Noticed this message in DevTools on youtube.com:
That’s an incredible YouTube-specific hack. So YouTube relies on performance.now to be super precise as an ID for their page routing. Because Firefox limits the precision of the timer, it caused the page to not react to changes sometimes. Firefox specifically implemented a workaround for this to work.
performance.now precision has been modified for compatibility reasons. See https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1756970 for details.
That’s an incredible YouTube-specific hack. So YouTube relies on performance.now to be super precise as an ID for their page routing. Because Firefox limits the precision of the timer, it caused the page to not react to changes sometimes. Firefox specifically implemented a workaround for this to work.
bugzilla.mozilla.org
1756970 - url change not affecting page content on youtube
RESOLVED (kberezina) in Web Compatibility - Site Reports. Last updated 2024-03-12.
It genuinely sucks how Google is deboosting smaller domain specific websites from search, giving higher ranks to general news outlets.
Say, I manage a website that is solely about Telegram and we publish high quality articles about Telegram. But even if you use exact keywords in search, Google will still prefer giving first results to general news outlets with their objectively worse articles. Or Reddit.
Another real world example that went viral the other day:
https://housefresh.com/david-vs-digital-goliaths/
Say, I manage a website that is solely about Telegram and we publish high quality articles about Telegram. But even if you use exact keywords in search, Google will still prefer giving first results to general news outlets with their objectively worse articles. Or Reddit.
Another real world example that went viral the other day:
https://housefresh.com/david-vs-digital-goliaths/
HouseFresh
How Google is killing independent sites like ours - HouseFresh
And why you shouldn’t trust product reviews from big media publishers ranking at the top of Google.
😢1
It appears YouTube is introducing a Sponsorblock-like thing for Premium subscribers.
If you double tap the edge of the screen to skip 10 seconds ahead, a button will appear which allows you to "jump over commonly skipped section".
It doesn't appear to rely on creator defined sections, so creators can't manipulate this behavior, it is purely relying on what users actually skip, it seems.
If you double tap the edge of the screen to skip 10 seconds ahead, a button will appear which allows you to "jump over commonly skipped section".
It doesn't appear to rely on creator defined sections, so creators can't manipulate this behavior, it is purely relying on what users actually skip, it seems.
Great update, now you have to tap twice to open search — arguably the most used feature in Play Store.
👏2
UPD: old method was re-activated on stable release
In macOS 15 Sequoia Apple changed the way you permanently disable app notarization check.
To run a non-notarized app you now have to either:
- Every time go to Settings > Privacy & Security and confirm the app there.
- Disable Gatekeeper permanently using a management profile.
I suggest using Sentinel which helps you installing the profile. You can also grab the profile directly from the repo, but the app also allows to un-quarantine apps, which is useful.
The app: https://github.com/alienator88/Sentinel
Direct management profile link
For the old methods that used to work:
- spctl global disable to disable gatekeeper permanently was removed
- Option + click to bypass gatekeeper one time was removed
In macOS 15 Sequoia Apple changed the way you permanently disable app notarization check.
To run a non-notarized app you now have to either:
- Every time go to Settings > Privacy & Security and confirm the app there.
- Disable Gatekeeper permanently using a management profile.
I suggest using Sentinel which helps you installing the profile. You can also grab the profile directly from the repo, but the app also allows to un-quarantine apps, which is useful.
The app: https://github.com/alienator88/Sentinel
Direct management profile link
For the old methods that used to work:
- spctl global disable to disable gatekeeper permanently was removed
- Option + click to bypass gatekeeper one time was removed
GitHub
GitHub - alienator88/Sentinel: Configure Gatekeeper, remove apps from quarantine and self-sign apps
Configure Gatekeeper, remove apps from quarantine and self-sign apps - alienator88/Sentinel
Screw you, YouTube, for ruining the auto-download feature, wasting the space and video slots with Shorts which I'm not going to watch.
There's no way to exclude them.
Out of 1Gb shorts took 400mb
There's no way to exclude them.
Out of 1Gb shorts took 400mb
🤬1
USB-IF, what's wrong with you, why can't you name a single thing in a humane way
https://www.techspot.com/news/105025-lunar-lake-allegedly-smokes-z1-extreme-handheld-gaming.html
https://www.techspot.com/news/105025-lunar-lake-allegedly-smokes-z1-extreme-handheld-gaming.html
TechSpot
World's first USB4 2.0 cables promise 80Gbps speeds
The cables come courtesy of Elecom, which just became the first company to have its USB4 2.0 cables officially certified, as reported by PC Watch. The Japanese...
😁3
You can't properly report Chrome Web Store extensions for malware anymore.
