I’d be very curious to know how much cheaper it is. Sure, there’s R&D to integrate that with everything, but that cost is split across all units sold. It feels like the actual sensors, at this scale, can’t add a significant amount to the final price.
I won’t argue with the ups and downs of each technos, but I recently looked into docker swarms and it was all I expected kubernetes to be, without the hassle. And I could also get a full cluster with services restored from scratch in 30s. But I am obviously biased towards it, too :)
I don’t like the approach of piling more things on top of even more things to achieve the same goal as the base, frankly speaking. A “local” kubernetes cluster serve no purpose other than incredible complexity for little to no gain over a mere docker-compose. And a small cluster would work equally well with docker swarm.
A service, even made of multiple parts, should always be described that way. It’s easy to move “up” the stack of complexity, if you so desire. Having “have a k8s cluster with helm” working as the base requirement sounds insane to me.
Deployment instructions start with the prerequisite that you have a full kubernetes cluster with ingress laying around, so… yeah. It looks like it’ll be on the heavy side.
Just checked the part about self-hosting. While it’s probably possible to handle things with a less heavy approach, their only “easy to use” example right now is to have a full-blown kubernetes cluster at hand or run locally in the source directory. That’s a bit much.
Servo
Hm. Did not know about that. Interesting, thanks.
Depends on where you are. In my country, 50k (€) a year could lend you your own individual house, fit all basic needs, and leave a fair amount for leisure.
You think the heads salaries/bonus/lobbying budget will be the first to get axed if google money goes away?
No idea, I’m not that obsessed with it. But do note that “The developers of these apps provided info about their data sharing practices to an app store. They may update it over time.” and “Data sharing practices may vary based on your app version, use, region, and age.”
The recent changes to Firefox terms of use (well, their introduction really) was supposedly meant to appease some regional lawmakers. Maybe it is a regional thing. Maybe they changed it again. Maybe it’s, as often with store page update, rolled out progressively to people (in either direction, whether it’s adding or removing these terms).
The point is, that’s neither a “Google” operation to put Firefox in a bad light, nor a Mozilla operation to… do whatever it is they’re doing these days. It’s just a regular message. Which, reading a lot of the replies here, is something that have to be said.
Have you read all the other replies? “Google mad”, “Google putting Firefox in the dirt”, “False info”, etc.
Yes, I agree. That’s why I’m weirded out by people saying “Firefox bad, use Librewolf” and the like.
I still think a solution that relies on donation (maybe with some corporate support) would be very good for everyone involved. Unfortunately, Mozilla is not a player in this, so we’re stuck with basically three engines, one that can’t be used, one that’s openly hostile, and one that’s becoming hostile.
Not great.
Can’t wait for /r/outoftheloop post asking “trump exposes tesla cars in the white house, what does it mean?”
That’s a regular notification, which would happen for any application whose data policy is changed on the Play Store page. These policy are as declared by the app publisher. This would be the same for any application that didn’t check that “sharing data with third party” box earlier, then checked it later on.
There’s no need to reduce Firefox marketshare. Most people don’t even consider using anything else than whatever is default in their device.
Also, it’s not a Google scare tactic or a flex. Every application on the Play Store must disclose the general outlines of their data policy, including the sharing of data. Lying with those checkbox is not a good idea but they are completely informative and put there by the publishing party, so the people responsible for publishing Firefox on mobile just updated these, and this is what is shown when an app publisher say their app is sharing data with third parties.
tl;dr: it’s very likely that not a single soul at Google even looked at this, as this is just the regular behavior of the Play Store with apps that changes their data policy or indicate sharing user data with third parties.
Frankly speaking, calling out Google and Chrome, then moving to Firefox while Mozilla have been doing it’s best Google impression for years now is not that great of a plan.
I wonder how long Firefox will be ok with all that, since Mozilla bought that advertisement business a while ago.
This kind of statement have way less impact when people already have 0 goodwill toward the one that says it.
Tech definitely is. Gate-keeping, stupid pricing, etc. done by few corporations and individual isn’t.
I’m not going to enumerate them, mostly because I did not keep track of which one was on and which one was off before messing all of them up. If you’re curious, open “about:config” and search for “survey*.enabled”, “collect*.enabled”. Even with all settings disabled, some of them remains on, and they do cause traffic to the (documented) endpoints.
Yes, you can disable the settings that are exposed to you with a checkbox. How about all the other that have no checkboxes and you can find by snooping around in either the code or about:config ?
Some people bought scam pins/portable assistant that is actually a butchered phone thing, so, yeah.