kimapr

you don't need apple-specific hardware to use webkit. you can just grab GNOME Web, Midori, surf, or any other of the billions of open source webkit-based browsers

2025-11-11 13:48:07 UTC

- reply

i'd argue it should be 3 different engines even, if a website works on firefox and chromium but not safari/webkit it's still broken

2025-11-01 22:07:46 UTC

https://ublog.kimapr.net/media/442a00095238f9554c7802501c8ee5c7a56315922b8c44fa8b3025e10b0e9190.png

2025-10-29 06:21:02 UTC

- reply

does firefox/pdf.js not support it either?

2025-10-24 02:41:11 UTC

- reply

that's really strange, svg is just another image format?? what makes it idfferent

2025-09-06 11:24:16 UTC

- reply

Apparently Linux 3.8 is dropping support for i386? Presumably i686 support will remain, so it's not like their dropping 32-bit support.

2025-09-06 11:19:15 UTC

linux is WHAT?
#note1sch…44h3

2025-09-04 14:18:25 UTC

https://ublog.kimapr.net/media/e91a77813edc697a51bbf43db5bf7f8ef3e67ed3e2cd08e33e21e8d174ad722b.png

2025-07-17 07:21:53 UTC

That's such a stupid warning either way "this app was created by another person" like yeah that's how apps usually are and you're also an app created by another person so shut up
#note1x9h…475r

2025-05-10 08:31:05 UTC

- reply

it fucks with eye readers as well tbh

2025-05-10 08:25:43 UTC

- reply

just change them not to be that, if the abstraction is any good this will cause no issues

2025-05-10 08:19:19 UTC

- reply

Why not just use `double`?

2025-05-10 08:06:41 UTC

- reply

infitity-1 = infinity...

2025-05-10 03:27:11 UTC

- reply

surely snac still has to do the same ser/de work but with cursed inefficient data structures? Python is probably faster

2025-05-09 09:19:53 UTC

I think it's really funny that in windows the standard libraries serve to abstract away incompatibilities between the kernel of different windows releases while this funny thing:
- **GLibc**
in the lunix world does the exact opposite

2025-04-07 09:20:25 UTC

- reply

> it’s like saying “if the recipient has PGP configured”.
It's by far worse because there's seemingly barely any options to get an S/MIME certificate for free. It looks like it's literally just one company and they generate and keep the private keys server-side so it's not really "end to end" encryption at all.

2025-04-07 08:31:31 UTC

- reply

from the article:
> This is how it works behind the scenes:
> - When the recipient is a Gmail user (enterprise or personal), Gmail sends an E2EE email. The email is automatically decrypted in the recipient's inbox, and the recipient can use Gmail in a familiar way.
> - When the recipient is not a Gmail user, Gmail sends them an invitation to view the E2EE email in a restricted version of Gmail. The recipient can then use a guest Google Workspace account to securely view and reply to the email.
> - When the recipient has S/MIME configured, Gmail sends an E2EE email via S/MIME (just like it does today).
This *might* mean Gmail will send S/MIME (an open standard i think?) emails instead of the "restricted version of Gmail" thing if possible but it's not clear whether "recipient is not a Gmail user" or "recipient has S/MIME configured" has higher precedence (though only one option makes any sense).
Apparently S/MIME requires one to obtain a certificate from a Certificate Authority to use it... Sounds quite awkward

2025-03-04 22:34:02 UTC

- reply

holy .avif
i can't tell if it's my internyet as usual or my phone is unable to display that format

2025-03-04 22:31:22 UTC

- reply

only comedy approved by the unfunniest billionaire clown
someday i should go on twitter and post the "c-slur" to get banned

2025-03-01 04:13:11 UTC

- reply

their probably followers maybe even mutuals

2025-01-20 04:13:02 UTC

"head recursion" a.k.a. a thing that's totally real and not just some bullshit we made up to confuse computer science students because it literally makes no sense. trust.