I remember using Waterfox when it was new. I moved away from it when Firefox started pushing 64 bit builds natively, and I've stuck with it since then. Recently though it does seem as if they might be going down a dark path, so perhaps I'll consider switching again. I remember Waterfox was hard forked after Quantum became a thing, in order to keep support with XPI - is that still the case?
The hard fork was "Waterfox Classic", which just became unsustainable to maintain.
Rather than support for XPI (which is just the packaging for Firefox webextensions), the current version of Waterfox does still support bootstrapped extensions - in theory anyone can still write one, with access to all the privileged JavaScript APIs typically not accessible to MV2/MV3 webextensions.
It's not widely used though, there are two repos I'm aware of that take advantage of this:
Yeah but, the article was specifically saying that you don't need to put in country because you can look it up by ZIP. That's obviously wrong, but apparently not to the author of the website.
I fail to see how you can claim this to work for sites which serve areas outside the United States, but have either no ZIP code, an overlapping code, or something else entirely. Germany has 5 digit PLZs, but putting some valid ones in doesn't get a result. It really seems like the author does not think about other countries.
I don't disagree with reordering the entry by relevance, but you have to start with country. That can also be a nice search - it will be a very short lookup, even if you put every country name in every language. Only after that is postal code (of whatever kind - it's only ZIP in the US) relevant.
As a side note, it's 2026, and there's still German software that thinks our postal codes are integers. Mine has a leading zero, and it hasn't been too long since I've seen (German-built!) software that silently truncates the 0 and then complains that it's just 4 digits and should be 5.
This happens in the US too, and even if you're wise enough to treat postal codes as strings (which they are) and not integers, someone is going to paste the data into Excel which will promptly blow things up on you anyway.
Solidworks is not even close to the least intuitive CAD program out there. My preference is Autodesk Inventor, which I find to be far easier for beginners to pick up. Fusion 360 is supposedly excellent these days as well. For a real nightmare, try Siemens NX.
as someone who made their living on f360 for many years I urge newcomers to avoid it. Vendor lock-in as much as possible, along with constant rug-pulls and price-increases. DLC-ification of once-included features, and just shit corporate maneuvers abound.
If your work allows for it, go for freecad or better yet openscad if you're pursuing this new concept of LLM design. onshape is nice feature-wise but then you're just trusting a different group that has an even tighter grip around your unmentionables due to the saas nature.
To be fair : the constant betrayal of tech companies in my life has just pushed me a bit further towards local-only than most; I don't really condemn the -as-a-service industry, they've just been the first to pull rugs and then shrug their shoulders when their (usually already dwindling) customer base is screwed.
Given the context (CCC) I would find it far less interesting if they did NOT use OpenPNP. It is also, coincidentally, able to assemble PCBs, even if it's perhaps not the best software out there.
Far more things rely on reliable and accurate time-keeping than just being on time to work. Timekeeping is vitally important (even if it's not readily visible) to lots of critical infrastructure worldwide.
Actually, it's really important to me to have a network of atomic clocks available to verify the times I clock in and out, I want to make sure I get paid for an accurate duration of time down to the nanosecond
The alternative to the OSA is not "being totally incapable of regulating the internet". There's a wide, wide gap between complete lack of regulation and what the UK has done.
I'd have to say that full hardware documentation, even under NDA, is prerequisite to claim equal effort. The expectation on a desktop platform (that is, explicitly not mobile, like phones or tablets) is that development is mostly open for those who want to, and Qualcomm's business is sort of fundamentally counter to that. So either they're going to have to change those expectations (which I would prefer not to happen), provide more to manufacturers, or expect that their market performance will be poor.
reply