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?

Why do you assume they haven’t warned Mozilla in advance?

Also, Mozilla was fully aware that what they were doing is in breach of GDPR. I find it extremely hard to believe that the makers of Firefox are not fully familiarized with it by now.

Last but not least Mozilla is doing this for financial gain. It’s selling pur data to advertisers. Why should we excuse it? It’s a very hostile act.

If Mozilla has hit rock bottom and has been reduced to selling our data to survive then that’s that. We’ll find another way and another FOSS browser. Accepting it is not an option.

So what, are we giving Mozilla a free pass to do anything now? Is the new bar “not quite as shitty as Google”?

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.

Any PC can do that, it’s called “status after power off” or something like that.

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.

TBF in most cases forced app obsolescence is on the developers. Some of them are super aggressive and will force you to update without really needing it. Like, come on, package tracking app, I really don’t believe you’re unable to show me the package pick-up barcode without updating. 🙄

But yeah, on iOS it’s completely impossible to get older versions, once you’ve updated something that’s it. And even on Android I’ve noticed that it’s become impossible to downgrade some apps even if I have the old apk, the Google installer simply fails to install it if I’ve ever had a newer version installed.

In the olden days software used to be sold by individual major versions. You paid for version 9, you paid for version 10. Or you skipped versions you didn’t need. You could use versions side by side. The newest installed would import its data from the older ones. etc.

App stores have made this very awkward or almost impossible. There’s no concept of separating major versions. You’d have to buy and install completely different apps to be able to pay for them separately and to use them side by side, but if they’re separate apps they can’t import your data from each other. Not to mention that people seem to hate having “too many apps” for some reason.

Software subscriptions switch the “support per major version” to “support per time of use”. It’s obviously shittier but it’s more realistic than a one-time price and expecting to use the app in all future versions in perpetuity. The one time price would have to be very large to be realistic.

It’s impossible to tell how meaningful Backblaze’s numbers are because we don’t know the global failure rate for each model they test, so we can’t calculate the statistical significance. Also there are other factors involved like the age of the drives and the type of workload they were used for.

buying more reliable devices can definitely save you time and headache in the future by having to deal with failures less frequently.

That’s a recipe for sorrow. Don’t waste time on “reliability” research, just plan for failure. All HDDs fail. Assume they will and backup or replicate your data.

Any difference you personally experience between the three big brands is meaningless. For any failed HDD you have there’s going to be another person who swears by them and has had five of them running for 10 years without a hitch.

But whatever’s cheaper in your area and stop worrying. Your reliability should be assured by backups anyway not by betting on a single drive. Any drive can fail.

For home setup you don’t care because you should have either redundancy or backup (preferably both).

So that typically means buying the cheapest HDD that’s new and from one of the established brands (Seagate, Western Digital, Toshiba) that’s in the correct size for your needs, and you can afford to buy it at least twice (for the aforementioned backups or redundancy), or even thrice, and replace as soon as needed.

In other words there’s no need to speculate on how long an HDD will last, you simply replace it when needed.

Please also note that HDDs over 10 TB are starting to get increasingly replaced with enterprise models which run hotter and make more noise.

I doubt they intend to mine it. For the Russian state is easier to acquire Bitcoin by hacking wallets than mining, and the plebs can’t afford the electricity.

Trading is trading and they’d be risking sanctions whether they take payment with Swift or Bitcoin.

They had some sort of point-based scheme, nuf said. It was so monumentally stupid I can’t even describe it without getting upset.

You forgot to mention the absolutely idiotic way kmanga works.

This is not a new problem, .internal is just a new gimmick but people have been using .lan and whatnot for ages.

Certificates are a web-specific problem but there’s more to intranets than HTTPS. All devices on my network get a .lan name but not all of them run a web app.

7 was actually surprisingly well optimized. It ran OK on an office PC with 512 MB of RAM and a 512 MHz CPU.

You wouldn’t use it like that because by that time apps like browsers and office were starting to feel restricted by that little RAM to the point you could only run either or. But the OS itself stayed out of the way as much as possible, and if you gave it just a little more RAM (like 1 GB) suddenly you had a usable office machine.

But you only have two kidneys, how will you buy a third Mac?

Macs are outrageously priced for the hardware you get.

Non-Apple laptops can be just as reliable and last just as long nowadays, and you get to upgrade them at a fraction of the cost. Actually I should say you get to upgrade them, period.