This just isn’t general interest technology news, especially since it’s for a vaporware (crowdfunding) product. Might be ok on /arduino or something.
Here’s USB PD to 12 volts (other voltages available too), just wire it to the breadboard:
I know perfectly well what breadboards are. I even remember the Continental Specialties brand. They have power supply strips, like the ones on the edges in this pic. You connect power there.
This is spammy and there are already plenty of USB-C power conversion gadgets, e.g. on Adafruit. No crowdfunding needed.
You mean RPL? There are lots of interpreters for that already. That’s the sort of thing to write because you want to write it, not because other people want it, unless you’re part of a community that is asking for it.
If you just want to implement an interpreter because language implementation interests you, I suggest Lisp or Scheme rather than something like RPL. The book “Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs” explains how to do that and it is great. You can read it online at mitpress.mit.edu/sicp .
I use TB under Debian and there is a tray icon and an arrival notification, poll time of maybe a few minutes, seems fine. Showing the # of messages in the tray icon could be sort of handy I guess, though I had never thought about it before and didn’t miss it. Basic features = shut off the “email contains remote content” banner or “spam filter thinks this email is spam” (I can recognize spam for myself). I just want a preference that permanently disables remote content without throwing banners at me. And eliminate the client side spam filtering completely since I have that on the server side, and can manually flag any that gets through. Plus various other stuff like that. Yes, get rid of the calendar and contacts stuff. Biggest feature needing significant code changes: make message search not suck.
This doesn’t really seem like something that needed to be done. Thunderbird already has too many features. It needs less, not more. A bunch of stuff in the email client part is also badly designed. That needs fixing, preferably upstream, but I wouldn’t think of that as feature enhancement.
I don’t bother with a proxy host or with LetsEncrypt, though I guess you could use LetsEncrypt perfectly well. Back when I was doing this, LetsEncrypt didn’t exist and you had to actually pay for public certificates, so using locally generated free ones saved money. It also had a minor(?) security advantage in that if the private server key somehow leaked, it wouldn’t let people impersonate our internet domain.
For the private CA I simply used the crappy CA.pl script that comes with OpenSSL or did at the time. There are much better ways to do it, especially at any kind of scale, but CA.pl sufficed dealing with a few development machines.
Proxy host out on the public internet? Usually I just use a local private CA for this, and install the CA root in my browser.
E5 because it supportsECC memory.
There are in fact many extensions designed to suppress or rewrite headers, most notably cookies, but also proxy headers and other things like that. Stripping out privacy invading (or in this case revenue redirecting) query parameters is another thing that extensions can do, and there are various extensions for that too, including apparently ublock origin (UBO).
UBO is not able to rewrite urls completely (a deliberate decision to protect users from accidental or intentional security breaking rules appearing in rule lists) but there are other extensions that do that too, like changing www.reddit.com to old.reddit.com, or bypassing google redirects and link shorteners that snoop on user activity. The web is a predator-prey ecosystem (users are mostly prey) and it is necessary to respond to new hazards as they appear.
Thanks, I have that too I think. It’s great for sharing from my phone. On my laptop I have a python script that is a lot fancier that I’d like to rewrite as a browser extension someday.
Thanks! I saw the GH issue about that but didn’t figure out that it had been deployed.
Hmm, I thought ublock origin could only block links, not rewrite them. Am I missing something? I just looked through the docs and only see block/allow/noop rules, and I remember reading something a while back about how the devs didn’t want to rewrite. I’d love to have a pointer to the docs about how to do this if I’m wrong. Thanks ;)
Added: https://old.reddit.com/r/uBlockOrigin/comments/b9tdky/rule_for_redirecting_urls_to_cleaner_ones/ points to some github issues related to this.
Oh nice, that is pretty new, but will have to see if it works on those gumroad links. I have an offline script (not a browser extension, I haven’t bothered figuring out how to write those) that edits urls to remove tracking and it’s quite a pain, since there are dozens of sites and tracking schemes it has to know about. Also, rather than creating a pasteable url, a suitable browser extension should just rewrite the link automatically before navitation when you click on it.
We need browser extensions to kill those tags automatically.
They had 1000s of hours of fuzz testing. Model checking means something different.
I wonder whether some careful specifications and model checking could have found this.
I don’t know of such limitations and I’ve done some screen recording that way. But yeah the CLI options are confusing. The wiki (trac.ffmpeg.org) and libera irc channel #ffmpeg both help.
TSMC uses the same lithography and same wafers and gets working chips. It’s the fab process. Is it fixable? Idk.
If you had something hog memory and a lot of other stuff got paged out of ram as a result, that can slow things down. Try running “top” and see how much swap space is in use. If it’s more than a little bit, once you have enough memory available by shutting off whatever was hogging it, try “swapoff” (pages the stuff back in, which can take a little while) followed by “swapon” to re-enable swap.