is why there are many who say if you're going to give me the jacket, I may as well wear it, and just proceed directly to the high seas.

Their public image kinda took a shit when they tried to EULA the guy out of a lawsuit over the death of his wife in a Disney-controlled restaurant. I'm thinking it's more likely they don't want to get the suing ball rolling, lest some of their partners, employees, etc. that had data leaked start looking at their IT security practices with that Looney-Tunes-wolf kind of interest.

Makes at least as much sense at North Carolina (lest anyone see the North part and forget that it's in the South) attempting to allocate public money to remove public EV chargers, and to prohibit private business owners installing their own unless they install free gas pumps as well.

I don't know if that stupid bill ever passed, but it was proposed.

It's pretty popular in New York for paying street merchants, food carts, etc. For the merchant, it's the convenience of a credit card but without the processing fees. Some buyers might prefer fumbling around with their phone for a while over carrying & forking over cash. And both sides get some reduction in risk and loss from robbery.

I'd certainly be hesitant to use it for any sort of "shipping" transaction (no buyer protections) and for those concerned about privacy, both parties see each other's registered names and emails/phone numbers.

As a Tesla owner and regular critic of the more idiotic aspects of its engineering, you most certainly can do a credible coast using the single pedal. Just think of it as a speed pedal instead of a power pedal, and manipulate it accordingly. It takes more finesse than just releasing the pedal and coasting, like an ICE.

There's also a power graph on the screen, that shows consumption/regen, and watching that for the zero point helps learn the coast technique.

True coast and two-pedal drive could be implemented in software easily enough, but they don't. Presumably to get people to break inefficient driving habits.

I have "Enhanced Autopilot," basically freeway lane-keeping and intelligent cruise. It works fairly well, within its limited domain. Tesla has been steadily dropping the price to upgrade to FSD, now it's at $2K including the necessary full-computer-replacement. I suppose they'll eventually give it away for free just to get people off the legacy hardware so they can stop supporting it.

There's been an issue for YEARS, well-documented on forums and whatnot, where you're going 80 mph on the freeway and whatever GPS-based nanny suddenly decides you're 30 feet away on the frontage road where the speed limit is 35, and immediately decelerates to that. It's not a brake-slam, but it's a harsh deceleration, and dangerous if someone is following closely. They don't seem very interested in fixing it. A friend has FSD, that does it too, so it's clearly pretty deep in the software stack, and is likely considered a feature and not a bug.

They have one, as noted in TFS. It can be turned off by the app. This one did. Not sure WHY an app would want to avoid using TLS for whatever shady stuff it's sending to the mothership. Smells more like lazy/sloppy than overtly malicious.

They *publicly* told the government to pound sand, but of course that's what both sides would want. Apple gets to make a show of defending privacy, and the government gets plausible deniability for whatever resources they gain.

Given a couple recent public examples, I've kind of lost any faith I had in Apple's privacy chest-beating, anyway. Sure, perhaps less flagrant malware slips through their store screening process than Google's (I'm not even considering sideloading, most folks doing that either are or should be savvy enough to avoid loading malware).

But iOS does less than Android, these days, to protect users from "legit" apps loaded with commercial malware. You get some fine-print in the app store telling you what permissions it wants, and you can install it or not. GasBuddy (to cite a recent example) requests 'health and fitness' access. Innocuous enough, right? Until it uses your accelerometer and compass to feed your driving habits to insurance companies, instead of counting your steps. Android lets me deny that specific permission and still install the app -- it might not run without that permission, in which case I can uninstall it, one-star review it and report it to Google for requesting inappropriate permissions -- but I can try.

And that's without even getting into rooting and custom ROMs, where I can spoof all those sensors and feed garbage to the data brokers.