TheBrokenRail

> Forgejo in particular has self-hosted actions runners that can be registered offline, and the runners themselves can be given labels and execute most existing GitHub actions (in fact, the yaml format they use is intentionally meant to be compatible with GitHub actions).

This is also part of Gitea. Which makes since because Forgejo is a soft-fork of Gitea.

Reminds of the GitHub issue for hosting Gitea on Gitea, it's... a read to be sure: https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/issues/1029

IIRC people actually tried to get rid of that. Thankfully it failed.

I hate these 2FA mandates. I don't use PyPI, but I do use GitHub, which has also announced a 2FA mandate.

I use my GitHub account to make bug reports, small pull requests, and silly personal projects. It is not that important. I want to sacrifice security for convenience on it, and that should be my choice.

I also do not agree with the argument this secures the supply chain because:

1. It ignores supply-chain attacks from people who already have repository access.

2. Most big companies (ie. Google) are probably already using 2FA.

3. And if people are automatically pulling code from random people/groups without checking it... maybe that's what actually needs to be banned.

And that's what I deserve for not reading the entire page. Thanks for the correction.

On the topic of user freedom, Firefox also doesn't allow installing extensions not signed by Mozilla unless you use a fork, Nightly, or Developer Edition (which is just a badly named beta)[0]. The hilarious thing is that Safari, the web browser from the company infamous for walled gardens and not letting you control your device, does let you install unsigned extensions on desktop[1].

[0]: https://wiki.mozilla.org/Add-ons/Extension_Signing

[1]: https://developer.apple.com/documentation/safariservices/saf...

Firefox doesn't allow users to install unsigned extensions unless they use a beta version, because users apparently can't be trusted to install software. I trust Mozilla to fight for privacy (they're great at it), but I do not trust them in the slightest to fight for user freedom (like accessing banking sites on an "insecure" OS).

This is really minor compared to other parts of Firefox. Notably, Firefox requires all extensions to be signed by Mozilla.

And the only way to turn that restriction off, is to either use Firefox Nightly or Firefox Developer Edition (which is a beta). If you want to use stable Firefox, because you like having a stable web browser, you just can't turn the restriction off. Period. The closest thing you can do is installing it as a "temporary extension" which uninstalls itself when the browser restarts.

It's kind of ridiculous that the default browser of most Linux distros has a Apple-esque mentality of "we get to tell you what you're allowed to install."

I just wish Firefox would stop trying to open external programs when I type "site:" in the address bar. It's so annoying to type "site:example.com hello" and just get a "No apps available" dialog and have to retype my search, manually specifying a search engine that time. I'm not sure if it's a bug with Snap, Firefox, or both, but it is beyond infuriating.

I've never contributed to Go before, but from reading this, I have to wonder who thought this system was a good idea.

From the sounds of it, the only situation where this PR-mirroring works properly, is PRs without any comments, which I imagine are quite rare. But if your PR does have comments, then you not only have to sign up for Gerrit anyways, but you're also responsible for keeping the GitHub PR and Gerrit PR in sync. That sounds horrible.

So does all forms of automation. By your logic we should've never invented computers because they took jobs from human computers[0]. Improved technology and automation reduces jobs for people doing things the old way and makes the job easier for everyone else. No job is necessary forever, that's just how the world works.

[0]: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_(occupation)

Like GitHub's new code viewer! I have to load the raw text just so I can use Ctrl-F!

> I've been using Discord since 2017 and in that time I think I've literally never accidentally joined a voice channel?

I've also been on Discord since 2017, and I've done it many times. Especially on servers which put voice channels right next to text channels. And I'm not the only one either, judging by another comment[0].

[0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36439417

> The app even prompts you if you're sure about joining under some circumstances.

The app is even worse! It brings a full-screen pop-up and if you haven't granted Discord microphone permissions, it will bug you, every, single, time.

Please no.

As someone who doesn't use voice channels, I can't even count how many times I've accidentally joined them because I mis-clicked. And then I have to find the "end call" button because, of course, it's small and located away from the channel itself. It is so unbelievably annoying.

The best feature Discord added recently was the ability to hide channels, so I can finally, once and for all, forget about voice channels.

Not a lawyer, but if this was true, wouldn't a bunch of developers and companies be facing fines? Especially smaller open-source stuff. And larger companies as well (for instance, Reddit's mobile app is infamously inaccessible).

People generating fake photos will just use an AI that doesn't leave a watermark. We are quickly approaching the point at which AI-generated and real images just cannot be distinguished, and we're going to have to adapt to that.

> If you allowed free reign access to the sensors people could record the inside of your house/work, capture your face, fingerprints, retinal pattern etc.

Yes, yes they could. That's not and shouldn't be Apple's problem. That's your workplace's problem to regulate how the device is used on-site, the government's problem to regulate how it can be used in public, your household's problem on how it can be used in private, etc.

The device will be inevitably jail-broken anyways, so a walled-garden isn't going to stop bad actors.

Not to mention, most of the things you mentioned can already be accomplished with less expensive and much more subtle devices, like a standard digital camera. And those device definitely don't try to prevent abuse. (Imagine if your camera refused to take a picture because it thought you didn't have permission!)

If you put information online publicly, you should be always working under the assumption that it will be immediately archived by someone. Whether that is the Internet Archive for websites, a Discord bot archiving edits and deletions, Pushshift (formerly) for Reddit, or just some private group operating a web scraper.

At least in this situation the archived data is public.

I really hate the modern idea of locking down devices to protect users from themselves. It's my device and I should be allowed to install what I want on it.

Android's better than iOS in that regard, but that doesn't mean it isn't still terrible. Sure, you can sideload apps, but you still can't run as root unless your device's manufacturer allows it. And sure, it might have a built-in file manager, but in newer versions of Android, you can't read/write to /sdcard/Android/data without a separate device.

And this trend is even infecting non-phone devices as well. You can't install extensions on Firefox if they haven't been signed by Mozilla. The only way to disable this restriction is to use a fork or beta version (Developer Edition or Nightly).