• 1 Post
Joined 1Y ago
Cake day: Jun 02, 2020


Vivaldi let in the choice of the user how much privacy like to have

And Firefox doesn’t? What is the difference? What is it about privacy that Vivaldi “gives you an option for” and Firefox doesn’t?

Privacy? What do you think how many lines of the script of FF or forks are pointing to Google?

With Firefox I can check. With Vivaldi I can’t check. Vivaldi may have thousands of lines pointing to Google for all we know (though I’m sure that’s not true, it’s an example).

Their code also is financed by Google,

Google pays Mozilla to keep them as the default search engine. Don’t make it sound like Google controls everything that goes in the source code of Firefox. Also even if they did, as I said before, Firefox is open source, so I can check.

Search a degoogled Geck Engine, and Gecko also is at the end of possibilities and also FF in the future go to Blink, this is a fact.

I don’t understand what this sentence means nor why it is a “fact”.

You’re really missing my point here on purpose just to defend Vivaldi. If it’s so good, so much better than Firefox, so much more private, with 0 references to Google in the code, then why isn’t it FOSS so I can see for myself? You haven’t given me a single reason for why it shouldn’t be FOSS. Repeating “Vivaldi better than Firefox” doesn’t answer my question.

it does not help you that the code is open, if you are not a programmer and then it will not be easy for you to review sometimes millions of lines of code to see where they point (try them with the FF code)

And that is when you rely on the community for that. As long as 1 programmer can see what’s up and explain it to the rest with proof from the source, we are all up to date with everything that’s going on behind the scenes. That’s why we have Ungoogled Chromium and LibreWolf. That is why there was so much commotion when Brave some referral links (or whatever it was, I don’t remember), they were visible in the source code. This is not possible with Vivaldi.

You may say there’s no advantages to something being FOSS, but you’re not saying there’s any disadvantages either. I say there’s many advantages to FOSS, like the one I said above. Therefore I remain convinced that FOSS is better than proprietary in most circumstances (including Vivaldi).

You gave a bunch of valid examples about FOSS projects not necessarily being trustable just because they’re FOSS. They are still FOSS though. People can see how things work and if there’s anything shady that’s happening. As I said before you don’t have to be a programmer for this; If the project is popular there’s bound to be people who’re gonna examine it for you. It’s not automatically better, but it’s an extra level of trust towards the devs.

Any app, FOSS or not, is only as good as the community or company behind it

Yeah, and if an app is proprietary the community’s quality is gonna suffer.

Vivaldi makes money from search engines and default bookmarks. Making it FOSS will not change that. Yes, someone will make a fork and strip all that stuff from the browser. No, it’s not gonna be as popular as Vivaldi. LibreWolf does not have as many users as Firefox and Ungoogled Chromium does not have as many users as Chrome.

Vivaldi features are implemented because of upvoted user requests, for this it’s wrong to say that nobody need this.

I didn’t say that. I said the target users of FF and Chrome don’t need them, so Google and Mozilla have no motivation to “fork” (much less “kill”) Vivaldi.

you will like the webpanel, where you can have some social media, Wiki or something else, while you have two or more webs in mosaic view in the screen, taking notes with markup or past them from the context menu, which is, like everything in Vivaldi, customizable You can stack the tabs in tree and save them as session, or hibernate them to save memory, You have a screenshot tool for part or the whole page, clock with pomodoro timer, menu with page actions and filters, own sync encrypted end2end, page translation which is not from Google translate, you can quit all Google APIs in the settings if you want

  1. Wow that is a lot of bloat.
  2. Yes, half of that stuff comes built in to Firefox and the other half is, as I said, available through extensions. Extensions which themselves are also open source. Firefox comes with a lot more features than you seem to think, just saying.
  3. Google and Mozilla aren’t targeting people who need these features. And even then it wouldn’t hurt the Vivaldi team to make it open source under a copyleft license, as far as I know.

As I say, try it, it don’t bite you.

I have tried Vivaldi, I know it’s deal. It was my main browser when I first started my power user journey and was for a long time. It was only like a year ago that I switched to Firefox because I started to care more about open source and privacy.

Chrome and FF currently intends to imitate some functions from Vivaldi (with poor results), like Tree Tabs, tabstacking, note function, split screen view, web panel, etc.

No lmao they’re not trying. They don’t need to do that. Most people don’t want these features.

Most people just want something that works, and Chrome and Firefox accomplish that easily already. They don’t need to go around copying “power user features”. Power users are not their target market.

When you say they’re trying to imitate the features, maybe you mean extensions or addons that emulate something similar. And even then IMO these extensions are better than Vivaldi’s implementations. They’re a lot more customizable and modular.

What do you think if they can make a browser like Vivaldi?

If they wanted to, they would have already. They don’t want that though. Chrome wants to target the average user, while Firefox both targets the average user along with the more privacy-conscious people who want a more open web.

