How do you avoid interaction if it’s being done automatically by your machine when you open up a print dialog, and if malicious servers can use the same names as legit printers?
How do you avoid interaction if it’s being done automatically by your machine when you open up a print dialog, and if malicious servers can use the same names as legit printers?
Exactly.
The reason most companies decide to contribute to FOSS is because it’s a lot more efficient to fix bugs and add/influence features upstream than to do it at your end of the code independently of everybody else.
I use whatever online storage service I want because you can add your own encryption layer so you only sync encrypted files. rclone supports lots of services and will also encrypt files for you.
You don’t have to install drivers or CUPS on client devices. Linux and Android support IPP out of the box. Just make sure your CUPS on the server is multicasting to the LAN.
You may need to install Avahi on the server if it’s not already (that’s what does the actual multicasting). The printer(s) should then auto magically appear in the print dialogs on apps on Linux clients and in the printer service on Android.
On Linux it may take a few seconds to appear after you turn it on and may not appear when it’s off. On Android it shows up anyways as long as the CUPS server is on.
From what I understand OP’s images aren’t the same image, just very similar.
Jesus gets crucified.
Any PC can do that, it’s called “status after power off” or something like that.
I mean, the process is not dying in either gif, so…
Isn’t it fourth?
Mozilla has already shipped strict privacy mode by default in recent versions of Firefox so they’re already a leg up on this.
Google is currently trying to transition people to its own proprietary method of tracking (where the browser itself tracks you) so they would love it if third party cookies were no longer usable for that.
Mozilla has also added a direct tracking feature (anonimized) to Firefox btw. Not sure what their agenda is.
Websites are irrelevant, if third party cookies stop working in major browsers there’s no point in setting them anymore, they’ll be ignored.
Bayesian filters are statistical, they have nothing to do with machine learning.
You should consider if you really want to integrate your application super tightly with the HTTP protocol.
Will it always be used exclusively over a REST-ful HTTP API that you control, and it has exactly one hop to the client, or passes through hops that can be trusted to never alter the HTTP metadata significantly? In that case you can afford to make HTTP codes semantically relevant for your app.
But maybe you need to pass data through multiple different types of layers and different mechanisms (socket protocols, pub-sub, file storage etc.) In that case you want all your semantics to be independent from any form of transport.
It’s a perfectly fine way of doing things as long as it’s consistent and the spec is clear.
HTTP is a transport layer. You don’t have to use its codes for your application layer. It’s often done that way but it’s not the only way.
In the example above the transport layer is saying “OK I’ve delivered your output” which is technically correct. It’s not concerned with logical errors inside what it was transporting, just with the delivery itself.
If any client app is blindly converting body to JSON without checking (at the very least) content type and size, they deserve what they get.
If you want to make it part of your API spec to always return JSON that’s one thing, but don’t do it to make up for poorly written clients. There’s no end of ways in which clients can fail. Sticking to a clear spec is the only way to preserve your sanity.
Endeavour differs very little from Arch once you’re past the installer. To the point I’ve never understood why it’s a standalone distro instead of an optional Arch installer, as an alternative to/part of archinstall.
Oh definitely, Manjaro is all about “mommy knows best”. It’s why people who say “you should use Arch instead of Manjaro” are completely missing the point.
Technically, Manjaro used Arch exactly as intended, leveraging its flexibility, but it’s very ironic that it used it to remove said flexibility. I’m guessing it’s why some Arch fans feel betrayed and hate Manjaro.
Yeah you don’t want your computer to be stable for 5 years going, that’s very un-Arch.
I like to call it Arch for the lazy.
And let’s not forget Cortana.