And how does having another box help you run a Linux tool like a bash script on Windows? This is as silly as the virtualisation argument. There are completely different use cases to having another OS available vs wanting to use a tool on your current OS that is only available on another one.
Anyone who compares this to "a linux box" or a virtual machine is missing the point, and obviously has never used https://www.cygwin.com/
Wow. Unable to read or understand context and then doubling down on stupidity when you're corrected. You're *actually* an idiot. Okay thanks for letting us know.
I'll keep it in mind in the future to use simple words with you.
Oh and I forgot to address you "embrace extend extinguish comment". Thinking that this is possible, viable, or even what they are doing with these capabilities and their market share only shows that you're good at soundbites, but lack a bit in the critical thinking part. There's multiple reasons why EEE isn't a viable strategy not possible, practical, the direction they are moving with WSL, and nor even in the interests of their business,.
Really? A bunch of open source zealots flocking to the MS cloud? What clearly isn't clear (he he) to you is that for the most part people don't want Linux, they don't want Windows, they don't want OSX. What they want to do is get stuff done using the software they require and the toolset and skills they possess.
And getting past this ridiculous restriction of picking an OS to run an application is a step forward in every way.
What the fuck are you talking about. I never said that in the slightest. In fact given the subject matter at hand what I wrote implied the exact fucking opposite.
dumbfuck
Yeah my line to you arsehat. Don't make assumption about others then act like a dick, especially when the assumption is wrong. You look like a fool.
I was about to say I've been using that since long before Tumblr existed, but I don't like hyperbole so I Googled. Tumblr launched in 2007. Visipics launched in 2007. Coincidence? You decide:-)
Obviously this is a zero sum game. You ultimately can't go any faster than the underlying capacity of the communications channel no matter what you do.
That is obvious, but also only a problem on constrained networks. QUIC may not be the solution to my parent's ADSL, but what about my gigabit fibre to the home?
Unnecessary aggression is not actually an improvement in the same way aggressive driving rarely gets one to their destination in any meaningfully faster way.
Interesting comparison. There is a well researched phenomenon (that we even covered on Slashdot about 10ish years ago) that to make optimum use of infrastructure and flow the maximum number of people you need 30%-60% of people to drive aggressively depending on town planning and road designs of different countries.
Modern TCP is well designed and efficient. TFO addresses the major performance issue on the web today which is round trip latency from unnecessary round trips.
Indeed it does, but from what I've read on IETF presentations on the topic it relies on proper routing and handling of traffic between server and client and a there's a significant portion of TCP connections that despite attempting to be negotiated as fast open proceed to fall back due to network support. It's one fo the key benefits QUIC presents over TFO.
Well IF that is the case then you'd be right. However that's a very big IF and my comment was mainly aimed at being able to beat supermarket ground beef (normally the cheapest shit thrown in a blender), but they are a long way from even matching proper beef in the taste department.
Yes. Fucked up. Yes. Morally reprehensible.... Wrong? Imagine no religious skydaddies causing people to judge others, attack others, decide what medical care others should receive.
Although you haven't heard that statement before. The previous cases where you have heard similar statements were in *favour* of one religion. I'm in favour of abolishing them all.
No you missed my point. Why do you think that lab grown meat would taste better than nicely ground beef? You mentioned mouthfeel and I agree with your comment about it initially being ground, but you also said the word "taste" as if it was a throwaway comment rather than a defining factor.
Wagyu needs a dash of salt and it's the perfect meal if you're making a perfect steak. When making a perfect bolognese a bit of salt on beef doesn't cover it. The goal is not to make spaghetti taste like steak.
Can you care to share how that would have even the slightest impact in our global carbon emissions? By refusing to sell oil from existing developed assets they would be doing little more than virtue signalling. But I'm sure it would appease the USA which would ramp up some exports.
First confirm that they blocked 911 calls over VoIP before generalising.
I mean sure we all know corporations are run by idiots so your scenario is likely correct but... yeah there's still a chance someone with a functioning brain was behind this.
I didn't know presenting a standards compliant invisible div which causes some other's browsers Youtube specific optimisations used to cheap benchmarks was considered a "chrome specific hack".
English is a hard language, I think you for clarifying it for me.
Now do a complete functional test of all features while masquerading as Chrome. I'll bet you a marsbar that it'll fail.
