

Removed by mod


Removed by mod


In my experience, Yes. Websites tend to execute too much of their site in JavaScript. The paywall part is no exception.


Disable JavaScript to bypass.
…and this is the primary reason they cannot be supported directly by Graphene.
This is phrased like a technical boundary. They are not supported because Graphene chooses not to support them. Not to say it would be easy, but they are making a choice to solely use Google’s hardware.
They don’t have to.


My biggest gripe with flatpak is the fact it isn’t sandboxed properly by default.
I’m not referring to vendor-given privileges. Every flatpak, unless explicitly ran with the –sandbox option, has a hole in the sandbox to communicate with the portal. Even if you try to use flatseal to disallow it, it will still be silently allowed.
This leads to a false sense of security. A notable issue I found is if you disallow network access to a flatpak, it can still talk to the portal and tell it to open a link in your browser. This allows it to communicate back to a server through your browser even though you disallowed it. Very terrible.
Security should to be dead easy and difficult to mess up. The countless threads I’ve read on flatpak tell me the communication about flatpak’s actual security has been quite terrible, and so it doesn’t fit this category.


Ignore the downer replying to you. If you found something that works well for you, then great!
If they don’t have the training data available, then I wouldn’t consider them open source.


“Meant to” and “do” are quite different.
I have, not once, ever had an issue caused by a update while the system was online. And if someone did, they could likely reboot to fix it.
I will stick to the online, instantaneous, and unobstructing updates.
I would like to see some real-world numbers and examples of problems that offline updates fix.


Its possible: Link
Or communicate that you aren’t listening. I would want to know, as the speaker, that my words are going in one ear and out the other.


this article does not attempt to compare the privacy practices of each browser but rather their resistance to exploitation.
The Madaidans article lacks relevance, we are talking about fingerprinting.


Last I recall, Vanadium lags behind customized-Firefox in privacy features, and even more behind the Tor Browser.
Having a tool like Noscript is absolutely necessary, with today’s browsers, if you want to fight fingerprinting.
Some of those countrymen are conscripts. 2/3rds? Which makes continuation of battle far less justifiable IMO.
Some people will choose to fight in Ukraine, to possibly die in Ukraine. Conscripts face punishment for refusal.
How many of those fighting would refuse the peace deal?