I went through the same route as the author of the post — there is just no way to explicitly report malware, only options are "Felt suspicious" and "Not trustworthy" with no details field.
https://palant.info/2025/01/13/chrome-web-store-is-a-mess/
I went through the same route as the author of the post — there is just no way to explicitly report malware, only options are "Felt suspicious" and "Not trustworthy" with no details field.
https://palant.info/2025/01/13/chrome-web-store-is-a-mess/
Almost Secure
Chrome Web Store is a mess
The post details Google’s lax enforcement of their policies in Chrome Web Store, resulting in a flood of spam submissions, add-ons “legitimately” stealing users’ data and outright malicious extensions not being addressed. At this point Chrome Web Store is…
🤩3
It's not open source, it's open weights, ML people should stop misusing the term.
Providing weights for a model is like providing a binary. Just because I can run it on my computer, it doesn't make it open source.
https://fixupx.com/LTXStudio/status/1919751150888239374
Providing weights for a model is like providing a binary. Just because I can run it on my computer, it doesn't make it open source.
https://fixupx.com/LTXStudio/status/1919751150888239374
🧵 Thread • FixupX
LTX Studio (@LTXStudio)
Today we’re introducing our latest open source video model—and it’s a big one.
This release sets a new bar for speed, quality, and control. It’s faster than anything in its class, packed with new features, and ready to run on your own hardware.
Let’s break…
This release sets a new bar for speed, quality, and control. It’s faster than anything in its class, packed with new features, and ready to run on your own hardware.
Let’s break…
👍3
Or was it really WhatsApp?
About a month ago a website called iGuides made an article about how Telegram is degrading.
Today Pavel Durov made a post[ru] in his Russian channel with screenshots of two Telegram channels with identical criticism of Telegram. He claims these posts are paid for by WhatsApp and that it's WhatsApp's campaign against Telegram.
iGuides authors noticed[ru] that the text and images from these posts are stolen from them. The title from the iGuides' article noticing the issue words it as if WhatsApp itself indeed has stolen their content for their promotion materials. I would disagree that this is likely. The rest of the article doesn't claim so, though, and just recites Durov.
One of the iGuides authors notes[ru] (seems to be their personal channel, I can't find the source from the screenshot) that the two channels on screenshots are just content farms that never produce anything original. I agree with this analysis.
Now I will have to be a bit rhetorical here, but do you really think WhatsApp's marketing people would buy negative PR posts on content farms using stolen material? Durov only provided two examples, and I can't extrapolate that this is a massive PR attack just from this.
It would be easier to explain it with content farms, in their typical fashion, simply stealing content from iGuides. By the way, both channels seem to be related, as they have the same account specified as "Manager".
Now why would Durov post this then?
a) He just wants to look better in the eyes of investors, especially considering an IPO is probably coming[ru];
b) Durov is getting more and more detached from the reality by the day, preferring to draw a conspiracy theory over accepting valid criticism;
c) This is genuinely a massive PR attack and Durov is bad at proving his position.
e.g. There's still a chance iGuides was contracted by Facebook to write the article too, that gets reused for other promotional materials, and they wouldn't admit this is the case and would rather say the article was plagiarized. But this would mean jumping through a lot of hoops for Facebook, and iGuides' behavior doesn't check out here, because if this was indeed marketing material they were contracted for, they would unlikely bring public attention to plagiarism here.
Or maybe the mentioned channels were paid for any negative PR and the channel admins were left with the task of writing the message on their own, and they just plagiarized it, like they typically do. I should note this option is very unlikely though, because advertisers very rarely leave writing the text to the publishing channel.
Also note that Meta was labeled as a terrorist company in Russia and it's extremely dangerous for any Russian to have any financial ties with them. I doubt iGuides or the mentioned channel admins would agree to this.
—
Additional notes: "Jobs' iPhone" channel post (11th of March, 5:44 UTC), "Apple News" channel post (11th of March, 7:06 UTC, Deleted 10th of May, 16:53 UTC)
About a month ago a website called iGuides made an article about how Telegram is degrading.
Today Pavel Durov made a post[ru] in his Russian channel with screenshots of two Telegram channels with identical criticism of Telegram. He claims these posts are paid for by WhatsApp and that it's WhatsApp's campaign against Telegram.
iGuides authors noticed[ru] that the text and images from these posts are stolen from them. The title from the iGuides' article noticing the issue words it as if WhatsApp itself indeed has stolen their content for their promotion materials. I would disagree that this is likely. The rest of the article doesn't claim so, though, and just recites Durov.
One of the iGuides authors notes[ru] (seems to be their personal channel, I can't find the source from the screenshot) that the two channels on screenshots are just content farms that never produce anything original. I agree with this analysis.
