Jump to content

InterLinked

Member
  • Posts

    482
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4
  • Donations

    $0.00 
  • Country

    United States

Everything posted by InterLinked

  1. Basically the same thing... "recycling" electronics means destroying them for scrap metal or shipping them to the Global South where slave labor disassembles them. Complete joke. Recycling is just a consumerist way to get people to endlessly consume. I'm not saying don't recycle and go to the landfill instead, but don't be fooled that it's this 100% green process that makes things disappear into the ether...
  2. agree with @soggi One man's trash is another man's treasure. I recycled a CRT monitor last year, and I still feel bad about it, since it basically work perfectly fine; same with a 2001 laptop (didn't have the charger for it). I'm sure somebody in the area might have wanted them; but logistically I couldn't have coordinated at the time, and I did salvage a bunch of other stuff. I also have a background in telephony, and typically old analog or electronic phones get scrapped but they always work perfectly fine, but I will salvage whatever of those I can. You always have to be on the lookout...
  3. For me it would make worse... I salvaged a CRT monitor that was in the recycling pile a few months ago for an "additional" monitor, never mind that it took up half my desk space on its own. Didn't work too well, as I got serious eyestrain from it to the point of being almost half blind in one eye (went away after it was turned off for 20 or 30 minutes). I think it might have been some radiation leakage when turning it off or on, since it made some crackly sounds and when turning it on subsequent times, if I looked in the other direction, I didn't quite have that issue. Nonetheless, a bunch of nicer Dell LCDs were getting recycled not much later, so I sent the CRT back to the recycling pile and picked those up instead! In fact, I'm using one of those monitors right now! (It's the super-duper Dell monitor from 2007 that has every connector known to man on the back - seriously there are like 10 or 15 inputs - VGA, DVI, HDMI, DisplayPort, S-Video, USB, etc. It's the same one that gets really hot - hotter than a computer would, typically, as heat dissipation's apparently nonexistent on this thing. I had one as well that I offered at the time; nobody bit so who knows where it is now. A real shame, as I don't discount the value of CRTs in and of themselves, but practically speaking, they didn't make sense for me. Still a shame to get rid of it though. Indeed... I'm more upset with browsers that push their own crap JS "standards" than those that simply follow the rules (like IE11 does, more or less...) I was writing some JavaScript yesterday for a websockets-based application, and as I was referencing different things (I usually do PHP for web programming, rarely JS, since I rarely have a legitimate need for it) I found one that said "won't work on < IE 8" and at the time that was posted, that would have been a serious concern. Even now, that's about as much compatibility as I'm willing to trade off: anything I do has to work in IE11 if reasonably possible (I think websockets aren't supported, but my realtime chat service has an AJAX-based fallback so that service still works fine in IE11).
  4. I think maybe he's referring to when Microsoft actually drops support for it completely (when ESU and POS ends) as opposed to what they want consumers to think. Regardless of the availability or PR campaign Microsoft is running, Windows 7 is still supported at least until next year.
  5. If I disable smoothing in Windows 7, it looks like this: Isn't that the same result? And here it is with dark theme in Windows 7: I fail to see how WIN7 is evil... Win8+ though, yes, definitely!
  6. So why not turn off ClearType then? Presumably that is unchecking "Smooth edges of screen fonts"?
  7. Yeah, what surprises me most is how they even cannibalized their own product (IE) in doing so. IE 11 was/is actually pretty decent, at least when it came out and it worked pretty well with everything. It still works with everything I do since I don't do anything too radical in my web dev/design. But now, if you go to a MSFT site, they deliberately break it and try to get you to use edge. At least I'm using Windows 7.... no Edge crapware on here, so it can't force open a different browser on me!
  8. NM 27 isn't UXP? (Apologies for the ignorance, but I've only used 28...) It looks like some of the code specifically targets GitHub webpages (DOM parsing), so I'm not sure how much of that would generalize, so it's not as simple as changing the permissions as with the manifest.json for a Chrome extension. Might be helpful though in terms of things to add on!
  9. Polyfills fix JS-deficiencies in the browser, it's not likely polyfill related, per se, a polyfill *might* be able to fix it. I also saw several "XYZ" undefined errors on some things that don't quite work yet. I think a couple more polyfills are needed for this to unbreak close to most sites. Most helpful errors are in the developer console (F12): If you go to the Console tab, the raw JavaScript errors are printed out there. Best to use those rather than what's on the page itself, though in this case, it's probably similar by the looks of it. The console will also show you the exact JS that crashes the page.
  10. Yeah... that's the latest 70 version, no? One minor version higher than the other one.
  11. I think it could be fixed by processing all the JS and doing some kind of find and replace, maybe. How to do that, I'm not sure yet. Yeah, it *used* to be there but it's not anymore it seems. It's in the Wayback Archive though - the latest 70 version with the old UI is linked here: https://w2k.phreaknet.org/
