1.2 gigametres? That's traveled further than some satellites.
Readit NewsSquareWheel commented on Car has more than 1.2M km on it – and it's still going strong cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-s... · Posted by u/Sgt_Apone
SquareWheel commented on MCP-B: A Protocol for AI Browser Automation mcp-b.ai/... · Posted by u/miguelspizza
Prediction: this will go the same way as RSS. Companies don't like you to be in control of how you use their data.
Isn't RSS a smashing success? I changed readers after Google Reader died, but otherwise, my feeds have been working seamlessly for nearly 20 years. I rarely meet a site with updates that doesn't support RSS.
SquareWheel commented on Incapacitating Google Tag Manager (2022) backlit.neocities.org/inc... · Posted by u/fsflover
Well I can inject HTML tags (or elements) with native JavaScript. Or manage them. Why would I want a bloated third party piece of software doing that?
Since you're asking, you could use it to tie together triggers and actions to embed code in specific situations (eg. based on the URL or page state). It has automatic versioning. There's a preview feature for testing code changes before deploying, and a permission system for sharing view/edit access with others.
SquareWheel commented on Covert web-to-app tracking via localhost on Android localmess.github.io/... · Posted by u/sebastian_z
The first link confirms exactly what I said above. They’re not preventing Google from removing third party cookies, they’re preventing Google from implementing ALTERNATIVES to third party cookies. The only reason Google is unwilling to straight up remove third party cookies is their business model.
The CMA was concerned that, without regulatory oversight and scrutiny, Google’s alternatives could be developed and implemented in ways that impede competition in digital advertising markets. This would cause advertising spending to become even more concentrated on Google, harming consumers who ultimately pay for the cost of advertising. It would also undermine the ability of online publishers such as newspapers to generate revenue and continue to produce valuable content in the future.
… report on the implementation of Google’s Privacy Sandbox commitments, the regulator has said that although the tech giant is so far complying with its demands, there remain considerable areas of concerns …
…
That it must not “design, develop or use the Privacy Sandbox proposals in ways that reinforce the existing market position of its advertising products and services, including Google Ad Manager“
…
It must also address issues with specific Sandbox tools such as how its Topics API targeting alternative can harm smaller tech business, and clarify who will govern the Topics API taxonomy.It is true that the CMA is concerned with the new API proposals within the Privacy Sandbox such as Topics. However, this is from an anti-competitive angle, rather than privacy. Their goal is to ensure market fairness.
As part of that same process, they have put considerable friction in place for removing third-party cookies. They've deemed that the removal of third-party cookies could give Google an unfair market advantage, and that is why they're concerned with finding an alternative solution to replace them. This has been a very slow process, and involves many discussions and debates with regulators. That has had significant influence on the design of the Topics API.
To provide a more direct example, the CMA have also put specific stalls into the deprecation process, such as the standstill period invoked last year:
> The CMA will start a formal review of Google’s plan to deprecate cookies and Chrome’s Privacy Sandbox replacements once Google triggers a 60-day standstill period, likely at the beginning of the third quarter. During this standstill, the tech giant is forbidden to put in motion any deprecation procedures on Chrome. ... If they can’t reach an agreement, the 60-day standstill period will become 120 days.
https://www.adweek.com/programmatic/the-cma-is-prepared-to-d...
To put it simply, third-party cookies would have been dead and buried long ago if this dispute were not happening. It may be possible for Google to remove third-party cookies without a replacement, but they'd have be risking a significant lawsuit and contravention of UK authority by doing so.
SquareWheel commented on Covert web-to-app tracking via localhost on Android localmess.github.io/... · Posted by u/sebastian_z
Google gets no competitive advantage from removing third party cookies from chrome. The anticompetitive monopolistic tactic was the plan to replace third party cookies with FLoC/Privacy Sandbox/Topics AI, and THAT is what they were not prevented from doing.
No one is trying to stop google from removing third party cookies. Google is just unwilling to remove them without introducing a new anticompetitive tracking tool to replace them.
> No one is trying to stop google from removing third party cookies.
That's simply not true. As I already mentioned, the CMA presented a legal challenge which you can read about online. Please review the history, as it's been going on for years now.
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/cma-to-have-key-oversight...
https://www.marketing-beat.co.uk/2024/02/06/cma-cookies-goog...
SquareWheel commented on Covert web-to-app tracking via localhost on Android localmess.github.io/... · Posted by u/sebastian_z
The deprecation of third-party cookies, that all browsers were at one point on track to implement, was pretty much the most realistic first step to that. Which is why Google killed it last year by leveraging their control over Chrome.
While not technically a crime, it was a disgusting, unethical market manipulation move that never really got the public outrage it deserved.
Google execs’ initial support for it was also telling: leadership at Google must literally thought they would find another way to stay as profitable as they are without third-party cookies. Put another way: Google leadership didn’t understand cookies as well as someone who’s taken a single undergrad web dev class. (Or they were lying all along, and always planned to “renege” on third-party cookie deprecation.)
This is very misleading. Google was prevented from disabling third-party cookies due to intervention by the CMA, who felt it would provide an unfair advantage over other advertisers. Google argued their case for years, proposed competing standards to act as a replacement (see Topics API), and eventually gave up on the endeavour altogether and simply made it a user toggle.
While it isn't touched on in the post, I think the issue with feeds is that platforms like Instagram have no interest in moderating HDR.
For context: YouTube automatically edits the volume of videos that have an average loudness beyond a certain threshold. I think the solution for HDR is similar penalization based on log luminance or some other reasonable metric.
I don't see this happening on Instagram any time soon, because bad HDR likely makes view counts go up.
As for the HDR photos in the post, well, those are a bit strong to show what HDR can do. That's why the Mark III beta includes a much tamer HDR grade.
FYI: You wrote Chrome 14 in the post, but I believe you meant Android 14.
@dang why is this flagged? The flagging system on this site is so incredibly bad. It’s always a tiny handful of users trying to control what others can see with zero logical consistency.
I flagged earlier because the first submission appeared to be blogspam by a new account posting only from that domain. The replacement article from Android Authority is much better.
SPAs are supposed to be more efficient by only loading the data needed to update, but somehow back/forward are 100x more responsive on static pages or static sprinkled with JS, and they don't break the back button either. SPAs always have a kind of sluggish feel to them.
Totally different caching techniques. MPAs have a built in mechanism called back/forward cache. It works automatically on most sites, though some invalidate the cache. https://web.dev/articles/bfcache
SPAs need to hold onto the data themselves, and correctly transition it between pages/components. Poorly-built ones will simply refresh it every time, or discard it if the data is too large.
Both mechanisms can allow for immediate page loads if they've been correctly implemented. They just require a different approach.
Explain float: clear?
Does that have anything to do with display: flow-root?
And white-space is not actually whitespace?
And when does vertical-align work vs not?
---
^ That is all CSS (and not particularly edgy CSS, except for flow-root).
So....yes, CSS is really that hard. Unless you use the subset of CSS that you have decided to learn + use. Not unlike C++.