Wondered how to deactivate the auto update of Chromium in the setting. There is no checkbox to untick. You have to twiddle with the regedit to deactivate updates. WTF?
i started using tree style tabs which was absolutely life changing. best computer memory i’ve had in years, it’s a far more logical and space-friendly way to keep lots of tabs open and still be able to read the titles. i feel like specifically grouping adds too much overhead - i have to think about which group to put each into, and think (even a little bit) about where to find it later
Was looking for that! Yeah, tree style tabs just makes researching so much easier. It also just feels good closing a parent tab after falling very deep in a rabbit hole.
All Google has to do is sell this idea to websites and big companies that hate adblockers to try and ram it through. It'll be like the old days "This site only works with internet explorer 3.0 or greater."
I appreciate them getting the warnings out and standing against it but if you use one of their browsers or follow their blogs/socials, then chances are you already knew Google Chrome was bad for you.
This has already been happening. I can't count the times I'm told to use Google Chrome or Firefox because Safari isn't supported. This isn't a new thing.
In the future, if you wish to link to an article, please include the link(s) to either the project’s official site, their source repository, or both. Just in case a reader would rather look at the project first before digesting someone else’s opinion. Plus, ItsFoss.com can be very ad-heavy (made the mistake of going there without an ad-blocker once) and not everyone uses ad-blockers.
I especially like to blame the complex interplay of 2 different apps, 2 different Fediverse server softwares over 3 instances (spanning several incompletely mapped protocol layers) - solely on the unassuming user, without any further explanation - speaking in riddles rather than speaking frankly. On the Mastodon instance these forwards were meant for (and falsely attributed to the lemmy user with the same local username part) this behaviour would come off as very rude. But thanks for the invitation to learning the details and culture of this service with your kind explanations!
I’m not systemd user, and I generally see this absorbing as much as possible as a terrible practice. I don’t usually comment on systemd stuff, since I’m happy just not being forced to use it.
However, even though I don’t use it, the decision of people managing systemd really affects non systemd users. See by succeeding in getting all major distros into become systemd distros (somehow now governed by RH, if anyone cares), everything systemd absorbs tend to leave alternatives sooner or later deprecated, or abandoned.
Even autofs is no longer part of some official repos, given systemd has its own auto mount/unmount functionality… And there are several other examples…
At any rate, hopefully the more bloated systemd, doesn’t make it the more vulnerable. And also hopefully, doesn’t make life worse and worse to non systemd distros and users…
BTW, before sudo there was su, so a life without sudo is possible, :)
I personally don’t have a problem with run0 over sudo, however, I don’t want to have to remember to use a different command on the terminal. Just rename it “sudo”, and do the new stuff with it. Just don’t bother me having to remember new commands.
You can uninstall the sudo application and add sudo as an alias for run0 in your shell initialization script. That’s better than them renaming run0 to sudo, because that will prevent people from running the real sudo if they want it.
news.itsfoss.com
Hot