  12. @Mathwiz recommended I post this here: I use Iron 70, which is a Chromium-based browser version from 2018. Recently, there was a "great purge" in browser support caused by some newfandangled JavaScript popping up everywhere at once: https://blog.interlinked.us/66/when-the-world-wide-web-goes-on-strike-how-do-you-fight-back I ended up writing a simple Chrome/Chromium extension to automatically polyfill webpages so things that stopped working in the browser, like StackOverflow, now fully work again. This doesn't unbreak *EVERY* site (at the moment, only the globalThis polyfill is included) but the goal over time is to expand support by addressing all these breakages and unbreaking them. Here is the project: https://github.com/InterLinked1/chromefill/ I imagine older versions of 360EE would likewise benefit. Newer, recent versions will not benefit.
  13. Which version is this? Seems newer than what I'm using. I did notice the "Unexpected token ?" error. I took a look and it almost looks like invalid JS to me, they weren't using it as the ternary operator. I'm not sure what the polyfill/fix for this is yet. Some things I use are still broken, affected by issues other than in or in addition to just globalThis. Hopefully, we can add more support for these other things over time.
  14. I don't *think* so but not sure. New Moon 28 works fine with StackOverflow, which didn't work in Iron 70 properly due to the globalThis issue, so I'd say "no". This is the compatibility chart for globalThis: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/globalThis#browser_compatibility There are other areas where UXP is affected, but I haven't addressed those yet.
  15. Why NM27 and not 28? (though I guess both, the merrier...)
  16. All right, available now! https://blog.interlinked.us/66/when-the-world-wide-web-goes-on-strike-how-do-you-fight-back https://github.com/InterLinked1/chromefill Hands are a bit tied at the moment, but might try to see what will work for New Moon as well.. for now, this unbreaks enough sites on Iron 70 that it's usable enough again.
  17. As some folks are aware, back in Q4 of 2021, there was a massive breakage of many browsers due to some JavaScript changes that took place around then which rendered browsers that weren't the latest version of Chromium or Firefox useless on many sites. I myself have been struggling with this for some time; Iron 70 no longer works on many things and New Moon is almost the same way. Some things don't work in either, or one or the other. I eventually realized that as it was just JavaScript code on these sites that had been changed (in many cases, in libraries not directly part of the site, probably why this sprang up everywhere all in a short period of time), and that if that was the case, maybe there was a way to restore compatibility... I played around for a while this week, and at last, I have made some satisfying progress. StackOverflow and other StackExchange sites, which have been basically 70% broken (minimal functionality mode) for weeks now, finally work 100% again in Iron 70! All it took was minimal polyfill injecting before page load using a simple extension that I set up to do the trick. It looks like many of the other errors I'm seeing are caused by one other popular error. I'm going to see if that can be polyfilled in a similar way too. Right now, I'm tentatively calling it "Old Chrome Compatability"... couldn't really come up with any clever names, but that's basically the idea. Plan is to hopefully add that other thing and then open source it this week so that anybody can add it and use it. Granted, Chromium is probably less popular here than UXP browsers, maybe rightly so. Gets me to thinking, now that I know this concept works, maybe we can rig together a similar extension for Pale/New Moon. It might even be simpler there, the way it's set up. The polyfills needed for one won't necessarily apply to the other, but there'll probably be a fair bit of crossover. Any thoughts? Anyways, these id*** had their fun messing up their JavaScript to break all our stuff, but I'm taking my JavaScript back now... take that, Google...
  18. Yeah, I guess you're right, most of the retro folks are on Windows 2000, not XP or Vista. Much thanks to roytam1 for working MailNews and New Moon on W2K!
  19. Yeah, I don't have any need or desire for a mobile, so I don't have one, and use landlines exclusively. I'm not the kind of guy that's teched up on the go, I simply don't care for that. I like sitting down to use a computer and using comfortable, high quality phones. I use payphones when I'm out and about, if I really need to (which isn't super often). I'm pretty much on VoIP as well, but the great thing about telephony is everything is backwards compatible. You can plug a 100 year old phone into a landline jack and it will just work, same for any decent VoIP adapter (ATA). I really only use analog phones, so I get more freedom that way. With digital, electronic, or VoIP hardphones like SIP phones, it is the same trajectory as mobiles, where everything nowadays is built for a few years and then becomes obsolete. The analog phones truly defy that. I have my own Asterisk system, so a lot of my telephony stuff is connected to that. I've always thought the U.S. wasn't great in how landlines are being neglected in a lot of places now, but sounds like it's even worse in Finland... maybe Asterisk/ATAs/channel banks are an option for you?
