Jump to content

InterLinked

Member
  • Posts

    482
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4
  • Donations

    $0.00 
  • Country

    United States

Everything posted by InterLinked

  1. 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...
  2. 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
  3. 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.
  4. 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!
  5. 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.
  6. 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...
  7. 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.
  8. Hmm, I think you forgot to attach the screenshots?
  9. 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
  10. 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.
  11. 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.
  12. 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?
  13. 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.
  14. 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!
  15. 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".
  16. File complaints with all these websites. They need to know that blindly using breakage-causing JS code is NOT okay! I complained to GitHub and they reverted enough breakage that it now works in Chromium 70 again though New Moon 28 is still broken. Though it's a losing battle for sure... as of a few days ago, GitHub file uploads are now once again broken... it's like whack-a-mole, you polyfill a "bug" in their JS, and soon enough, a new one crops up again that breaks the whole damn site again. What we really need is some of extension to replace all the JS on websites with the JavaScript they used two years ago, pulling from the Internet Archive or something. That might actually work - scrape the JS for sites that are broken now, using old JS, and see if they start working again... Maybe we can get a list of changes going and replace the diffs we see.
  17. Seems like the classic Tragedy of the Commons problem here...
  18. Works like a charm, thanks @vxiiduu Windows 7 Ex, or Windows 7++, whatever you want to call it, is working great!
  19. Hmm, when I open the one on the repo, I just get this: Is there something else I need to do besides downloading that? I don't seen an mui, for instance, so I'm assuming that's only for packing and not on the Win7 end.
  20. Sorry, bit late here, but just getting the opportunity now to go ahead and try this out. Does it have to be W10 v1507? I do have access to some Windows 10 systems, but they're all newer than that. I'm assuming copying the SnippingTool.exe from those wouldn't work? Just a bit annoying to have to download an ISO for an OS I don't itself need, but as the hard work here has really been done, I can't complain too much Thanks again! Now that the one feature out of, uh, one features that Windows 10 actually has that older Windows doesn't, I guess Windows 7 has "useful feature parity" with Windows 10/11! SuperWindows, here we come!
  21. Yup, it was working for me in Chromium 70 with the latest Chromefill (https://github.com/InterLinked1/chromefill) until about 2 days ago. Looks like one of those "Unexpected syntax ." errors in both Chromium 70 and New Moon. Unfortunately, this will be difficult to polyfill. Probably not even anyone at SO responsible directly, but one of the stupid libraries used somewhere on the site, so they don't even know it's happening. I'd think posting answers would work since JS isn't required, but yeah, comments, voting, etc. definitely is broken now.
  22. You mean Chromium < 71, right? A lot of breakage seems to have happened right around there. See release notes, "Specific Polyfills": https://github.com/InterLinked1/chromefill
  23. I spent way too long putting this together: https://w2k.phreaknet.org/vista/
  24. That is simply downright false. The post office is peanuts compared to other rampant government spending. Military funding alone is on the order of a trillion a YEAR. 78 billion over 12 years is NOTHING in comparison. Post office is a basic service that at least services the public good, unlike most things in society... Time to end subsidies to cell phones and divert that to landlines and the post office instead, so we can maintain our basic public infrastructure, not toxic useless crap.
  25. Not sure where you got the idea that nobody cares about this, but most "real" environmentalists that likewise also decry all of this as well. If you think about it, resources that go towards so-called "national defense", e.g. artificially devoting resources towards blowing up other people or countries, is a complete unproductive use of resources, sustainable or note. If you were paying attention, surely you must know that right now in the U.S., people are outraged about the enormous spending bill giving the Pentagon nearly $1 trillion is budget appropriation. Slashing national defense is certainly an important step that can be taken here.


×
×
  • Create New...