Now I will have to be a bit rhetorical here, but do you really think WhatsApp's marketing people would buy negative PR posts on content farms using stolen material? Durov only provided two examples, and I can't extrapolate that this is a massive PR attack just from this.
It would be easier to explain it with content farms, in their typical fashion, simply stealing content from iGuides. By the way, both channels seem to be related, as they have the same account specified as "Manager".
Now why would Durov post this then?
a) He just wants to look better in the eyes of investors, especially considering an IPO is probably coming[ru];
b) Durov is getting more and more detached from the reality by the day, preferring to draw a conspiracy theory over accepting valid criticism;
c) This is genuinely a massive PR attack and Durov is bad at proving his position.
e.g. There's still a chance iGuides was contracted by Facebook to write the article too, that gets reused for other promotional materials, and they wouldn't admit this is the case and would rather say the article was plagiarized. But this would mean jumping through a lot of hoops for Facebook, and iGuides' behavior doesn't check out here, because if this was indeed marketing material they were contracted for, they would unlikely bring public attention to plagiarism here.
Or maybe the mentioned channels were paid for any negative PR and the channel admins were left with the task of writing the message on their own, and they just plagiarized it, like they typically do. I should note this option is very unlikely though, because advertisers very rarely leave writing the text to the publishing channel.
Also note that Meta was labeled as a terrorist company in Russia and it's extremely dangerous for any Russian to have any financial ties with them. I doubt iGuides or the mentioned channel admins would agree to this.
—
Additional notes: "Jobs' iPhone" channel post (11th of March, 5:44 UTC), "Apple News" channel post (11th of March, 7:06 UTC, Deleted 10th of May, 16:53 UTC)
👍1😁1
if you send a iMessage voice message containing an ampersand it won't be delivered due to XHTML formatting error when transcription is added to the message
🤩6🏆1
Facebook Messenger added required end-to-end encryption. If you don't opt in, you won't be able to read your own messages across devices.
I love end-to-end encryption that purely relies on a numeric pin code, it will be so hard for Facebook to guess my 6-digit pincode with unlimited attempts if they ever want to read my correspondance.
Or is it to prevent hackers from accessing messages? Well we had a tool for that, it was called Passwords and Passkeys!
Explainer: This way of making end-to-end encryption is useless and it would have been better if they just didn't do it at all then.
I love end-to-end encryption that purely relies on a numeric pin code, it will be so hard for Facebook to guess my 6-digit pincode with unlimited attempts if they ever want to read my correspondance.
Or is it to prevent hackers from accessing messages? Well we had a tool for that, it was called Passwords and Passkeys!
Explainer: This way of making end-to-end encryption is useless and it would have been better if they just didn't do it at all then.
🐳1
SnapDrop and a bunch of other P2P services acquired by a cryptocurrency scam company
"LimeWire GmbH", a company that sells NFTs and "AI" under the name of the deceased P2P file-sharing software, decided to aggressively acquire a lot of independent P2P file-sharing websites.
I am very used to recommending snapdrop [dot] net whenever anyone seeks a wireless P2P transfer between multiple devices. It was a browser app that would establish a direct connection between devices on the same network by the shortest path (the local network) to transfer files or text.
Today, when recommending the website yet another time, I found out it was put into a uBlock filter, and this is how I learned the website was sold.
From this GitHub issue, I also learned that a few other similar services were bought out, so the list of services to avoid (probably incomplete) is:
sharedrop [dot] net
sharedrop [dot] io
file [dot] io
Users also report that the code of the services was covertly changed to always use transfer through LimeWire's "cloud", with no P2P functionality.
The current best alternative to this service seems to be the pairdrop.net fork, that also has some UX improvements.
"LimeWire GmbH", a company that sells NFTs and "AI" under the name of the deceased P2P file-sharing software, decided to aggressively acquire a lot of independent P2P file-sharing websites.
I am very used to recommending snapdrop [dot] net whenever anyone seeks a wireless P2P transfer between multiple devices. It was a browser app that would establish a direct connection between devices on the same network by the shortest path (the local network) to transfer files or text.
Today, when recommending the website yet another time, I found out it was put into a uBlock filter, and this is how I learned the website was sold.
From this GitHub issue, I also learned that a few other similar services were bought out, so the list of services to avoid (probably incomplete) is:
sharedrop [dot] net
sharedrop [dot] io
file [dot] io
Users also report that the code of the services was covertly changed to always use transfer through LimeWire's "cloud", with no P2P functionality.
The current best alternative to this service seems to be the pairdrop.net fork, that also has some UX improvements.
👍2