I don’t see the commitment length? That info bubble is just an explanation of what they mean by “commitment”.

It even says so at the end of the bubble. What’s your point?

The browser can never know what information is needed for a certain use case. So it needs to be permissive in order to not break valid uses.

For instance, your list does not include the things a user clicks on the website. But that’s exactly the info I needed to log recently. A user was complaining that dropdowns would close automatically. We quickly reached the assumption that something was sending two click events. In order to prove that, I started logging the users’ clicks. If there were two in the same millisecond, then it’s definitely not a bug but a hardware (or driver or OS or whatever) issue.

At least these ancient versions won’t try to update in the middle of a sea fight.

TIL that the Higgs itself has mass.

On the contrary, websites are incredibly sandboxed. It’s damn near impossible to find out anything about the computer. Off the top of my head: Want to know where the file lives that the user just picked? Sure, it’s C:\fakepath\filename. Wanna check the color of a link to see if the user has visited the site before? No need to check. The answer will be ‘false’. Always.

First comment from the link:

Every time you open LinkedIn in a Chrome-based browser, LinkedIn’s JavaScript executes a silent scan of your installed browser extensions. The scan probes for thousands of specific extensions by ID, collects the results, encrypts them, and transmits them to LinkedIn’s servers.

That is very different from “searches their computer for installed software”

(top-left corner:) Hexensküche 1971

Riemann-Roch’scher Satz: der letzte Schrei: das Diagramm

[the chart and doodles]

ist kommutatif! [sic]

Um dieser Aussage über f: X→Y einen approximativen Sinn zu geben, musste ich nahezu zwei Stunden lang die Geduld der Zuhörer missbrauchen. Schwartz [sic] auf weiss [sic] (in Srpinger’s Lecture Notes) nimmt’s wohl an die 400, 500 Seiten.

Ein packendes Beispiel dafür, wie unser Wissens- und Entdeckungsdrang sich immer mehr in einem lebensentrückten logischen Delirium auslebt, während das Leben selbst auf tausendfache [not sure about that] Art zum Teufel geht – und mit endgültiger Vernichtung bedroht ist. Höchste Zeit, unsern Kurs zu ändern!

[illegible] 1971 Alexander Grothendieck

—————

I’m not sure if I can do the German idioms justice in English, but here’s an attempt at translating it:

Hell’s kitchen 1971

Riemann-Roch’s Theorem: the latest in-thing: The diagram

[the chart and doodles]

is commutative! In order to give any meaning to that statement about f: X→Y I had to abuse the audience’s patience for two hours. In written form (in Springer’s lecture notes) it takes about 400–500 pages.

A stunning example how our curiosity has taken to enjoying itself in a logical delirium, disconnected from reality [literally: life], while life itself is going to hell a thousand times over – and is on the brink of its final annihilation. It’s about time we changed course!

[illegible] 1971 Alexander Grothendieck

My cat has started using “vacuum” as a swear word

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/QyBhlvAAQDo

If this is to be believed, then animals can actually communicate quite complex thoughts.

Ribbed for your pleasure.

My point was: You don’t need to wait for it to buffer or even load. Once the page is there, the video is playable.

Hallelujah!

I’m fine with waiting 10 seconds at the beginning of a video. I wonder how much YouTube would save (by reducing bandwidth, smaller caches, choosing slower storage) if they didn’t have the goal to start the video virtually immediately.

This shouldn’t happen unless you also switched to a niche browser.

It’s probably way cheaper to add a speaker than an actual, physical bell. But I agree. My microwave dings and I’m fine with that.

All of the things you’d be polluting the sun with are already there.

This one:

Now get off my lawn!

The relevant passage for anyone interested in more than just the headline:

By contrast, Bennett and Brassard’s theory - known as BB84 - shows that any attempt to hack or copy their quantum encryption key changes the very behaviour of its elements, making replication impossible.

Further reading: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BB84

I used to get the single correct result just a few months back.

Just befriend a paramedic or a firefighter or some other of the sort that works next to a train line. You’ll hear that joke quite often and get used to it.