notriddle

Are you sure it doesn't have something to do with Microsoft holding 80% of the desktop market at the time, while Apple only has 50% of the smartphone market now?

Since Edgium isn't part of that 67% number, it doesn't matter.

> Chrome is holding on to a 67% market share on desktops[0] despite not being pre-installed on either of the two most popular desktop operating systems.

1. It's advertised on the two most popular search engines.

2. Microsoft doesn't include Chrome in Windows, but a lot of Windows OEMs pre-install Chrome.

That's half the reason.

The other half of the reason is that Web applications are way easier to deploy, even if 100% of your users are on Windows, because the second-order-effect of being locked-down is less gatekeeping and less scare screens. If a web app is able to see stuff that it hasn't been explicitly granted access to, that's considered the Browser's fault for allowing it instead of it being the User's fault for installing an untrusted app.

I hope they added a sign, “keep children away from train,” to the fence.

Brave has so few users that Wikimedia doesn’t even list them on the summary table. They get more hits from Apple Mail.

https://analytics.wikimedia.org/dashboards/browsers/#all-sit...

Relevant xkcd: https://xkcd.com/1102/

> Why?

Because the alternative is that businesses do for data privacy the same thing they already do for things like manufacturing and corporate taxes. That's even worse.

It's a lot easier for big business to control a single state government than all fifty of them.

Swift is great. Apple should use it more.

Of course, but there's a difference between a Bud Light ad glorifying beer, and E-B secretly funneling money towards academic studies that show positive impacts from moderate consumption of alcohol. Some groups aren't really expected to be impartial.

Approval voting is a cardinal system, not a ranked choice system. That's why it's able to satisfy all of the Arrow's Theorem criteria.

> The problem with cardinal systems is that political parties will tell their followers "just vote 10.0 for me and 0.0 for everyone else".

Of course parties will try to convince people to do that. The question is whether voters will listen.

It's extremely easy to prove to yourself that, if my ranked preferences are O'TruePreference is better than Doe who is better than McBadGuy, then this ballot:

    Evil McBadGuy: 0
    John Doe 10.0
    Andre O'TruePreference 10.0

... is strictly better than this one, regardless of how other people vote:

    Evil McBadGuy: 0
    John Doe 10.0
    Andre O'TruePreference 0

> Enough people will do that to obviate the other advantages.

I know this happened with Approval Voting, but that doesn't necessarily mean it'll happen to Score Voting. It's likely that voters just didn't read the directions, and thought that if they voted for more than one candidate their ballot would be discarded.

If you're going to talk about vote counting systems, please consult this interactive blog post:

https://ncase.me/ballot/

And the HN discussion surrounding it:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30847133

[Unfortunately, while you can test ranked choice voting systems against each other directly using examples, you can't really test them against cardinal voting systems because the ballots aren't the same. At best, you use statistical models to compare them.]

It’s also missing the point. Not every disability has a known cure, even if WalterBright’s examples do.

The back button problem is fixable. Discourse (which you’ll see on discuss.python.org and users.rust-lang.org) uses the history API to keep track of your location. You can create a URL that points at any individual post, and the page will appear “pre-scrolled” to it, so you can not only use the back button to return to your location in the infinite scroll, you can even bookmark your location in the infinite scroll.

The scroll bar and find function can be mitigated, but not as elegantly.

The real problem is that, when you load a page in the middle, it’s easy to scroll down, but scrolling UP is glitchy. That one can’t be fixed. https://meta.discourse.org/t/scroll-jank-when-scrolling-up/1...

Most of those problems already exist. The working-weekends one is the result of mismanagement.

So, Python urllib, the JS URL object in Firefox, Chrome, and Node.JS, the address bar in Firefox and Chrome, the Rust url crate, PHP's parse_url, and wget are all of the opinion that this URL does not contain an authentication section.

Interesting corner case where curl seems to disagree with almost everyone else I can think to interrogate.

No, it’s not, and writing VM configuration as a Turing-complete program means you can’t perform structured queries over all the VMs you manage without executing arbitrary code, and you can’t make bulk modification at all.

At least, not without restricting yourself to a tractable subset like dependabot does.

I can text someone a link to a website, they can click the link, and it just opens without going through an explicit install process.

I’d just like to interject for a moment. What you’re refering to as an ad blocker, is in fact, a content/ad blocker, or as I’ve recently taken to calling it, a content plus ad blocker. Ad blockers are not an extension unto themselves, but rather another downloadable block list for a fully functioning user agent made useful by the extension, browser chrome, and vital web engine components comprising a full user agent content customization system, which, in this case, can be customized using the ABP blocklist syntax.

Many computer users run a modified version of a content blocker every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of the content blocker which is widely used today is often called an ad blocker, and many of its users are not aware that it is basically a generic content blocker with a particularly popular block list preloaded.

It’s a poorly-conceived first thought. How does having the source code protect someone against a tracking bug hidden underneath their car? Is a stalking victim supposed to upload a modified firmware to a computer they don’t have physical access to, and might not even know exists? Or do you figure that giving more power to the person deploying the computer, the perpetrator, is somehow going to help the people they victimize?

> When you have an algorithm that suggests things to people, you are a de facto publisher and whatever you do, you're choosing what to promote.

But CloudFlare doesn’t. That’s why they position themselves as a common carrier.

> unless that call for violence is intended to produce an imminent lawless action

So it’s fine to call for violence, as long as the violence in question would be legal if it were acted upon?

That makes so much sense, it seems like it would go without saying. If the violent act itself was legal (like a war, or an organized boxing match), why wouldn’t it be legal to solicit or petition for it?

The point is that "JavaScript Applications" aren't just written with JavaScript, and so-called "JS frameworks" really aren't doing much with JavaScript (except, I suppose, JSX).

Mostly, they're DOM enhancers, and Firefox has always been coded against its own internally-maintained, enhanced version of the DOM.

> Firefox has been an Electron-style app for 100+% of its lifetime

That's technically correct, which is the best kind of correct, but horribly misleading.

Firefox has always been mostly written in JavaScript, but not HTML [1]. A bunch of features that are being standardized now, like Web Components [2], are pretty similar to stuff that Firefox has used in non-standard form for decades.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XUL

[2]: https://briangrinstead.com/blog/firefox-webcomponents/

GitHub does: https://docs.github.com/en/get-started/importing-your-projec...

> It seems like the simplest solution here would be to not ban accounts automatically for CSAM detections, but to have a process to do so based on police recommendation.

The police aren't going to recommend a ban. They don't want people banned. They want people arrested, tried, and convicted for criminal possession. They're going to recommend keeping the account open until they have enough evidence to take it to court.

> "autoSpaceLikeWord95", "footnoteLayoutLikeWW8", "useWord2002TableStyleRules", and "lineWrapLikeWord6"

I expect that whatever tooling the USPTO uses can probably just ignore those things. They're extracting metadata, not actually rendering it.

1. This is straight up <https://devblogs.microsoft.com/oldnewthing/20110310-00/?p=11...> and <https://devblogs.microsoft.com/oldnewthing/20050607-00/?p=35...>. Since the Chrome team probably have at least one team member who reads that blog, they'll probably do the same thing and make this the "the buck stops here" rule for anything that doesn't have special privileges, like the browser itself or extensions.

2. There should be a webext-exclusive API for placing items above the top layer.