  20. Well, I have more than 5 phones right now, but only because I am a telephone collector and enthusiast, and do a lot of testing since I do some telephone switching work. Not that it's a competition, but my primary phone is 64 years old, a green 1957 Western Electric 500 set. I'm sure those Nokia mobiles are fine compared to today's, but nothing beats a good old Western Electric landline phone. I'm wagering that most of my phones will outlive me and be kicking just fine in 2100. Due to my background, I'll probably acquire more - in fact, just recently acquired a Nortel 350 ADSI phone for testing, but in theory I could never buy another phone for the next 80 years and I'd be just fine. Computers are obviously less durable, my main PC right now is a 2009 Dell OptiPlex. I'll probably be using it for a long while yet... it's new to me since I only recently salvaged it (actually a few of these) from getting recycled. Added some RAM to it so it's at 16 GB, and it has 2 external graphics cards, so she's purring along now with Windows 7...
  21. Yeah, my criticism of electric cars doesn't mean I endorse fossil fuels, either. We need fewer cars, in general, period. I'm more into classic cars, just because I hate all the newer ones, and obviously classic cars are pretty much all gasoline powered, not electric powered. Also plan to move to a rural area, where having one would be more of a necessity. That said, I think the focus on shifting to electric cars is definitely misguided. We need to reduce cars, starting from 3-car families where kids drive to school, to 2-car families, to 1-car families, maybe even less in urban areas. That is real change that would help the earth, not people switching from one toxic technology to the next. Electric cars are about $$$$, not the earth.
  22. This is repeating the same debunked pseudoscience that the industry and government have been repeating for years: "Currently the only proven biological effect of exposure to EMF, even at 5G frequencies, is slight tissue heating" Complete hogwash, mostly repeated by physicists who don't know what they're talking about, with no medical or biological credentials. Interestingly, also physicists who told everyone tobacco was safe and climate change doesn't exist... Look at actual reputable, independent, peer-reviewed science - most of which (more than 70%) finds biological effects from non-ionizing RF exposure. Now you are just spreading disinformation around. Industry scientists like to claim it's safe, and we're hearing the same types of claims that we did about lead, tobacco, and more recently climate change. It's the same BS playbook over and over again. 180 scientists signed a petition in 2017, warning about 5G: https://ehtrust.org/wp-content/uploads/Scientist-5G-appeal-2017.pdf 419 scientists have called for a moratorium on the technology: http://www.5gappeal.eu/ The 2020 Consensus Statement of UK and International Medical and Scientific Experts and Practitioners on Health Effects of Non-Ionising Radiation, which represents over 3500 medical doctors, would also disagree with you: https://phiremedical.org/2020-nir-consensus-statement-read/ More recently, 7,000+ scientists, 4,000+ medical doctors, 400+ building biologists, and 13,000+ engineers (and a lot of others) have signed the petition to stop 5G on earth and in space: https://www.5gspaceappeal.org/signatories-organizations Doesn't sound like "just a few people" are concerned to me... More studies: https://www.powerwatch.org.uk/science/studies.asp Here is a portal of 34,000+ more studies on the topic: https://www.emf-portal.org/en Here are some charts showing actual health effects at what the FCC would consider "low" levels of radiation, along with the study the finding was from: https://bioinitiative.org/wp-content/uploads/pdfs/BioInitiativeReport-RF-Color-Charts.pdf Consequently, there is a legitimate reason to be concerned about the 5G rollout: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0013935118300161 With all the manufactured doubt created by people just like you, of course, it's no wonder people are misinformed about the topic: https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/how-big-wireless-made-us-think-that-cell-phones-are-safe-a-special-investigation/ Lots of misinformation from outlets like the New York Times, as well: https://microwavenews.com/news-center/fact-free-hit-5g-critic Feel free to subject yourself to whatever exposure you like (and smoke those Camels while you're at it!), but you're not doing anyone a favor by trying to mislead and distort the science. Could go on and on, but clearly, you will believe what you want to believe - cause face it, who wants to believe their gadgets are harming them? - but you can't argue with science. Well... you can, and are... but that doesn't change the reality... Sorry, but I'm getting sick and tired of all the lies and conspiracy theories that are floating around... "smoking is safe" (YES, I still hear this from id***), "climate change doesn't exist" (YES, this too I hear), the vaccine has tracking chips inside it, 5G caused the virus, the election was stolen, 5G is safe with no health effects whatsoever, Windows 7 is not getting ANY security updates, etc. etc. etc. Time and time again, people ignore the facts and believe their own version of reality. If only everyone could be more scientific and actually use their brains, and if they don't know the facts, admit it and do some research.
  23. Well, this is a view that has been proven wrong by 50 years+ of science and research. You seem to believe that only thermal effects exist, but there are plenty of established non-thermal effects. The FCC would agree with you, and they got sued and lost this year over their outdated guidelines. Perhaps if you have cells in your body... is more like it. All life on earth is affected, especially things like bees, birds, trees, etc. Beyond the scope of what can be put here, but you should do some research and look at the literature. Sounds like you have catching up to do.


×
×
  • Create New...