Look at how many FF forks have existed, Mozilla is a great company that can afford it as it is also supported by Google

Afford what? They’re not losing anything. They still develop the main browser. Forks don’t cost anything.

and how many different Chromium Browsers there were, and how many of these forks are currently abandoned and dead.

Well then you’re proving the point yourself. The forks aren’t “dead because Google has more money”. They’re dead because the original is more popular, because it’s better maintained by a team. If Vivaldi keeps up and has the original maintained correctly, no fork is gonna win over them.

You haven’t refuted anything since my point was in the first sentence I wrote, not the second one.

They could always re-license with a copyleft license. Then, if a big company forks the browser, Vivaldi can still use the modifications and improve the original version. I can’t see how that’d be suicide


You proved the point yourself. Not using javascript isn’t gonna change a thing.

Also no one really thinks about that guy when they hear javascript lmao

Well that’s certainly one way to miss the point lmaooo

Extra key right to left shift + return key is different

See here in the wiki, you have to export NNN_ARCHIVE. Then when you try to open it an archive you get the additional option to mount.

It uses archivemount under the hood (it’s gonna ask you to install it), and I guess this tool can also be used with other file managers. I’m gonna see if there’s some snippet to use it with the one I use (lf), or I’ll make one. I don’t know how I’ve been living without this for so long haha it’s gonna be so useful

EDIT: Ok I didn’t read the other response haha. nnn seems to be what youre looking for. Also archivemount can mount archives and so it’s file manager agnostic :P

I found this for 7z. Disclaimer: I haven’t tried it. Note that the readme seems to be outdated since it says nodejs while it’s actually rust.

As for a more general purpose file manager with this feature, I think there isn’t. But it’s such a good idea I don’t know why it hasn’t been made yet. Maybe make an issue about it in your favorite file manager’s issue tracker? You may even get a better alternative from the dev/community.

Or maybe the tool I linked above could be extended with other formats, and then that can be used from within existing file managers. Not as smooth but it could work I guess.

Do share if you find a better alternative!

Yoooooo hell yeah we have a cubing community!

Personally haven’t been cubing a lot lately… I was mainly a speedcuber but only got to sub-25 (pb 12s). I “mained” the GTS2M (you can probably judge by that the time I stopped speedcubing) but when I’m casually solving (like lately) I like to use the GTS.

Despite being only sub-25, I know full CFOP (all OLL and PLL) though everytime I take big breaks in cubing I tend to forget some OLLs haha. Learning algs is one of my favorite things about cubing.

I can also do BLD but I’m terrible at it. I have something like 30% success rate and can’t get down from 5 minutes. I’ve been practicing it more now that I’m not as into speedcubing, but it’s not a constant practice either. Last time I even tried was probably more than 3 months ago.

So lately if I ever find myself bored I take get my GTS and do some casual solves. If I’m feeling really inspired I practice BLD. I might get more into again it if I see lots of posts from this community though haha :P

as Facebook made a deal with mobile ISPs to have Facebook access not count towards the data-cap

This is so annoying. The internet here is pretty much only the most Popular Apps nowadays. Very hard to move to other platforms (and convince friends & family to switch too) when they literally cost more money to use >:/

“Why use Signal Matrix, when WhatsApp is free?” Ugh

You could patch your ROM to add signature spoofing with Nanodroid’s patcher. I had success with it on my Redmi Note 8 back when I used stock LineageOS.

It may not be supported on your phone/Android version though. Also make sure to read the important parts of Nanodroid’s README if you plan on using it to install microG too. Ask me if you need any help with the process!

A FOSS Music app that’s as good as Musicolet. I got too used to its queue system that now I can’t use any other music app that does it the more “traditional” way. Also multi-select, menus, options and search are just too well done in this app. Literally the best IMO.

The fact that it does so much and is still ad-free and mostly donation-based (iirc) also always makes me reconsider if going full-FOSS is actually worth it at all. It just feels like it was built with so much care… Similar to other non-FOSS apps I used to use.

I guess not everything that’s proprietary sucks

Maybe you can run one of those crazy nmap scans to see what it is?

Or maybe it’s a better idea to figure out why it’s happening in the first place instead hmm

It’s all subjective. You can’t just call the other side of your opinion a “rumour”. I completely understand not liking Arch but you’re making it out to be terrible when it isn’t really


Not liking a distro is one thing but saying it’s unpolished is something different

A voice channel (or “call” if you wanna equate them) with no people won’t use any “tons of bandwidth” though. There’s literally no data being transferred. A voice stream doesn’t even have to be allocated (or whatever the right terminology is for that).

EDIT: actually, you can just keep a call open indefinitely. I’m in a room that does this regularly. People hop in and out all the time.

That’s interesting, I’ve never experimented with that. Still, people want an obvious equivalent to Discord voice channels. Calls aren’t voice channels, no matter how much you want them to be the same. At a technical level they’re the same yes, but the UX is completely different.

Hell you could even say all they need to do to implement voice channels is at the client level because the server already kind of supports it through the Jitsi calls.