It changes how extensions work in Chrome (and derived browsers), notably it modifies the API that adblockers use to block requests and dramatically restricts the number of rules they can support. It’s a change pretty clearly designed to limit the scope of adblockers and make it easier for companies like Google to work around them.
I don’t see any claim that this impersonation is actually misleading anybody. OP just seems to be salty that they’re mocking their tankie behaviour and going “but but they’re impersonating someone!”.
I mean there are significant similarities. Email is often used as an existing example when talking about the Fediverse, the username@domain format is basically identical.
So why’s it irrelevant?
Is it because it doesn’t support your point? It’s because it doesn’t support your point, isn’t it? Thought so.
The reason I think there needs to be some kind of federation/consortium/whatever is because it’s a huge load on individual server admins to have to make determinations about which servers to federate with and which not to. That, plus maintaining their server, finding some way to pay for it, fighting spam/abuse/etc, is a lot or work. Ultimately, unless there’s some kind of formal process most servers are just going to end up copying what the big instances do, which centralises power a bit too much for me.
I like the setup where each server administrator comes up with their own rules about what they want to see on they server, then people can join one with rules they like.
But I also think there needs to be some server-level agreement/consortium/federation/etc that makes (or better, implements from decisions sourced from the community) wider decisions about what "Lemmy" as a whole will allow. That way server administrators are free to make decisions like whether they want to allow NSFW or not, but in order to stay federated with the rest of "Lemmy" they need to abide by some basic rules like "no hate groups" and "prevent spam", and risk being defederated if they don't.
we're seen as evil because we're helping DRM exist and we're ensuring people make money out of games
No, you’re seen as evil because your software is an inefficient and invasive security risk that makes games significantly worse, and compromises/punishes your paying customers in the quest for more money.
I no longer pirate games (thanks to Steam), but I’ll never buy one with Denuvo.
Traditionally you use a fuck ton of water in a giant pot but, really, that’s mainly so you can boil it harder without it boiling over so easily. The actual pasta comes out basically the same regardless of the amount of water.
What isn’t the same, though, is the water. And many pasta dishes call for adding some of the starchy pasta water as a thickener/emulsifier for sauces, so actually if you’re doing that you’re better off using less water as it’ll be more concentrated. And obviously less water boils faster.
For this reason many well regarded chefs have taken to cooking pasta in a wide flat pan with just enough water to cover it, at least for small quantities.
Denormalising is the other way around, ie accepting duplicated or less than optimally organised data for some other reason (eg for performance or to reduce complexity for your filthy human brain - but usually performance)
Eh, I don’t think it’s be a big deal. Slap a giant warning on it, all good. Super common on all sorts of platforms. Anyone trying to claim their encryption doesn’t work because they have a (scarily labelled) option to disable it can be easily demonstrated to be disingenuous.
And worst case if someone does disable it but doesn’t implement their own then their email I just falls back to… the same as any other platform.
They might not want to take the time to build it, but I think what this dude is asking for is a totally reasonable thing.
Honestly if you don’t know where to start just play the bog standard free play with default settings. Maybe increase mineral deposit richness a bit if you’re just starting out.
If you want to make your life a little easier look for a starting map with lots of trees and deposits close together but not overlapping.
Right, but what the author is trying to implement is what is generally considered best practice for secure email.
You’re right that what Proton are doing is a compromise that’s reasonable for most people, but the author here is annoyed that there’s no way to turn it off so he can implement best practice E2EE himself.
Ironically he could probably do that with the vast majority of providers that aren’t Proton, so to me it seems like a totally reasonable ask that a self described privacy focused email provider has some way to allow you to implement best practice email security.
It changes how extensions work in Chrome (and derived browsers), notably it modifies the API that adblockers use to block requests and dramatically restricts the number of rules they can support. It’s a change pretty clearly designed to limit the scope of adblockers and make it easier for companies like Google to work around them.
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2021/12/chrome-users-beware-manifest-v3-deceitful-and-threatening