Firefox mobile is a buggy piece of shit, it's no surprise that it is presented with a kids version of internet content. Although maybe that's changed. I gave up my open source zealotry and uninstalled it a few months ago.
*IF* the assertions are true Google intentionally leveraged it's monopoly position to intentionally sabotage other browsers to get more people to switch to Chrome.
And yet if the assertions are true then this was facilitated by the means of the other browser falling over when presented with completely standards compliant code.
I see little doubt that Google did it to punish Edge. I also see little doubt that Edge was designing to the benchmark rather than designing something that is able to work with standards compliant code.
You might think pushing congestion control out to user space where Google has intentionally given themselves a 2x advantage over TCP is "excellent". When I look at that it's nothing more than a pure power grab for self-serving reasons actively harmful to everyone else.
There is nothing substantive HTTP3 brings to the table TFO+TLS 1.3 does not already provide.
Make up your mind, is it 2x faster, or just the same?
all the missing features suddenly appeared and were working with no issues
Oh? To what level did you test? Did you see something pop up and then give it the thumbs up and declare success? Did you verify that what Google was rendering was recognised and supported in Firefox and not experimental?
The reason I ask is simple: Every other documented example of what you describe was actually done for a reason, for example the outrage earlier this year that different code is presented to Firefox for Maps vs Chrome. End result is that Firefox was faster when it pretended to be Chrome, and yet some minor part of the functionality (specifically in the interaction with map planning) broke, though these were desktops examples not mobile examples.
Firefox mobile is (IMO) a bucket of shit and I'm not surprised that sites send it custom HTML.
Slashdot Mirror
And how does having another box help you run a Linux tool like a bash script on Windows? This is as silly as the virtualisation argument. There are completely different use cases to having another OS available vs wanting to use a tool on your current OS that is only available on another one.
Anyone who compares this to "a linux box" or a virtual machine is missing the point, and obviously has never used https://www.cygwin.com/
Wow. Unable to read or understand context and then doubling down on stupidity when you're corrected. You're *actually* an idiot. Okay thanks for letting us know.
I'll keep it in mind in the future to use simple words with you.
Holy Crap. A searchable list of 2.6million archived tumblr blogs: https://transfer.sh/13Aa3n/tum...
By trying to rid the internet of porn, Verizon may have given us the best source yet.
Oh and I forgot to address you "embrace extend extinguish comment". Thinking that this is possible, viable, or even what they are doing with these capabilities and their market share only shows that you're good at soundbites, but lack a bit in the critical thinking part. There's multiple reasons why EEE isn't a viable strategy not possible, practical, the direction they are moving with WSL, and nor even in the interests of their business,.
It's clear that people want Linux
Really? A bunch of open source zealots flocking to the MS cloud? What clearly isn't clear (he he) to you is that for the most part people don't want Linux, they don't want Windows, they don't want OSX. What they want to do is get stuff done using the software they require and the toolset and skills they possess.
And getting past this ridiculous restriction of picking an OS to run an application is a step forward in every way.
A simple "we didn't test" would have sufficed.
"Microsoft is a bunch of good people now."
What the fuck are you talking about. I never said that in the slightest. In fact given the subject matter at hand what I wrote implied the exact fucking opposite.
dumbfuck
Yeah my line to you arsehat. Don't make assumption about others then act like a dick, especially when the assumption is wrong. You look like a fool.
I was about to say I've been using that since long before Tumblr existed, but I don't like hyperbole so I Googled. Tumblr launched in 2007. Visipics launched in 2007. Coincidence? You decide :-)
Obviously this is a zero sum game. You ultimately can't go any faster than the underlying capacity of the communications channel no matter what you do.
That is obvious, but also only a problem on constrained networks. QUIC may not be the solution to my parent's ADSL, but what about my gigabit fibre to the home?
Unnecessary aggression is not actually an improvement in the same way aggressive driving rarely gets one to their destination in any meaningfully faster way.
Interesting comparison. There is a well researched phenomenon (that we even covered on Slashdot about 10ish years ago) that to make optimum use of infrastructure and flow the maximum number of people you need 30%-60% of people to drive aggressively depending on town planning and road designs of different countries.
Modern TCP is well designed and efficient. TFO addresses the major performance issue on the web today which is round trip latency from unnecessary round trips.
