Jump to content

InterLinked

Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    492

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

  • Donations

    0.00 USD 

  • Country

    United States

 Content Type 

Everything posted by InterLinked

  1. InterLinked
    I think it's against TOS to distribute modified ISOs here. However, you should be able to make one yourself somewhat easily. Have you followed the steps here? https://w2k.phreaknet.org/guide
  2. InterLinked
    Personally I noticed this almost immediately as I use GitHub quite regularly. It was broken on Monday, working for a brief period of time yesterday, and broken again today. I have contacted support before in the past and gotten them to revert the changes in the past. They also said they would not do this (the ?? and ?. operators) so now they've lied. Please *DO* file support tickets and complain about this BUG since they have broken the website and made it inaccessible. It violates the spirit of their platform and they need to hear from a lot of people. **They do actually listen** but they DO need to hear from you! Please take a minute and file a bug report now. It will only take a minute and they will hopefully put a system in place to ensure this is reverted and does not happen again if enough people complain.
  3. InterLinked
    Then go VoIP. It's cheaper than both. Point is to use a landline PHONE and the actual service can be VoIP or true POTS, etc. Then again, I'm a VoIP/telephone engineer in my spare time so I have to remember it's not as simple for everyone In my case, all the equipment was free anyways, so it was either use such a PC or watch it be recycled... Right now I live in the city, so yeah, no car. In a few years I'll probably move somewhere more rural and then I'll "need" a car, but for now I don't so no point in having one. Yeah, kind of the same myself...
  4. InterLinked
    Don't be fooled, even for an instance. They are a terrible idea. Environmentalists should not settle for the "lesser" (if it is that) of two huge evils. There is a third, better way. Yup, exactly. And consider how toxic most urban areas are these days, most environmentalists live in or are relocating to rural areas. These are the bright green lies society is banking on: that in the future, we'll have better technologies that will make the problem disappear. The problem is *that's not going to happen*, it's not physically feasible, and all of this is destroying the planet *right now*. Ditch your "smart" or "dumb" phone altogether, and get a real phone. My 1957 Western Electric 500 blows your phone out of the water any day. Or any other phone manufactured by Western Electric before Divestiture. 5G is an environmental disaster. It's going to significantly increase carbon emissions and compromise any current targets for carbon neutrality. It's yet another we don't need that is bad for the environment on multiple fronts. I'm with you there. Windows 7 is my main OS, and I'll continue running it on hardware from around 2010 for a very long time. (Lots of it being recycled so I have ready access to it) You can do this if you don't want. I don't have a cell phone or any other low-quality, high environmental impact consumerist crap technologies. I only use landline phones (mostly Western Electric, which is the gold standard as far as phones go). I've got an early 2000s Canon point and shoot camera that works great. I've got everything I want and need, and it works better than all the crap that everyone else is taking on debt to buy. My PC and monitors are all 12 years old. I don't have a car yet, but when I get one, you can bet it won't be newer than 40 years old.
  5. InterLinked
    That's kind of the point... stop the real killer of the planet and cause of climate change... rampant consumerism, waste, and excess. Throwing a wrench in the economy is an easy way to reduce environmental impact quickly.
  6. InterLinked
    Great, they've now jumped on the "gasoline is evil" bandwagon.... Exactly what I would expect these rich out of touch lawmakers to do. If they really wanted to make a difference, maybe they would ban the sale of new cars or heavily tax driving any car. But no, they just push subsidies for certain environmental atrocities while condemning others. At the end of the day, the earth loses either way. Personally, I'd rather see gas stay at $5 per gallon than a complete ban on gas vehicles. For them, it's about having their cake (pretending to make a difference) and eating it too (enjoying the benefits of car culture)...
  7. InterLinked
    Hmm... so apparently this is why I can't access any sites on medium.com For about a year now, I get their "1020 Access Restricted" - owner may have blocked you blah blah Spoof user agent from Iron 70 to Chrome 98 and boom, now it works. The people who run medium.com are total freaking retards, there is no other logical or plausible explanation.
  8. InterLinked
    That was actually the idea that I had suggested / been thinking about a few weeks ago... chromefill applies polyfill automatically, why not run it through something like Babel to transpile it from newer syntax to older "vanilla" JS syntax on the fly? It just seems there isn't a tool for that *now* but we could make one, and clearly it does work if done manually. Great work and good to see! The challenge will be automating it. Ideally, something like this would be part of one of those extensions. I would add it to chromefill myself in a second, if only I knew how. I don't think there's any way to do transpiling on the fly automatically. Alternately, perhaps if there is some JavaScript based Babel transpiling to convert the syntax, that could be part of the extension and all the JS could be run through that...
  9. InterLinked
    No cell "phone" here either.. though I think the term "mobile" is better since they are an insult to telephony. On the other hand, I have about 10 phones of varying vintages within arm's reach, so I guess I still have a phone problem In my defense, I do a lot of testing, and that's actually what I'm doing right now, speak of the devil...
  10. InterLinked
    I agree. Permanent Standard Time. I'm a morning person and I prefer the "real" time. I know some people who refuse to observe DST and they basically live in their own time zone during DST...
  11. InterLinked
    They're not. It's just fossil fuels 2.0. An economy that depends on finite resources is not sustainable and has a finite timeline. Personally, I'm not sure where this "get rid of oil is coming from". I don't see nearly enough oil being "gotten rid of". The prices now are due to the supply shock from Russia. I guess the one good thing from all this is higher gas prices...
  12. InterLinked
