I have Pushover. I love it. I have a bash alias that I use to notify me when some command completes. I get a notification on my phone, and a tap on my wrist letting me know some hours long task is complete, and I can do the next step.
I have a Octoprint integration which lets me know when 3d prints have completed.
You can also modify the priority of a message, so I can send "critical" events if I need to, although I use that rarely.
What about the constant Brave Premium ads? I got many notifications every day asking me to pay them, I couldn’t find a way to disable them. They had intrusive ads for premium in every new tab page as well.
Interrupting my work to ask me to send you money is unacceptable, Mozilla has never done that to me.
If you take a minute and go through the settings one time, I think you could figure out how to disable what you don't like and enable what you do like. I use several browsers but with Brave I haven't seen anything like what you're describing probably just because I disabled it in the settings
It’s really easy to disable that stuff. I use as my “incognito” browser, it has some of the best anti fingerprinting capabilities and I just have it delete everything when I exit. I know tor browser is better but tor network is just too slow for me to do casual incognito browsing
The web is slowly becoming chrome only and I hate it. I recently had to switch to Chromium because Firefox simply did not work for the websites at my job.
I looked into using ffmpeg to “compress” video podcasts by lowering the framerate a lot, but it didn’t seem to do as much as I thought (about 50% size reduction). The theory was that a video podcast is mostly talking heads with an occasional chart on the screen, so you really only need a frame every second, or five seconds.
Reducing framerate doesn't help much when there isn't a lot changing between frames. Here are some better optimizations:
Noise reduction, so you compress less useless noise: -vf hqdn3d
Turn up the Constant Rate Factor. This will make better visual tradeoffs than decreasing frame rate. 23 is a good starting point for h264, but keep increasing it until you don't like how the content looks: -crf 23
I’ve had fiber at my house from day one provided by a local ISP. Comcast came in and buried their own fiber lines (years later) for all the houses in my neighborhood. Soon after, my ISP bumped my speed and lowered my monthly bill.
We desperately need more competition. It’s the only thing that actually lowers prices.
Also, I will happily pay higher prices to never pay for Comcast again. So they won’t see a penny from me.
This is all covered in microeconomics. Competition is very good for society. Things that stop competition are bad and require government action. The scenario above is describing the behaviors of a “natural monopoly” due to the barriers to enter the market. As with all monopolies, regulation or some government action is normally required to promote competition and stop bad behavior (some examples of government actions are described in the link below / the root article is an example).
I really wish microeconomics was a required course in high school or primary. I find it to be one of the least understood of the well-established fields, and one that matters when we get older and vote or debate on these topics.
The government is the actor. Do you think that corporate lobbying gives corporations the right to write their own laws, or something? Lobbying is paying someone to speak to a government representative. Every government representative has the full authority to respond, "No? That's stupid," and if they respond any other way they should be the one held accountable for it.
People worry about price dumping waaay out of proportion to how often it is a problem.
Usually when there is a deep-pocketed entity stomping out local competition they are using regulatory capture as their main tool (this is what Comcast seems to do) and the problem is competition has been made illegal.
In situations like this, my default assumption is that it is illegal to lay competing cables until proven otherwise. We had a similar situation of massive monopoly provider in Australia back in the early 2000s, the economics didn't stop new companies laying new cable to compete with the incumbents. That all died when the government launched a new national network though.
That new national network ("the NBN") is so hit-or-miss that it's not funny.
My current connection in Brisbane is 1GbE download (incredibly fast for Australia), but only 50mbps upload. That 50mbps upload is the fastest commonly available speed in the whole country. Most ISP's don't offer anything faster than 20mbps. :(
Reliability isn't great either. Had an 8 hour (!) outage overnight about a month ago, then a ~2 hour outage last week. Both caused by NBN Co, rather than my ISP.
The concept of hosting anything actually useful or important from home infrastructure is just laughable when there are commonly multi-hour outages. It's just fucking stupid. :(
I disagree that SMS two factor is more secure than a password alone. I have found that once you enter your phone, it is more trusted than your password (meaning it alone can reset your password). A phone number is as secure as the least competent support person at your phone provider.
A password, with email reset is better. My email has two factors of authentication, rather than whatever my phone provider requires as proof.
What you describe isn't 2FA, though. "SMS two factor" fundamentally precludes the idea that the second factor can be used as a primary factor as then it isn't "two factor" it is "one factor".
