>>107544309
>not doing both

File: 1764795431105574.jpg (100 KB, 1200x630)

100 KB JPG

>>107544309
It depends on how much time you've got. I prefer to do it all myself. I write down every change I make so I can easily revert it. Most forks are based on custom configurations that are available on GitHub and many of them explain every change they make so you can take inspiration from them. Stuff like Betterfox, Arkenfox etc.

Like the other anon said, you can do both. In fact, depending on which changes a fork imports, you likely will have to. Mozilla won't stop slopping up their browser with all kinds of features that hinder more than they help, and I'm not just talking about the AI stuff. Still, as long as the option to disable them is in there, I won't complain too much.

>>107544309
Because the current logo is ugly.

>>107544309
Let me answer with a question:
Is it a fox or a red panda? Because a firefox is a red panda, but the Firefox logo is clearly a fox. Does that make any sense? Is that what we deserve after phoenix and firebird? Do you really want to use a browser that lies to you?

>>107545005
What you mean is respond, not answer.

>>107541140
>>107516522
It's a slippery slope
One day you're enjoying life as a normie, the next thing you know, you're an AnCap Tankie
>Piracy is theft
>Adblock is theft
>Advertising is theft
>Taxation is theft
>Property is theft

>>107535555
This is a worse ratio than Swagbucks. Browsers and adblockers should always be kept separate because all browsers are ad platforms.

>>107516493

which of these block the new fucking "subscribe" overlay on the lower right of every channel on youtube, even if you're already subscribed?

its like a fuckin constant watermark overlay that makes no sense

>>107544679
If you're open to it, try Freetube. It gets rid of all the bloat that bothers people about YouTube. It even gives you the option to view the video from YouTube or invidious and/or download it directly

File: what-was-that-OP.png (15 KB, 830x185)

15 KB PNG

>>107516493
that is a WHOLE LOT OF SHIT i'm not going to do when adguard does this for me

>>107538164
OK tell me what to buy then

>>107540743
I'm worried the tracks might become too good

liftoff

>>107540405
>what is absolutely insane is that this was produced in 1990 (Correction: december 1989 actually), that was the time in music where tune didn't matter as much as beat and grooves. This belter was just something else, and still is.
fucking goobers, even now you have self-proclaimed experts going on about chord progressions and not saying much about melodies

How the hell does one work on multiple tracks with a bunch of hardware synths?

>>107544354
its cucked, compromised, agenda'd

>>107544381
"I'm proud to be a right-wing!"

>>107544370
>its cucked, compromised, agenda'd
They have been vote-rigged and supported for the democrats since 2008

It's pretty good if you use the pro models
That picture must be from years ago cause image gen hasn't worked like that for a while

>>107545174
shabbat shalom

please respond

>>107544945
>>>/biz/

>>107544577
same, i'd love to sell but no idea where

>>107544577
Maybe in the current market having spare RAM is a good thing if your current hardware fails.

I'm going to go on record and say that we should have been executing people who said "chill" and the likes back when people initially complained about the PCIE lane requirement for NVMEs.
Those people, today have been vindicated.

We should still be executing people who cover for NVMEs, in the street.

>>107539277
People like this are the types who should have had it done on camera is basically what I'm saying.

>>107537160
I already do bitch
>t. 6 NVME drives, 4 in RAID 0 in an expansion card
It makes zero difference having my GPU in the 8x slot

>>107541548
your izzat is lost, bro. stop coping

>>107545139
izzat so?

File: froggo XD.jpg (145 KB, 1024x1024)

145 KB JPG

>>107542424

>>107542424
you're right. but also, foss is dominated by autocratic trannies. that's the part you left out fren

File: c5YquiBG.png (21 KB, 235x178)

21 KB PNG

>runs FL Studio, AutoCAD, Office, Photoshop
I literally don't give a single fuck. GNU/Linux just works for me, it gets the job done.
The three times I tried to use Windows I had bad experience. The last one (Windows 8.1) was complete garbage, slow as fuck and bloated to the core. I imagine that Win 10 and 11 must be even worse.

>>107542505
This.
I want none and have no need for any of those programs.
>FL Studio
Run fine in Wine, but Reaper and LMMS are just as good.
>AutoCAD
FreeCAD, Blender with Plugins, and BR-CAD
>Office
LibreOffice
>Photoshop
GIMP

>MatLab
GNU Octave

>>107540449
>China will continue to take the nothing that America gives them and like it.
Didn't Trump just sign a deal that undoes the last like 5 years of tech embargoes the US was trying to enforce on china?
Your president is blatantly open to bribery and China has deep pockets, they can probably take whatever they want.

>>107534418
Imagine chips monopoly, probably worst than now.

File: 1749050281482217.jpg (1.73 MB, 1280x6846)

1.73 MB JPG

>>107536174
I am eternally thankful for Deus Ex redpilling me on the Reds all the way back in 2000

File: delusional.jpg (33 KB, 524x391)

33 KB JPG

>>107538940
>Tariffs are a thing of the past

>>107534917
>Check prices on amazon to see if this anon is right
>Cheapest 32gb set of RAM that doesn't take months to arrive costs 400€

>>107542256
Russian subhuman scum.

>>107543620
Good. She must have asked for it.

>>107534210
it's a flat line made exclusively of things they can find on the ground.

File: 1751741610549.jpg (28 KB, 640x480)

28 KB JPG

>>107535885
>>107536126
>>107536389
>>107543387
I WAS IN THE POOL!!!

>>107534210
MODS!!!
I CAN SEE HIS BBC!!!

