Plex does - if you give them money. A lot of app packages offer customizable icons provided you give them money for the privilege.
I disagree with this approach, and vendors that lock such changes down. If a user wants to replace every single app icon with a PNG or SVG of their choosing, that should be permissible at the OS-level. Users should always have the final say over their interface choices, and corporate or software-maker changes regarding aesthetics/interfaces should never override what the user has chosen for themselves.
Right now there's strong overlap in interfaces and experiences that make this difficult, if not impossible to execute on. Separating the two again is critical for computing to be accessible to all, as is maintaining a consistent experience throughout interface changes.
Outsourcing of software dev to India and support to Latin America. Paying pennies and charging high fees. They get contracts to all sorts of big companies like telecoms and manufacturers
Because in most cases, it's not about the quality of the product. I've had cases where using a (free, open source) reverse proxy to implement SSO and TLS termination would save 5-digit figures (on the side closer to 6 digits) yearly from upgrading the licensing a product we used. That was rejected because then we wouldn't have anyone to point our finger at if something goes wrong with the product. It's about the "support contracts", not about the products themselves.
Which is in itself a fucking joke because now everything is outsourced to some clueless person in a call center half-way around a world, or you get to chat with an LLM. Either way, it has been ages since the "support contracts" actually resulted in a problem that wasn't ultimately solved by ourselves, not them.
> Deleted the below posts out of an abundance of caution. Despite the words of the Proclamation, an unnamed White House official told New York Times that they intend to apply the $100,000 only to new applicants only.
> If that is correct, the implications are not as urgent.
Oh, how quaint, as if this significant change went through the normal lawmaking process that involves bills and Congressional approval, instead of the new rule by executive order fiat.
Also unemployed for the last 3 years after a layoff. Partially on purpose because I felt I needed a pause to recharge but I kept extending because money was not a problem due to stonks going up.
I learned react, go. Played videogames and had a child. Things are going well.
Part of me is afraid that too much time off the market will make me not fit for the workforce anymore but tbh I feel like my mental health really needed this.
Now I'm faced with a dilemma. Go back to my home country where I probably could retire now at 40 or stay here and try to get back to work. Trump administration has been making my decision easier by the day.
For existing Fi users, it's $450 off, plus another $200 in store credit for the Pro models (not money off since it's parked in Google Store, but if you're buying accessories or other items over the next year it's like money). Selling my old phone brings the price of a 10 Pro down to around $400 (not counting the $200 store credit).
If you sign up for Fi when buying the phone, the deals are pretty enticing: $300 off right away, $500 more in Fi bill credits over 24 months. I think you also get the $200 store credit too.
> Second, in many environments (managed hosting etc.) there is not an easy way (or indeed a way at all) of adding headers to responses.
It's getting better. Most serverless hosts (including Cloudflare, which this site uses) follow the (req: Request) => Response pattern, which by definition allows sending headers.
What are you talking about. Any non-static hosting will let you specify headers with a plain php function. Any baseline shared hosting offers that kind of control and has done so for the past 20+ years.
Sure, if you wanted to deal with configuring Apache. Or getting your hosting provider to do that. If you knew to ask, and didn't mind waiting, and your hosting provider knew how...and was willing to do it, a condition I forgot to add in my last comment here, but which applies equally there. (User-provided .htaccess files were the source of a number of relatively high-profile early CVEs, as I recall. Apache grew a number of options for trusting their content, and I want to say before very long you could not rely on anything working past simple HTTP-Basic credential management.)
Oldschool shared web hosting was a shockingly deprived environment by modern standards, which is why my Linode account turned old enough a few months ago to buy a drink in a bar: $20 a month in 2004 was amply worth gaining a degree of control over web server configuration which is broadly the default assumption now.
Since I was also administering some shared web hosting in my own right at the time - partially overlapping with my web design work targeting shared hosting, since some customers preferred to BYO - I don't blame admins for being difficult to work with; we all had good reason to be, with the afterthought security typically was everywhere in those days. But you begin perhaps to see why bypassing the whole rigamarole with a hint to the client was attractive.
but that was the point of the dot file to allow vhosts to change the default server settings without needing access to the root config. maybe they weren't designed specifically for vhosts, but that was my main use of them.
Yes. If the main Apache config was set up to allow it to read a dotfile, and if configured not to ignore the options you wanted to use, that is what the dotfile did. That's why, if you wanted an option easily portable across hosting providers, you used the meta tag instead. Which is my point, and my only point, and not really up for debate by some pettifogging rando with nothing better to fill a Saturday night.
Wtf, seriously. I was just asking. Sorry if that resulted in me pissing in your cheerios. Just because a question was asked doesn’t mean it was challenging your knowledge. I was just asking to clarify based on personal experience. If you don’t have time for questions or feel personally slighted that someone would have the gall to question the written word of the almighty throwanem, then posting on the internet is probably something you stop doing
It isn't a question of "challenging [my] knowledge," it's a question of you acting like kind of a jerk. I realize you don't see yourself as the one starting an argument here, and I have observed your manners likewise lacking on many occasions on this website before. Your opinion of the matter is not well qualified. You're being an ass. Knock it off.
I realize you're probably not accustomed to being called on your lousy behavior. I doubt you will need to become so. But just for once, here we are. You don't bother to find out what you're talking about before you speak and then you want your hand held on points that were already clarified, had you but bothered to catch up. I don't tolerate that in candidates, I won't tolerate it in colleagues, and I see no very pressing reason to tolerate it here.
Wait, I'm confused. Do you mean that I correspond with the caricature by which you're accustomed to see HN users represented, presumably not by themselves, on other social media platforms? Or do you mean instead that I correspond with a caricature of the caricatured representation that etc.? Your comment is ambiguous. Please clarify.
I don't know any other
reply