Just get a kobo instead. The price difference between with ads and a new kobo is minimal. Not worth the Amazon headache with a locked down device.
The eBooks in Kobo's store are also locked down with DRM.
Readit NewsFlimm commented on Amazon will allow ePub and PDF downloads for DRM-free eBooks kdpcommunity.com/s/articl... · Posted by u/captn3m0
Flimm commented on Amazon will allow ePub and PDF downloads for DRM-free eBooks kdpcommunity.com/s/articl... · Posted by u/captn3m0
Can anyone find even one DRM-free ebook on Amazon Kindle?
Flimm commented on Unicode Footguns in Python pythonkoans.substack.com/... · Posted by u/meander_water
I've said this before and have said it again: Python3 got rid of the wrong string type.
With `bytes` it was obvious that byte length was not the same as $whatever length, and that was really the only semi-common bug (and was mostly limited to English speakers who are new to programming). All other bugs come from blindly trusting `unicode` whose bugs are far more subtle and numerous.
I strongly disagree. Python 2 had no bytes type to get rid of. It had a string type that could not handle code points above U+00FF at all, and could not handle code points above U+007F very well. In addition, Python 2 had a Unicode type, and the types would get automatically converted to each other and/or encoded/decoded, often incorrectly, and sometimes throwing runtime exceptions.
Python 3 introduced the bytes type that you like so much. It sounds like you would enjoy a Python 4 with only a bytes type and no string type, and presumably with a strong convention to only use UTF-8 or with required encoding arguments everywhere.
In both Python 2 and Python 3, you still have to learn how to handle grapheme clusters carefully.
I don’t love their license. But I think that a license that says you aren’t free to redistribute this software or it’s derivatives for a fee (including by letting users use it over a network) if you’re a corporation making over $1 billion a year in revenue is perfectly compatible with the original intent of free software.
The freedoms were about freedom for the user not a non user developer.
If you're talking about free-as-in-freedom software, promoted by Richard Stallman and the FSF, then they have always been clear that Free software must not forbid commercial usage or require payment. Vendors are perfectly free to sell copies of Free software if they wish, but the license cannot forbid making copies and derivatives, even for commercial usage. See:
I've created a library that use t-strings to prevent shell injection that even works on Windows. It's written in Rust. https://github.com/aspizu/tshu
$ uv run --with tshu python -m asyncio
>>> from tshu import sh
>>> username = "aspizu; rm -rf /"
>>> await sh(t"echo {username}")
aspizu; rm -rf /Does the library handle arguments that begin with a dash?
Does this code print out the contents of the file named `--help`, or does it print the documentation for the `cat` command?
filename = "--help"
await sh(t"cat {filename}")If you have uv installed, trying out Python 3.14 is as simple as running this command:
$ uvx python@3.14
Python 3.14.0 (main, Oct 7 2025, 15:35:21) [Clang 20.1.4 ] on linux
Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information.
>>>
The entire previous history of humanity we only had non-targeted ads in newspapers, on billboards, and on TV and radio, and everyone was ok with that. But suddenly, on the internet, it's somehow "not possible" to have advertising that isn't personalized or even dynamic at all. How so?
Even personalised advertising can be done without sharing personal data with 100+ third parties. For example, ask the user to fill out a survey about their interests, and then serve them more personalised ads based on their survey answers, all without sharing personal data with third parties.
Why would there be a privacy-respecting free option? The content is not free to produce.
There are many ways to monetize free online websites. The most obvious way is advertising. Advertising can be privacy-respecting.
The Guardian in particular is funded by a trust fund, by donations, by advertising, and maybe by other sources of revenue as well.
This article is on theguardian.com , and it has started to require a paid subscription for all readers who don't want to share their data with 131 third parties. There is no privacy-respecting free option. The paid subscription is £5 per month, and it doesn't eliminate all ads. (This requirement may depend on which country you're in.)