It's still flakey, but with the open panthor driver things are working well.
It's usable as is.
By the time linux catches up hardware might be very expensive or missing completely.
So my thinking is buy now, use as is, and maybe later we get better software... The point is the 3588 can actually replace my X86 desktop for ALL purposes except Unity/Unreal which I am glad to not run.
On-Topic: Anything that good hackers would find interesting. That includes more than hacking and startups. If you had to reduce it to a sentence, the answer might be: anything that gratifies one's intellectual curiosity.
This is very interesting - engineering is tackling problems others have had to tackle before. With anything from drone economy to personal aircraft coming to life in the near future, to new gear being designed, somebody on HN is working on it.
I tried just yesterday with latest firefox and fedora, screen sharing didn't work out of the box. Only screen sharing by creating a virtual display worked, not sharing the current screen nor tab.
well, a browser owned (and de-owned) by an internet advertising company is enough for me not to ever touch that. We already have a chrome, which is one of the reasons we're in this mess to start with.
Well, System1 was/is a search aggregator. That falls under ad-tech but at the time no-one cared about the former and only the latter.
Lots of browsers make search engines and lots of search engines make browsers, so it made (and still does) make a lot of sense.
I understand seeing ad-tech and immediately expecting the worst, but a quick Look into what it actually meant and I never understood why people were so in arms about it?
Yeah, I'm pretty uncomfortable with Waterfox because of that episode. In the HN thread the creator responded to complaints about this privacy-unfriendly turn by saying that they "tried to stay away from branding Waterfox as" being about privacy or user control. That's fine, but an immediate turnoff for me even now that the advertising company is apparently out of the picture.
If Waterfox isn't about privacy or user control, who knows where it gets sold next or what the dev adds to it next?
Edit: I just realized that the dev is the one who wrote the grandparent comment. Maybe you have an explanation that would help?
Well the issue I’ve always found is that privacy is a sliding scale. At the time especially, everyone was after “absolute” privacy - i.e. everything Tor offers. But people were coming in to use Waterfox with that expectation and it wasn’t meeting it - but communicating how “much” privacy you’re being offered is difficult. I did settle on the current terminology and when people ask in user forums I try and make it clear that it’s a balance of usability and privacy - as much as possible without breaking websites.
Not sure I agree with your understanding wrt Waterfox not being about user control? Always has been and the feature set matches that and that hasn’t changed.
That might be so but he did highlight that he put work ahead of the family
> Most time goes to work, some to family.
I do two jobs, but do that _because_ I prioritize family life: I do my main (not remote) work only part time because that can't be done remotely, and do a second job (consulting, 90% remotely) on off days to make up the difference. I don't care about the money as long as we make do.
I agree up to a point, and I pay nearly 50% income tax.
In my opinion this free housing should be built within an acceptable commute ride from city centers, maybe up to 30' ride? And scattered all around, not creating any slums. Hard problem to solve, I'm sure.
Nowadays there are years long waiting lists for city housing because they have flats available in expensive areas, which I feel is not the best bang for buck from taxpayers perspective.
