pupbiru

joined 11 months ago
[–] pupbiru@aussie.zone 5 points 2 months ago (2 children)

worth clarifying though afaik brave has said they won’t remove v2; not that they will continue to support it… ie if there’s a breaking change in upstream chromium, i’m not sure i have confidence that they’ll spend a bunch of time working around it

[–] pupbiru@aussie.zone 2 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

na unlike that loser they don’t have to commute!

[–] pupbiru@aussie.zone 34 points 3 months ago

the bus company can not ban imports

[–] pupbiru@aussie.zone 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

do the thing first - nobody is going to find out about it for a while, which gives you time to think and build a defence

if it gets successful, then worry about takedowns

worst that happens is it goes away

[–] pupbiru@aussie.zone 6 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

stupidity is a once-off

malice is a pattern

and even if it’s not malicious, a pattern of stupid action needs to be stopped just as much as malicious action

[–] pupbiru@aussie.zone 3 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

this changes nothing: microsoft should have sent a patch remains microsoft should have sent a patch; internal policies are irrelevant to actions effecting external projects

[–] pupbiru@aussie.zone 2 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

on top of what others have said - directing you to the app and login - it’s also likely just that teams don’t talk and make decisions that solve their local issue without too much for the whole, and then say “ugh team x solved this so inelegantly! we were forced to do our thing that wasn’t as nice!”

[–] pupbiru@aussie.zone 29 points 3 months ago (2 children)

*without being sued for more than we would make from seizure induced deaths

[–] pupbiru@aussie.zone 8 points 3 months ago

just fork chromium again; why use a toolbar when you can have the whole browser!

[–] pupbiru@aussie.zone 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

that’s fair, and i think that in the context that we were both talking about, what we both wrote was reasonably correct

arch is a reliable OS that is sometimes unstable

but a server needs a stable OS to be reliable, which means that whilst arch can be a reliable OS, it does not make a particularly reliable server

[–] pupbiru@aussie.zone 1 points 3 months ago (7 children)

disagreement is fine, but there was literally a thread about “linux disinformation” where the OP asked for examples of things people say about linux that are untrue

the top answers by FAR are that arch is stable

saying that arch is stable, or easy for newcomers is doing the linux ecosystem a disservice

you should never use arch for a server - arbitrary, rather than controlled and well-tested updates to the bleeding edge is literally everything you want to avoid in a server OS

[–] pupbiru@aussie.zone 1 points 3 months ago

snaps are like poor man’s containers when it comes to servers… maybe better than having single-use VMs but if you’re wanting to build out real systems in a modern way, i literally haven’t worked with anyone using ubuntu in the last ~10 years

view more: ‹ prev next ›