Guaranteed they’d find a way to double dip. Price gouging, restricting content behind further paywalls, adding ads anyway… absolutely they’ve investigated all those and undoubtedly more.
Switch to Firefox, Chrome is their biggest lever to force this kind of stuff onto people. While Firefox exists and it remains uncool for them to block it they’ll have to compete against piracy and adblockers which will limit their ability to aggressively monetise.
Switch to firefox!
Best of luck with that.
I mean I’m still out here rawdogging usenet without a vpn. I keep waiting for the great crackdown on usenet but it never comes… Surely that comes before any VPN crackdown.
deleted by creator
One gold upvote costs $2, the recipient might get either $0.90 or perhaps $1. But most likely they’ll get nothing.
Yeah that’s totally galling. Shrinkflation for online services.
You know some shiny-suited corporate asshole got a huge bonus for coming up with that though.
Isn’t the “take it or leave it” approach to consent considered consent bundling? Didn’t google get fined for doing a similar thing?
Hotmail was 2mb.
Yet more evidence that aggressive adblocking is cyber security.
Surely those broadcasters will pull their streams (it’s not like they’re not already hurting), FireTV will get a reputation of having restricted access to broadcast TV, some people will live with it and some will buy a smart TV and not worry about Amazon any more…
The way it works is that there’s a symbol table entry for “foo” which has a slot for a hash, scalar, array, glob, etc.
That leads to some super weird behaviour like, for example, if I declare a scalar, hash and array as “x”:
$x = "sy";
%x = (foo => "mb");
@x = ("ol", "s!");
You can access them all independently as you’re aware:
say "x: ", $x, $x{foo}, @x; # Outputs: x: symbols!
But what’s really going to bake your noodle is I can assign the “x” symbol to something else like this:
*z = *x;
…and then the same thing works with z:
say "z: ", $z, $z{foo}, @z; # Outputs: z: symbols!
Oneliner if you want to try it:
perl -E '$x = "sy"; %x = (foo => "mb"); @x = ("ol", "s!"); say "x: ", $x, $x{foo}, @x; *z = *x; say "z: ", $z, $z{foo}, @z;'
Congratulations! You now know more about one of Perl’s really weird internals than I’d wager most Perl programmers (I have literally never used any of the above for anything actually productive!)
You mean the fact that you can have a hash called %foo, an array called @foo and a scalar called $foo all at the same time? I agree that’s a weird choice and there’s potential for insanity there, but it’s pretty easy to just not do that…
20+ years of Perl experience and while Perl has a load of idiosyncrasies that make it harder to work with than other languages, I don’t think that particular one has ever caused a significant problem.
Nope. But I know a bunch of people that do or have, and have interviewed several (it’s a pretty small sector!)
I write Perl at work. Supporting an actively developed Perl based application.
It’s honestly not that bad as a language, the biggest downside is that the ecosystem of libraries around it are often abandoned or outdated. The language isn’t perfect and it needs a bit of discipline to avoid creating unreadable code, but honestly it’s not as bad as its reputation might have you believe.
It has quite a few tricks and unexpected bits of flexibility that make it quite a bit more expressive than other languages - you can really craft nice compact, elegant code with it if you want to.
These days I use other languages too (Python, Ruby, JS, etc) but none of them quite match Perl for expressiveness.
Oh also it’s great for oneliners. That expressiveness can be abused for brevity in some really interesting ways.
Which incompatible language upgrades? Are you talking about Perl 6?
That was never really an iteration of Perl, and it was renamed Raku some years back so is no longer named like it’s an iteration of Perl.
Perl continues as Perl 5 and honestly values compatibility extremely highly, probably more than many (most?) other languages. There have been a handful of breaking changes over the years (most notable for me was the hash key ordering thing) but those are usually security related rather than anything else.
One of the best things about Steam is not having to store install ISOs so I can reinstall games when I upgrade.
Install Firefox Install Firefox Install Firefox!
I am not sure how Manifest V3 is relevant here?
Because they literally tout security as one of the primary reasons for forcing it onto people.
https://developer.chrome.com/docs/extensions/mv3/intro/
The first line is “A step in the direction of security, privacy, and performance.”
https://developer.chrome.com/blog/mv2-transition/
“Manifest V3 is more secure, performant, and privacy-preserving than its predecessor.”
It’s the first thing they say.
If it doesn’t prevent a malicious extension from lifting your password in perhaps the most dumb and naive way I can think of, then it seems fairly disingenuous to describe it as “secure”.
They use data, just not the data from the customers paying them for enterprise licenses.
Honestly fear of leaking customer data is the only thing that’s kept my work from spunking every single byte of data we have at some LLM service a lazy attempt to come up with a product they can sell with minimal effort. They’re gonna love this shit.
My colleagues having a chat about their favourite tv shows in the operations channel at 7am have entered the chat.