Yes, it isn't technically an issue when it is purely a second factor. But it almost always ends up being trusted enough that the support team will reset your account with just that info.
This is a MANGA+ problem. I even have my password (and user and IP), but I cant login because google wants me to confirm a phone number I no longer have.
LifeHack: Dont setup a MANGA account with a phone number. Leave phone# for banking and other important logins.
> I have found that once you enter your phone, it is more trusted than your password (meaning it alone can reset your password).
Sure, but my answer to that is simply, don't trust users' SMS more than their password. You should require two factors of authentication to change settings on any authentication factor (i.e. SMS and email to change password, password and email to change SMS).
Agreed. When Netflix had just about everything, piracy took a big hit.
We need a return to Blockbuster-like selection, but streaming. A streaming service should purchases however many copies they are streaming, and replace them on a schedule as the copy “wears out”, like Blockbuster.
It may actually be profitable again. The entire reason media rentals ended up dying is because of Netflix coming out with just about every bit of media available for streaming.
Now that everything has fractured into a million pieces, media rental once again seems like it may make sense. Redbox is still around still lending out blurays. It wouldn't shock me if that model made a resurgence.
redbox isn't nearly as convenient as having it delivered to your house.
however, it does make me wonder if owning/operating/maintaining all of the boxes is more or less expensive than paying the USPS to deliver and collect on behalf of your service.
I don’t think that’s true; it might be the case that mailing out dvds is profitable, but too low revenue for modern Netflix to bother with. I mean, it was possible to build a business on it at some point…
Easy to find out by coming up with a business plan, and then pitch it to investors. If you are right, then you'll be the next Reed Hastings. If not, you'll just be another person with an idea nobody else believes is worth investing
I disagree that that is necessary to run that experiment, somebody already did it, proving that it is possible.
Also I don’t think suggesting a giant task like starting a business is anything but a bad faith rhetorical tactic. I’m not going to pitch a DVD mailing company to investors for reasons that have nothing to do with whether or not it is viable (I’m a programmer, not a businessman, and I don’t care to run a business, for one thing).
Of course I wouldn't expect some person as a programmer become a CEO of a physical media shipping company. I always forget that I must be explicit in these types of forums where the you is never considered as the royal you. Everyone takes things so personal.
right, and Mr Hastings has decided it was no longer a viable business and shut it down. what's confusing about that, and how it was applied to this conversation?
it's like we just want to argue and not actually have a conversation
I think your are missing the GPs point. Netflix, of course, started with mailing dvds and recently ended it. As far as I know, it was always profitable. Unfortunately being profitable is not the same as "worth investing", investors are chasing the highest returns and won't invest in something with a low return on investment.
You are kind moving the goal posts with your first statement "If that was profitable, the service you describe would not have shuttered." and this one.
The trend has been clear for a long time. The future is a streaming, not physical media. Profitability is necessary but not sufficient to be a successful business over the long term, you also need to grow and change according to market dynamics, otherwise you will find yourself dead.
This article is all about how streaming is a big money loser for almost everyone. So it has growth without profitability. I'd rather have profitability without growth.
No, I'm not missing the point. Yes, I said profitable. But let's all agree that profitable doesn't just mean making one dollar more than all of your expenses. By definition, that's making money which is technically profitable, but that's not what anyone would consider a profitable business. So while technically right might be the best right, it's technically useless in this conversation and does nothing to actually move the conversation in a positive direction.
Saying that a company is profitable but not worth the investment is not going to solve the streaming is our only option. We are looking for a solution other than streaming that is still legal so that people do not have to resort to pirating. If you are suggesting that a service providing shiny round discs through the mail or any other brick&mortar Blockbuster or mom&pop video rental solution is going to be profitable to the point of sustaining a business, then there's a bit of realism that needs to be brought back into the conversation. This seems to not be wanted and instead point back to me not understanding what words mean.
Because people don’t know how to pirate anymore. Circa 2000 everyone I knew was pirating everything. There is no Kazaa or bearshare or Napster anymore.
And even I'm kinda warry of using bittorrent... Usenet is fine from legal stand-point for sourcing my linux distros. But networks where you share got enough legal trolls to make want not bother. And I don't consume enough linux distros to make any special setups.
It is amazing what wealth of linux distros are out there for the taking. And in many cases that's the only way to get them since no one is willing to sell those linux distros to you anymore.
Wikipedia is doing the same.