I wonder if chromium having the blue colors is what set the precedent for almost every other privacy-conscious browser to have a blue logo (Waterfox, GNU Icecat, palemoon, librewolf…)
EDIT on second though probably not, blue just seems like a good color for internet-related applications. Safari, edge, and internet explorer are also blue!
Schools IT departments all over the world are doing society a massive favor by indirectly teaching children how to bypass censorship. 80% of what I know about IP and NAT came from finding different ways to bypass my school’s firewall haha
I remember hearing that in pokemon go, you could choose to join one of three teams or whatever (blue, yellow, and red). And the blue one was by far the most popular one, despite there being no difference besides color.
Is “literally” an adverb? I always though that adverbs were like adjectives but used for verbs (actions). Like “quickly” or “slowly”. Where is the action in a sentence like “It’s literally the same browser”? Is it an adverb for the “is” (to be) auxiliary verb? srry english not my first language
Huh? Wasn’t this always how this template looked like? I found it by ducking (is that what we call it?) “elmo cocaine meme template”, meanwhile “coockie monster cocaine meme template” returns nothing relevant…
EDIT: Are you making a joke about cookies that I am too dumb to understand?
Good to know, thanks! I currently use the flatpak version of my preferred browser for extra security (the sandbox could in theory limit the damage done by zerodays, also in theory limits fingerprinting because things like custom fonts are not available inside the sandbox), but unfortunately that breaks previewing/debugging local html files that reference other local files (e.g. images), so I was looking for a nice and simple browser to install natively just for that purpose.
Oh haha no worries. I myself have never watched a ful episode of whatever show these characters are from (Sesame street? was that what it was called?) so I thought you were referencing some lore I didn’t know haha
Winget is awesome! It’s nice to see Microsoft finally focusing on adding basic quality-of-life features to their OS. First there was Windows Terminal, then proper bash support with WSL, and now package management with Winget! To be fair, it’s not 100% there yet. Tried installing ffmpeg with winget recently, and it took like three times longer than apt-get would have. But hey, better than downloading EXE’s from some random website. Really excited for what they’ll add next. Who knows, maybe Windows will finally be a viable desktop OS some day!
Linux is faster and better for tech illiterate people like myself
For real tho, I could never come up with a good reason why I choose Linux over windows. But recently I tried Windows 11, and that finally made me understand. What are sticky keys? Why are you telling me the exchange rate of EUR to USD right now? Why do I need to put . in front of my username when signing in? Why can’t you just tell me that you want TPM and UEFI boot enabled instead of cryptically saying that my hardware is incompatible even though it is? There’s just too much crap going on for a dumb fuck like me to understand. I would like one boring linux desktop experience that hasn’t changed since 2003 please.
Chrome is literally the same shit as Chromium but with (more) spyware. Like, there are no other added features. And some people still choose to download Chrome. WHY!?!?!?
Does anybody know why dbus exists? I’ve been wracking my brain trying to come up with a usecase for dbus that isn’t already covered by Unix sockets....
Wouldn’t this also be possible with plain sockets tho? To continue with your example of music players, the current standard is MPRIS, which uses dbus. But in an alternate universe, the people behind MPRIS could just have decided that music players shall create sockets at /run/user/1000/mpris/[player name] that all speak the same standardized protocol. If a player wanted to add functionality beyond MPRIS, it could accept nonstandard requests on its socket, or create a new socket altogether for extended control.
I just don’t see how this would require any more coordination between developers than the current solution. And I don’t see how dbus can save you from having to “understanding every single […] app out there”. If anything, it adds the overhead of learning how dbus itself works, on top of how a specific app’s dbus interface works.
A message bus won’t magically remove the need for developers to sit down together and agree on how some API would work. And not having a message bus also doesn’t magically prevent you from allowing for alternative implementations. Pipewire is an alternative implementation of pulseaudio, and neither of those rely on dbus (pulse can optionally use dbus, but not for its core features). When using dbus, developers have to agree on which path the service owns and which methods it exposes. When using unix sockets, they have to agree where the socket lives and what data format it uses. It’s all the same.
It can even start the receiving daemon if it is not yet running.
We have a tool for that, it’s called an init system. Init systems offer a large degree of control over daemons (centralized logging? making sure things are started in the correct order? letting the user disable and enable different daemons?). Dbus’ autostart mechanism is a poor substitute. Want to run daemons per-user instead of as root? Many init systems let you do that too (I know systemd and runit do).
In either case you still need to read the documentation of whatever daemon you’re trying to interface with to understand how it actually works. Dbus just adds the extra overhead of also needing to understand how dbus itself works. Meanwhile sockets can be explained in sixteen words: “It’s like a TCP server, but listening on a path instead of an ip and port”.
There’s nothing about dbus that makes decoupling easier, you can do it just as well with sockets. Pipewire and pulse both speak the same protocol, and they both rely on sockets, not dbus. The vast majority of the apps on my system don’t know or care that they’re speaking with pipewire instead of pulse. Read my comment here lemmy.world/comment/6284859
Great point about policies! Setting permissions on sockets only gets you so far… I guess if you really wanted to, you could create an individual socket for every method of every resource, and have granular permissions that way. But that would be quite messy
By “start with dbus” do you mean with the dbus-launch utility? I think it’s needed because it sets some environment variables that thunar uses to actually find and connect to the bus. If you run just the daemon “on the side”, thunar won’t know how to connect to it. Kind of how you need $DISPLAY to be set correctly for X11 applications to work.
I guess it's the pretty colors? (lemmy.world)
Linux users when (media1.tenor.com)
What is the point of dbus? (lemmy.world)
Does anybody know why dbus exists? I’ve been wracking my brain trying to come up with a usecase for dbus that isn’t already covered by Unix sockets....