I was writing a comment after some code I wrote and Copilot autocompleted saying "This is hacky, but..."
I thought it was funny so I put a comment above saying "This is what Copilot said about my code:" and it autocompleted a line after it saying "Copilot was correct, but..."
I don't believe in them because when you consider operational costs, less money comes out of the lottery than goes in, so if everyone simply didn't bet on the lottery, they would have more money than if they bet on it.
at least the lotteries and las vegas publish their odds. Losing to the terrible math is probably better than playing against someone with inside information.
Vivaldi is the only browser I feel actually has features. Built-in RSS client, mail client, vertical tabs, workspaces, notes, saved sessions, tab groups, side by side tabs, profiles, etc.
To put more simply, just look at how many preferences its preference dialog has compared to other browsers. It feels like nobody else is even doing anything except coming up with a new CSS property nobody is going to use every 3 months.
Everyone says they love Firefox, but every time Firefox adds a new feature it's a feature Vivaldi already had for years.
Just prevent VS Code from accessing the entire $HOME.
The idea is that a well-made, modern desktop operating system would extremely limit an executable's access to user files and provide intuitive tools to allow access. Most applications shouldn't even need any access beyond their own configuration directory and maybe something like ~/Document/Source Code for source code editors and IDE. It shouldn't need to access ~/Pictures, ~/Videos, ~/Downloads, etc.
The problem is that Windows would rather sell you OneDrive, and Linux is very far from a well-made modern desktop OS, so a transitive dependency on a linter installed by a VS Code plugin can rm -rf $HOME, I guess.
For linux we have bubblewrap, firejail, apparmor and selinux (popular ones, there are far more). But it is often complicated and annoying to set up. Normally one would expect sw developers would write security rules for their apps but it is difficult due to amount of different sandboxing tools and various distro-specific configuration changes.
It would be nice to have it sorted out somehow. Actually Snap is an interesting example of something done in that regard.
Yes, and I wish Linux developers would see their own hypocrisy.
Linux users love to say that "fragmentation is good" but they also depend fully on root, sudo, users/groups, and RWX file permissions. Those are "standards" enforced by having only 1 way of doing something, the kernel.
Don’t forget that Linux is Unix inspired. And unix were meant to be used on servers and mainframe where root were used by a trained sysadmin. Users were not meant to install applications, and their actions has little impact on the system integrity (if they’re not actively attacking it)
But now with PC, you are root on your local machine, and some abuse that power without even knowing what it entails. You could easily sandbox npm, by creating a user for your js dev persona. But that’s not convenient, so no one does it.
I want web pages to stand alone, not be part of a newsletter I'm meant to subscribe to. Maybe we could, shock horror, share links to individual good pages.
People don't like Google because it's bad. If competition wins, maybe they'll stop being so bad. But if they become badder themselves, that's not good.
The impression I get from Google's own marketing material is that Google doesn't believe in "the web". And it hasn't believed in the web for years.
Think about it. Pretty much every time they show a search box with someone asking for directions to reach a physical place, what hours is it open, etc.
The greatest thing about the internet is that it has removed distances around the whole world, but Google's major value proposition seems to be that... it can accurately index and query information about local businesses?
