I feel like we’re regressing back to the Netscape Navigator/Internet Explorer browser war days, when browsers were openly and intentionally breaking functionality on competing sites.
post
I only use my programming for good. For instance Bat_Count.exe lets the user enter a number and then the Count from sesame street will count to this number and say “Ah ah ah!” at the end.
Even Avogadro's number?
Shouldn't have anything to do with bats, then.
How many molecules in the air the bats are flying through?
One, ah ah ah.... Two, ah ah ahhh ... Hold on, this might take a while
Not with that attitude. There is no reason we can't cultivate alternatives like PeerTube. No video platform starts with a massive library and if we actually want to take back our digital rights then we have to put our foot down and give a hard "no" to trading those rights away just because we really want to watch a particular creator on a corporate platform. It's the only way to not only stick it to Google but also let creators know that viewers will not tolerate the likes of Google.
I think the hosting is the real problem. For something like Lemmy where it's just text it's not too expensive, but when you need to store and stream videos for free I have to imagine most people wouldn't be able to afford that without charging for it and the moment you start charging you can't compete with YouTube anymore
i think the solution could be a FOSS torrenting site where everyone hosts their own videos (or maybe a stream only site?). people are already willing to fork over for netflix so maybe if the content quality was extremely high theyd shift (e.g. nebula)
Yep, this is already a solved problem via torrents. All that's needed is a site (like lemmy or something else) to host the links, and help with content discovery.
Yeah, I'll let you know when anyone I watch even considers giving peertube a moment of consideration.
I assume they wrote it as 5000 and it got changed to 5E3 by the minifier as it saves a byte?
This is so much better because of the Geordi template.
Ah it's the web so
await new Promise(res => setTimeout(res, 5000));
This seems like a pretty dumb thing to do to try to wipe out a browser with 2% marketshare.
"I'm switching from Chrome because they killed ad blocking."
"OMG! Firefox takes 5 seconds to even load webpages! I'll just go back to Chrome."
The goal is to prevent the competition from growing.
The EU should investigate this
Unfortunately said browser is dependent on Google financing Mozilla.
Obviously there a people in charge now who will never understand the Streisand effect. They could have kept it quiet and just... allow... the technical adept users to do their thing. Now, they are the laughing stock and get unwanted attention. Also, from my layman understanding, this shit won't fly in the EU at all.
Or, to say it differently: This is the best thing to happen to Mozilla in quite a long time and I'm a fan.
I'm out of the loop. What happened? Did someone decompile their code and find definitive proof of a throttle for Firefox?
To be fair, they used setTimeout() and not thread.sleep() because the latter isn't possible out of the box in JS ^^
Users who have ad blockers installed may experience suboptimal viewing
Yeah let me turn off the adblocker just for having an even more suboptimal viewing due to ads. They're lunatics.
JavaScript is an interpreted language, so no decompilation is necessary, although this is repeatable by using a Firefox user agent.
As long as working around it is as easy as it is nowadays, I just think it's funny.
marketing and bean counters drag down every good idea. That and the belief all the world's problems can be solved in one paragraph. I used to return a 5 second sleep for bad login attempts. Just to slow down the bots trying to brute force a login. video over increasingly cheap bandwidth for a screen the size of a postcard will soon be replaced with a simpler solution. This is progress. another one bites the dust.
top 50 comments