No, just different cron schedules. If I just reboot a machine the job doesn't get triggered, only if I start a machine after the cron schedule should have been triggered. To be fair, if I start two machines in these conditions this will happen too, but such situation is much more manageable than rebooting too machines in a short period of time.
Huh.... why would a CSS animation of a transform be slower than JS? This is strictly for the "CSS transform" case ofc - obviously pure webgl would be way faster.
I'm having a hard time seeing it. My experiments with CSS animation have always performed much better in CSS than JS (again, excluding it being pure webgl/canvas JS).
And ofc there's the nice bonus that it works if I haven't chosen to trust and whitelist their website for JS yet.
Oh. Sure, that is pretty obvious. A triangle in webgl is so much more lightweight than building it out of DOM elements but this was more about "if one is going to use this CSS system, why not support a pure CSS viewing mode" - which right now, it does not - rotation requires JS and is pretty stuttery. I was thinking it should actually be a bit smoother if there was a "toggle on/off rotation using a CSS animation" option. Plus, something like that could easily be done in pure CSS if JS was disabled, which would make the output all the more accessible and offer a good usecase.
It could also be helpful in scenarios where JS is restricted - emails? iframes? bulleting board user content? Dunno. Trying to come up with some that aren't just "nemo was running umatrix and doesn't trust your site just yet"
well, people do in fact still do that. or APNG or WEBP.
But, all I was focused on was the initial comment was on if you were going to use this particular tool, it'd be nice if it had a pure CSS rotate mode, which makes a fair amount of sense given "working without JS" is probably one of the few significant use cases anyway (unless, you reeeeeally need your model to be tightly integrated into the DOM for some reason).
So, saying that CSS would be worse than JS as a feature for this project did not really make sense. We weren't talking about "should the project even exist"
(I feel it should and it's awesome ;) )
Huh. Didn't know there were 2 non-JS interfaces. I get redirected to https://html.duckduckgo.com/html/ (which is also 10 per page).
I do appreciate that DDG has it at all. Google blocks all non-JS searches these days.
I've never noticed the challenge, but then, I don't think I've ever clicked 20 pages into the search results either. Usually if I've clicked on a couple of pages I feel it's time to refine my query..
I will say it's nice to have them actually honour keywords in searches that google has made harder and harder to discover and seems to ignore at will (inurl: site: etc)
The funniest one for me in google is +"foo" they decided people didn't actually mean it, so they changed it to +""foo"" - then when we all started doing that, they made the new secret "yes I really want that string" to be +"""foo"""
shrug not interested in stock market speculation. That ⅕th figure is from 2025 actual revenue figures. The government percentage had dropped from 2024 where it was ¼.
It's variable though, and if DoD decides it wants a bunch of spy satellites or whatnot in orbit, you could see the percentage growing, along with their total revenue ofc.
It's just far from "completely dependent" which was my only objection.
Starlink obviously a huge part - $11½b revenue in 2025.
uMatrix + NoScript personally (yes, seems silly, but I find NoScript's UI more convenient for script toggling, while liking uMatrix's fine grained controls)
Did you enable firefox resist fingerprinting?
Also maybe letterboxing, which I think is not enabled by that flag by default, and also helps with CSS fingerprinting.
It hasn't received updates in a good long while, but seems to work fine, for me anyway. Has some rough edges, logging blocks when there's a bunch of redirects is a bit of a pain, making it hard to fix whitelisting in complicated things (like the dozen domains microsoft uses for auth) but apart from that...
(and ofc there's a bunch of forks adding bugfixes, some even relatively recent in activity, but unfortunately none have become the blessed official maintainer)
Indeed. I've had my XCover 6 for 3½ years now. I've dropped it many times, on hard surfaces (like outdoor concrete/brick). I've undoubtedly been fortunate. the plastic has gouges in it. there's (small) scratches on the screen (some from my keys), but the screen is not cracked. When it is dropped the back and battery pop off, which I think helps dissipate the forces. BTW, for anyone trying to extend their phone life, I strongly recommend those magnetic USB connectors. Reduces wear and tear on the USB port, and is also kinda convenient for quick disconnect.
> I strongly recommend those magnetic USB connectors
Note that these connectors are in violation of USB standard and potentially harmful as they expose the pins in an unintended way. For instance, notice that all the connection on the USB port are not all the same length, it is a form of protection, to make sure the power lines are well connected before the data lines make contact. With magnetic USB connectors, you lose that feature, in addition to potential issues with ESD, short circuits, etc...
I have a friend who swears by them and never had a problem, but still, that's good to know.
> notice that all the connection on the USB port are not all the same length, it is a form of protection
This was noticeable on USB-A connectors when you look closely where the two outside pins were slightly longer than the two inside pins: the Make-First, Break-Last (MFBL) principle. You can also see the same thing on SATA edge connector pins.
Take care googling for photos because many are CAD mockups misinform (because they are drawn pretty incorrectly and show no physical length differences).
USB-C does have longer pins for the ground, and the CC (configuration channel) connects last. A USB-C host doesn't deliver power until it is negotiated using the CC pins.
So USB-C via a "magsafe" connector is safe.
But maybe look for the two outermost pins to be longer.
You mention ESD which could be riskier since charged fingers or worse could touch contacts directly. However the lip around the contacts is usually grounded so any spark should be grounded first. I would also assume modern electronics are well protected against ESD (nobody wants occasional undiagnosable failures leading to refunds). Sure that stuff from earlier this century wasn't so well protected. YMMV if you are a sparky person in a sparky environs: weigh the downside costs of different approaches appropriately.
At least the USB-C ones I purchase are not flush - I never found those to be reliable. It's a male prong that looks pretty much identical in wiring to the male prong on the phone, that connects to a female one plugged into the socket. That plus a bit of a collar to help hold it in place. So I don't see why there would be any difference in grounding, it's the same connection...
(that plus the comments from the more knowledgeable person below)
Eventually they start wearing out, and I just replace them. I've had no issues with high voltages (45W+ charging on phone and steamdeck) and with peripherals (hub for example).
You want to get everything grounded before the data wires connect. But that's more about the shroud than the pins as far as I understand it, and a magnetic connector could ensure grounding if it was designed to do so. And for charging purposes you could skip the data wires entirely.
At least on Android, when my Samsung Galaxy Note (I loved that phone - replaceable battery, pressure sensitive stylus, IR blaster, OLED, audio jack, water resistant - they went downhill from there IMO) finally end of lifed, I just used the official Samsung tool to upload a community image on it. The process wasn't horrendously difficult. I don't know if people would do it, but it was a clear set of steps that even a tech novice could accomplish if following carefully.
reply