Oh! This takes me back. I used it as my primary browser during the Firefox 57 saga, and continues to use it for over an year. The developer was very responsive to bug reports, and fixed the issues right away. Unfortunately, I moved away from the Linux ecosystem as my primary computing environment, but I would still recommend this if someone wants to try a Vim-based browsing experience and is willing to try out a new browser.
> I used it as my primary browser during the Firefox 57 saga
As an early lover of Firefox, I'm sorry to see its progression away from its ideals, and can't keep track of which part of the saga happened when. Was that when they removed XUL?
> How many Regular Joe people are using progressive web apps in the first place?
I know several of them, because Google doesn’t let e-commerce apps in my country sell cigarettes and other products containing tobacco. The android version of these apps guide users into installing their PWA version if they wish to order such products.
Thanks for taking the time to respond to my comment. I didn't mean to be provocative or offensive, just wanted to show the perspective from the other side.
> I agree with the sentiment, or the problem that the government is trying to tackle, but I disagree with their methods. They violate the fundamental human rights of many millions of people -- predominantly in Jammu & Kashmir and Manipur -- whenever they disconnect entire regions, not just from the Internet, but from the outside world. Even the postal service has been suspended.[2]
> I don't think it's all India's fault though. At its core, this is a content moderation issue. Those malicious actors that spread misinformation use large WhatsApp groups and the like, and the companies behind those products haven't done enough to address the problem, so local governments in India take the drastic decision to cut off the Internet.
I appreciate the sentiment. People on HN who live in free Western countries might not appreciate how an under-policed country with deep historical animosities looks like (India had 145 police personnel per 100k population, whereas the US had 428[1]). Unmitigated misinformation can do (and has done) a lot of harm in such societies. I agree with you that at its core, its a moderation issue, and a policing issue. I myself do not agree with the blanket bans, but I do not see any other possible mitigations as long as the communication service providers (such as Meta) do not bring proper moderation and fact-checks.
> Rather than waiting for something like that to happen, I'm more interested in mitigating it in the first place. That's why:
> - Letro[3], the first -- and so far only -- app to be powered by Awala, only supports 1:1 messaging. No groups yet, and when we do, we'll only support a relatively small number of people (TBD; not hundreds or thousands).
> - The future functionality to support "broadcasting" information to many users already has built-in mechanisms to handle hate speech and misinformation.[4]
> - As I work closely with anyone integrating Awala in their existing services, I intend to ensure that they have adequate plans to address hate speech and misinformation.
I do hope the mitigation works, and people are able to communicate with each other without allowing misinformation to spread. I had done some research on opportunistic networks as an undergrad student, with a similar goal of restoring communication in regions without adequate network coverage, so I do understand the need for such services. I wish you all the best, and would be following Awala with interest.
Hi there. I’m from India (the world’s capital of Internet blackouts). A major reason for Internet blackouts here is because in many areas, there’s a deep seated animosity between different communities due to historical and ideological differences. Internet blackouts are done close to any sensitive event, to prevent malicious actors from spreading misinformation/rumours and provoking riots. Have you considered the ethical implications of your service in such cases? Are you willing to take the moral responsibility for the damage to life and property that could be caused using your service?
I think that it's manifestly unreasonable to preemptively knock out communications in a large civilian area during peacetime for essentially any reasons; in that same vein, it's absurd to lay blame at the feet of a communications enabler who provides a means for individuals to escape authoritarian suppression of communications.
The only parties responsible for the violence you are implying would be the individuals actualizing the violence, the individuals originating falsities, and the governments who fail to actively maintain peace. The collective failures of all three to restrain their actions amidst uncertain rumors should not condemn the vast majority of peaceable humans from communicating with each other.
Nobody I know seriously claims that free speech and communication exclusively has upsides, but I'd argue that the benefits vastly outweigh the downsides and risks.
Whether freedom of speech should be externally "dictated", i.e. against the laws passed and enforced by an elected (or often not so much elected) local government, is a much more complicated question, but the ethics of providing a pure communications tool (i.e. a tool that isn't directly leveraged by its creators for foreign propaganda etc.) seem fairly clear to me: I think the desire for communication and information of somebody in such a region is ethical; the desire of others to suppress it isn't.
Cutting the internet is an authoritarian move, that’s used as threat on communities (usually minorities).
There is no moral irresponsibility when it comes to giving the general public access to data. The moral irresponsibility here is India bullying a minority population through their nationalist right wing government.
Also my god I can’t believe the pendulum has swung so far the ass of nationalism that it’s not a moral quandary to restore access to communications to marginalized communities.
Not necessarily. You can write open source code in your own time and publish under Google org on GitHub. This is the recommended process if you don’t care about retaining the copyright to your code.
If someone does want to retain copyright, there’s another process for getting approval.
I really wish to see a lander mission to Venus. Doesn't look like anybody other than Russia has done it - that too nearly 40 years ago. The environment is so extreme that the technology - especially electronics - would have to be radically different. The data is also likely to be extremely interesting.