Indeed it does, but from what I've read on IETF presentations on the topic it relies on proper routing and handling of traffic between server and client and a there's a significant portion of TCP connections that despite attempting to be negotiated as fast open proceed to fall back due to network support. It's one fo the key benefits QUIC presents over TFO.
Well IF that is the case then you'd be right. However that's a very big IF and my comment was mainly aimed at being able to beat supermarket ground beef (normally the cheapest shit thrown in a blender), but they are a long way from even matching proper beef in the taste department.
Oh, well, no proof or evidence of that is needed for your claim at all.
The sky is blue. I'm not providing proof of that either. I'm just assuming a minimal knowledge on the subject matter.
What a fucked up statement.
Yes. Fucked up. Yes. Morally reprehensible. ... Wrong? Imagine no religious skydaddies causing people to judge others, attack others, decide what medical care others should receive.
Although you haven't heard that statement before. The previous cases where you have heard similar statements were in *favour* of one religion. I'm in favour of abolishing them all.
In no way did my original post imply that no losses are ever incurred, which seems to be the point you're trying to stick to
For someone who's explaining the english in your original post you've done a great job (intentionally?) ignoring the point of mine.
No you missed my point. Why do you think that lab grown meat would taste better than nicely ground beef? You mentioned mouthfeel and I agree with your comment about it initially being ground, but you also said the word "taste" as if it was a throwaway comment rather than a defining factor.
Wagyu needs a dash of salt and it's the perfect meal if you're making a perfect steak.
When making a perfect bolognese a bit of salt on beef doesn't cover it. The goal is not to make spaghetti taste like steak.
Can you care to share how that would have even the slightest impact in our global carbon emissions? By refusing to sell oil from existing developed assets they would be doing little more than virtue signalling. But I'm sure it would appease the USA which would ramp up some exports.
Seriously.. Do we need 3 scare articles per day about Global Warming?
No. We are only delivering 3 scare articles per day. Evidence suggests we need a shitload more to get the point across.
[Citation Required]
First confirm that they blocked 911 calls over VoIP before generalising.
I mean sure we all know corporations are run by idiots so your scenario is likely correct but ... yeah there's still a chance someone with a functioning brain was behind this.
The internet: Serious answers to even the most silly of rhetorical questions.
no service refusal for anyone.
Even if you're not our customer.
with Chrome-specific hacks
I didn't know presenting a standards compliant invisible div which causes some other's browsers Youtube specific optimisations used to cheap benchmarks was considered a "chrome specific hack".
English is a hard language, I think you for clarifying it for me.
Suddenly the full functionality is back.
Now do a complete functional test of all features while masquerading as Chrome. I'll bet you a marsbar that it'll fail.
Firefox mobile is a buggy piece of shit, it's no surprise that it is presented with a kids version of internet content. Although maybe that's changed. I gave up my open source zealotry and uninstalled it a few months ago.
*IF* the assertions are true Google intentionally leveraged it's monopoly position to intentionally sabotage other browsers to get more people to switch to Chrome.
And yet if the assertions are true then this was facilitated by the means of the other browser falling over when presented with completely standards compliant code.
I see little doubt that Google did it to punish Edge.
I also see little doubt that Edge was designing to the benchmark rather than designing something that is able to work with standards compliant code.
You might think pushing congestion control out to user space where Google has intentionally given themselves a 2x advantage over TCP is "excellent". When I look at that it's nothing more than a pure power grab for self-serving reasons actively harmful to everyone else.
There is nothing substantive HTTP3 brings to the table TFO+TLS 1.3 does not already provide.
Make up your mind, is it 2x faster, or just the same?
all the missing features suddenly appeared and were working with no issues
Oh? To what level did you test? Did you see something pop up and then give it the thumbs up and declare success? Did you verify that what Google was rendering was recognised and supported in Firefox and not experimental?
The reason I ask is simple: Every other documented example of what you describe was actually done for a reason, for example the outrage earlier this year that different code is presented to Firefox for Maps vs Chrome. End result is that Firefox was faster when it pretended to be Chrome, and yet some minor part of the functionality (specifically in the interaction with map planning) broke, though these were desktops examples not mobile examples.
Firefox mobile is (IMO) a bucket of shit and I'm not surprised that sites send it custom HTML.