File: 1762465892968559.jpg (97 KB, 1079x1057)

97 KB JPG

>>107544980
I've been looking through /g/'s good sites archive and I'm not yet sure, I'm leaning towards building a multisearch that connects every search engine and just spamming the same search across all of them. Anyway, the reason I'm bringing up the good sites thing is because I found this and it seems close to what I want: https://www.faganfinder.com/

I can't be the only one who remembers it as faggotfinder kek

>Also, the most recent good sites pasta I found: https://rentry.org/good-sites

>The /g/ archive, on this topic:
https://igwiki.lyci.de/wiki/Search_engines

>The pasta that keeps getting posted, just to get it out of the way:
>Why not just stick with Google?
Search engines are a biased window into the web. We want to filter out SEO and discover actual interesting webpages.
>SHIT tier alternatives
duckduckgo.com

Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.

>>107544980
There are none left. They all suck. Yandex used to be good, but the Russians completely butchered it.

>>107545122
I forgot to mention, but this wiki page helps in understanding what index/backend each search engine uses: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_search_engines

>>107544058
Just use firefox at this point

>>107544105
Because firefox is full of telemetry trackers you dumb fucking faggot. Please go back to using chrome, all of you dont know shit about online privacy.

>>107545036
I use Brave.

>>107545066
How's the weather in Mumbai?

>>107545099
Dusty

>>107544853
>>107544817
Nvm I realised you were talking about Firefox's chrome not the Chrome browser

>>107543056
>>107543302
they dont have any plans for that yet. theyre focusing on making a working browser first. later on they will differentiate, which is fine because its not for end-users at all yet, its a big project after all

>>107544747
and those apps are just a webview, running the website

>>107543056
It's a noble effort by somebody to keep himself productive as a way of staying away from drugs. As far as the premises of it being actually usable, maybe one day it will be if he continues to work on it, but it's not going to see widespread adoption, not even remotely coming close to something like Firefox.

>>107544853
answering your question, vivaldi modified the source for tabs yes. I'm guessing edge had to too for its vertical tabs. it's why I said to build on vivaldi

>>107544821
>For that to happen all timestamps in the .tar have to be the same.
If it wasn't clear what I meant by that: I'm saying they have to have the same set of timestamps on all the files in the tarball, same user who created them, same tar and zstd version. E.g., for "aalib-1.4rc5-18-x86_64.pkg.tar.zst". A related topic is TorrentZip / trrntzip. That topic is: deterministically creating .tar or .tar.zst from a set of files. TorrentZip creates deterministic .zip files given one or more files as input; doesn't matter what OS or version of whatever you're using.

As >>107544794 said
>mirrors get their packages from syncing from another tier 1 or 2 mirror, etc
So only like one individual/team creates the .pkg.tar.zst - not multiple different computers creating the .tar.zst which usually means different .tar.zst as everyone has different file timestamps unless trying to make it the same.

>>107544839
>Most software
Huh, didn't know that.

>>107544846
>Check the checksum or verify the packages signature, that's what you actually care about.
True. That's what I was getting at by "determinism".

>>107544881
>For example, say there was a problem with a package. It would be completely valid to replace that package with a new problem-free version and to do it without bumping the package version (they wouldn't do that, they would of course bump the version but as long as the signature and checksums match then you know that it has come from Arch infrastructure)
I find this to be confusing. Oh, a problem package would be one which doesn't match to the checksum or .sig. No need to change the version as it's non-bit-identical one replaced with the correct bit-identical one.

>they wouldn't do that, they would of course bump the version
Also no really understanding this part.

>>107544903
>only like one individual/team creates the .pkg.tar.zst - not multiple different computers creating the .tar.zst which usually means different .tar.zst as everyone has different file timestamps
Necessarily the case, otherwise package.1.2.3.pkg.tar.zst.sig wouldn't verify in all mirrors.

>>107544976
I mean a problem as in a bug with application that requires a re-build of the package to happen. They could in theory do that without bumping the version number so your locally downloaded version is no longer the same as what's on the mirrors.

They would never do this, but hypothetically they could. The important thing is the checksums and signature matching, not what's in the files. It's the checksum and signature that tells you that the package you have downloaded in some way, shape or form originated from Archlinux infrastructure.

>>107544998
Now I understand.

>The important thing is the checksums and signature matching, not what's in the files.
A checksum like CRC32 or a hash (also referred to as a checksum I think) like SHA256 is based on the exact series of binary that the file is made of, so that part does matter for "what's in the files". Any change to the data at all = different hash. So if a .tar has the same files as another .tar but different timestamp(s) on the files in the .tar = different hash.

You probably already knew this.

Being honest with you, I don't currently know how to manually verify "abseil-cpp-20250512.1-1-x86_64.pkg.tar.zst.sig" to the corresponding .pkg.tar.zst file. Does it contain a SHA2 hash and/or a GPG thing which tells me I got it from a good source?

>>107545063
https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Pacman/Package_signing

Pacman uses GPG so I think you'd do something like this if you wanted to manually verify it:

gpg --verify "abseil-cpp-20250512.1-1-x86_64.pkg.tar.zst.sig"

GPG then reads the signature file and will tell you if it matches.
For example:

$ wget https://archive.archlinux.org/packages/a/abseil-cpp/abseil-cpp-20250512.1-1-x86_64.pkg.tar.zst{,.sig}
$ gpg --verify abseil-cpp-20250512.1-1-x86_64.pkg.tar.zst.sig 
gpg: assuming signed data in 'abseil-cpp-20250512.1-1-x86_64.pkg.tar.zst'
gpg: Signature made Tue 17 Jun 2025 16:30:48 UTC
gpg:                using RSA key F00B96D15228013FFC9C9D0393B11DAA4C197E3D
gpg: Can't check signature: No public key

Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.

Do people really want extensions with LLM-hallucinated code?