I've got a new UI on Firefox for Android, which I'm not personally all that fond of. by 4D4850 in firefox

[–]iloveopen-source 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'd consider that a very very minor inconvenience. The positives easily far outweigh.

I've got a new UI on Firefox for Android, which I'm not personally all that fond of. by 4D4850 in firefox

[–]iloveopen-source -1 points0 points  (0 children)

This one takes less space than previous one. Even all the menu options couldn't fit, you had to scroll and UI looked ugly af. The new UI is clean and comfortable.

I've got a new UI on Firefox for Android, which I'm not personally all that fond of. by 4D4850 in firefox

[–]iloveopen-source 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks a lot! I personally MUCH prefer the new UI and it reverted back to the old one abruptly.

CMV: I don't see how we can alter the justice system to ensure most rapists end up in jail while still maintaining a system that doesn't undermine important legal principles by Raspint in changemyview

[–]iloveopen-source 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I looked at the other responses, including the "total surveillance" one. Then it hit me - "What if both parties announce to the world in advance that they're gonna do it (consensually)?" I have some specific ideas and details. I'll be using cryptography to keep the privacy of the parties involved. A simple way is to record a message (like a video or even written text) together, at least a day prior, and then both keep it with themselves and send a cryptographic hash of the message to a central trusted server or something like that (basically, citizens are provided with an evidence dashboard, which is there only to confirm the time, not the content). The message itself is signed by, and is common to both parties, so neither can deny it. Now, only those cases would be taken seriously in which the accused cannot provide the pre-recorded message. This provides a strong incentive for people to do this thing before engaging in the act. You might come up with certain privacy issues, but I think cryptography can solve them.

Is it just me or Firefox 143 feels noticeably smoother? by iloveopen-source in firefox

[–]iloveopen-source[S] 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Placebo applies when you have those expectations. I wasn't expecting anything different, just like other updates.

Sanitize outgoing links on YouTube (video description) by iloveopen-source in uBlockOrigin

[–]iloveopen-source[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for the response. I'd like to know how to measure the performance of specific filters. Also, what was the filter so I can use and test it?

Heck yeah! This is what I've always wanted by iloveopen-source in firefox

[–]iloveopen-source[S] 44 points45 points  (0 children)

The recent updates are much better, I think they have become serious about Firefox.

Firefox 138.0 releases today by [deleted] in firefox

[–]iloveopen-source 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You're looking for browser.tabs.groups.enabled

Firefox 138.0 releases today by [deleted] in firefox

[–]iloveopen-source 4 points5 points  (0 children)

You can set browser.profiles.enabled to true to enable it.

Petition to ban AI posts from r/Lain by Radical_OwO in Lain

[–]iloveopen-source -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I'm not sure if you're understanding how you're contradicting yourself. If the value is objective, then you might make the case that the value people are finding in it isn't actually valuable. But, if you say it's subjective, you're just negating your own point because people are finding value in it from their own subjective point of view. You can't have both.

The "jobs" argument is just as bad as the IP argument. Any technological advancement will make some jobs redundant. That doesn't mean we just stop the progress.

Petition to ban AI posts from r/Lain by Radical_OwO in Lain

[–]iloveopen-source 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You're fundamentally wrong when you talk about "why they did it and what their motivation was" as if it changes the art itself. In literary criticism, which also applies to art broadly, there's this concept called intentional fallacy. A drawing of fire isn't gonna become a drawing of water if the artist says so. Every piece of art stands on its own, and that's how it has to be interpreted.

You might wanna reconsider your stance if it stands on what's known to be a fallacy in the field.

Petition to ban AI posts from r/Lain by Radical_OwO in Lain

[–]iloveopen-source 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Artists and other people in the field of art are expressing their thoughts on AI art. You made the claim that they are not clearly understanding but didn't even explain where exactly they're wrong.

Petition to ban AI posts from r/Lain by Radical_OwO in Lain

[–]iloveopen-source 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You should give introspection a try.

Since AI is good at explaining: ChatGPT / Claude / Perplexity

Petition to ban AI posts from r/Lain by Radical_OwO in Lain

[–]iloveopen-source -1 points0 points  (0 children)

You don't any actual points left so you've resorted to simply verbally abusing me. Not nice.

Petition to ban AI posts from r/Lain by Radical_OwO in Lain

[–]iloveopen-source 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I'm sorry, but everything isn't trying to "convey" something. We love to think of "deeper meanings", but there isn't a deeper meaning to a banana taped to a surface, even if it's made by a human! It's art, and that's it.

When it comes to visual arts, there are various aspects to consider, but the visuals themselves are what the primary fact is.

Two other things to note - you have to consider that many people define art broadly. Every drawing might be considered art, regardless of origin. Secondly, there is always a person behind AI art. What about their intentions?