towerful

joined 2 years ago
[–] towerful@programming.dev 2 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Thank you for reminding me I still haven't bought a new water bottle after I lost my last one!

[–] towerful@programming.dev 20 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (3 children)

This is already possible using an autounattend file.
https://schneegans.de/windows/unattend-generator/ is fantastic.
Use Microsoft's Media Creation Tool to create a windows installer USB, add the XML file to the root of the USB disk, reinstall windows exactly how you want it.

(If you are feeling fancy, download the windows iso, and repack it with the autounattend.xml file in it, then drop it onto a Ventoy USB stick)

[–] towerful@programming.dev 10 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Surely you can't be serious!

[–] towerful@programming.dev 2 points 4 days ago

That's not a big financial incentive.
Microsoft will remove stuff when it actually gets in the way.
If it's easier to leave in and not have to touch dozens of other programs/services then they will.
They might mark it as depreciating, and start planning a suitable replacement. They might just mark it as depreciating and kick the can down the road.
When enough services that relied on that depreciating thing have been touched due to other updates, then they might look at actioning the depreciation.

But if it doesn't actively break the thing they are currently working on, the cost overhead or ripping it out is insane.
There might be other dev teams working on features that now rely/leverage the thing marked as depreciating. But the thing getting marked as depreciating happened towards the end of the other teams new feature development cycle. At which point actually depreciating the thing might invalidate that other teams entire project.
And maybe the rip it out, and it turns out one of their large clients (or a large amount of the user base) was relying on it.

Addressing technical debt is always hard to justify, but it always makes a better project.
If management doesn't care about a better project, they will prioritise features and things that make money

[–] towerful@programming.dev 1 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

But maybe they have the lowest crash rate?
So like, crashes cost money right? Someone is responsible. Someone has to pay.
But if everyone dies in an inferno, then nobody is responsible. Who can pay? They're all dead! What medical bills? What repairs? It's all a write off.
Sounds like a high mortality rate with low accident rate is an absolute profitable win! Free market baby!

[–] towerful@programming.dev 1 points 1 week ago

Mumble is fantastic.
I designed and implemented a very complex voice system for an old guild. Like 100 people, 8 groups of 15, group leader's private chat, priority speech all that. It worked so well, and never failed.
This was many many years ago, to be fair.
I wish it's positional audio was more supported.

[–] towerful@programming.dev 6 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Well, non-flammable vents for one thing

[–] towerful@programming.dev 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Never used librewolf.
But it sounds like the conveniences you want are a compromise for fingerprinting.

Don't let perfect stand in the way of good.
The internet has been significantly ruined by large companies.
There is a loop where companies with the resources to create and maintain frameworks/tooling/whatever are large enough to help define "features" for browsers.
Browsers don't make money, not really. To even be considered, they have to be able to run what the big companies are pushing.
All of this makes it very easy for smaller companies to deliver better websites. Or abuse the features big companies are pushing.

It's like: email was awesome, then spam emails happened. Websites were accessible, then SPAs happened. Search engines were useful, the scraping/AI happened.

I don't know what I am trying to say.
Other than browsers do not get the support they deserve to actually be decent unless they are backed by a company that wants to loss-lead them... Which has resulted in the web being pretty fucked

[–] towerful@programming.dev 3 points 1 week ago

However, the international response to Trump’s call for the dispatch of warships has so far proved vague and reluctant, with countries unwilling to commit to a military response that could prove treacherous for their navies.

This is the correct response.

[–] towerful@programming.dev 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

Yes

(And all owls are superb)

[–] towerful@programming.dev 20 points 1 week ago (1 children)

When ctrl+v is disabled to "prevent brute force bots" or something ridiculous

[–] towerful@programming.dev 10 points 1 week ago

Yeh, I have passkeys in bitwarden.
I get it. Once they become ubiquitous, you click "login" your password manager prompts you to select account, and you are in.
No password that can be leaked, incorrectly stored, brute forced.
It's like mTLS, except staged.

 

(not sure where to post this...)

I had an idea there might be a TUI lib for typescript. A duckduckgo search came up with an article that described exactly what I wanted!
So of course I immediately searched for this fabled tui lib. A quick search didn't reveal anything, and npm can't seem to find it either! https://www.npmjs.com/search?q=Tui
Navigating directly to the npm package page reveals a 10 year old got repo with no actual code... (https://github.com/basarat/tui)

What the scuff is this world coming to?!
This seems to absolutely align with my experience of using LLMs

(Also accepting suggestions for typescript TUI libs that actually exist!)

 

I've been here a while, and I appreciate the community and the defed/hiding list.
I also know programming.dev contributes to upstream Lemmy repos.

I saw another post about another instances funding.
Which reminded me....

Is programming.dev on track for funding?
Need some more donations?
Is there a runway?

view more: next ›