    You're right that fossil fuels are terrible, but electric cars are not really any better. Significantly more natural resources and mining go into their manufacturing - lithium batteries is something that has at least penetrated the mainstream a little bit. I'm not deluded into thinking that somehow electric cars are more "eco-friendly" to the planet. Cars are terrible for the planet, no matter their fuel source (and to be explicit, the energy sources are terrible, regardless of the type). We need fewer cars on the roads, period, not a shift from fossil fuels to electric. It's not even that electricity might be coming from fossil fuels - renewables are again one of these "bright green solutions" that's nothing more than rearranging some deck chairs. There are two evils to choose from here, and to me, at least having a car that would be sensible to me is more important than pretending I'm helping the environment. I don't have one now as I'm in an urban area, and I walk or take the train, but I'd like to move to a more rural area, so that's just practically speaking. Point is, you can't have your cake and eat it too... electric cars are just the next environmentally destructive technology. We need to be moving away from these types of things. Same reason that I find these concept "dumb mobile devices" really irritating... the technology is fundamentally unsustainable. Throw your mobile phone in the trash and get a landline phone, you'll never need to buy another one. Problem solved
  13. InterLinked
    I'm with you there... It really depends on the phone, or "phone". Vintage telephones are a great example of anti-planned obsolescence. You can call from a 2010s AT&T landline phone to a 1930s Western Electric 302, and everything just works. Something I really like about analog telephony is the way everything is interoperable and backwards-compatible. You typically don't see that. Contrast that with mobile telephony, and IP, to a great extent, where different platforms are their owned walled gardens, things are designed to fail after a few years, etc. They're complete polar opposites.
  14. InterLinked
    I'm with you there... I don't have a car yet, but when I do get one, it won't be anything less than 50 years old!
  15. InterLinked
    Please... let's not insult our intelligence. 2015 is not "vintage". "Vintage" is my 1957 Western Electric 500 that I use on a regular basis. I don't even consider my main PC, from 2009, to be "vintage". "Vintage" in phones is from before most of the people on this forum were born.
  16. InterLinked
    Call me paranoid, but this is why I keep copies of installers for things, just so I can be sure about them I only have XPI files for the few extensions in New Moon, Mail News, etc. that I'm actually using, but I guess it's good that "they're there", now...
  17. InterLinked
    Thanks, just found that as well, it wasn't there when I had checked before. I'm surprised it all lasted as long as it did. It always felt like it was a day away from falling apart.
  18. InterLinked
    Hmm, I think you forgot to attach the screenshots?
  19. InterLinked
    lol, yeah, it's a constant tug of war with some sites. GitHub at least seems to be fully functional once again, thanks to VistaLover's latest contributions. StackOverflow seems like it will require on the fly transpiling though
  20. InterLinked
    Yes, exactly! I think if we could figure how that would work and what it would entail, we could basically unbreak everything and rewind the JS ten years or so. Then you could use a 10-year old browser, no compatibility worries at all! Question is, what and how? Does such a tool even exist? Presumably there could be an "API" somewhere to do this, like the one you referenced, and you could make an AJAX call with the JS contents of everything and then replace them somehow with the response, but something self-contained would probably perform a LOT better.
  21. InterLinked
    Follow the usage instructions at: https://github.com/InterLinked1/chromefill You just need to load the extension in developer mode, and then you don't need to do anything.
  22. InterLinked
    Thanks, I'm trying it out locally, and yeah, I think the ?? and ?. stuff is really getting me, StackOverflow is still broken, but otherwise seems to be working at least as well as before. About those last two things that "can't" be polyfilled.... they CAN be transpiled! Take a look: https://javascript.info/polyfills Transpilers A transpiler is a special piece of software that translates source code to another source code. It can parse (“read and understand”) modern code and rewrite it using older syntax constructs, so that it’ll also work in outdated engines. E.g. JavaScript before year 2020 didn’t have the “nullish coalescing operator” ??. So, if a visitor uses an outdated browser, it may fail to understand the code like height = height ?? 100. A transpiler would analyze our code and rewrite height ?? 100 into (height !== undefined && height !== null) ? height : 100. So I think what we really need to do is have this extension auto-transpile this bleeding edge JS into "vanilla JS" that "any" normal browser can run. This, in theory, should solve not just the issue but probably a large number. My understanding is that transpiling something is something the *web developers* are supposed to do before packing their JS into the actual website source, so unlike a polyfill which runs in the browser itself. That said, I'm sure it's possible, but not sure how slow it would be if feasible. Thoughts, anyone?
  23. InterLinked
    All right, I didn't just want to include your additions without your permission/acknowledgement. I take it it's okay to go ahead and add these? I can say "incorporated contributions from VistaLover" in the commit message.
  24. InterLinked
    Ah, nice! Any chance you're able to contribute your additions back? I could probably benefit from that a lot myself! Yup, I've been noticing a lot of that "unexpected syntax ?" type of stuff myself... real shame... Interesting, it seemed like NM was more broken than Chromium 70, but sounds like with polyfills it can be better than it!
  25. InterLinked
    Not even that - but only the *latest* versions of those browsers! (Technically, I'm using "Chrome", but a 3 year old version). Maybe this will be a wakeup call to the WWW: stop using useless JS libraries you don't need and write all your damn code yourself. If you can't understand it, and you don't know what it does, and you don't know why you need, then don't use it!!! This has never failed to serve me well as a webmaster. And of course, none of my websites randomly break. jquery is pretty much the only JS library I ever use, and even then, only on pages that actually "need" JS. Everything else on top of that, I write if I need it. And if I don't need JS, I don't use it. It's not "simplistic", it's called "resilient progressive web development".
×
×
  • Create New...