Ungoogled Chromium

Works with TorBrowser. I suppose they are discriminating against browser choice, potentially in combination with IP address.

Thanks for the tip about Redlib.

The Codeberg repo also loads fine for me over Tor. It’s likely your particular exit node was just IP banned due to abuse; worth rotating circuits a few times before concluding all of Tor is blocked.

It was blocked throughout the day. And also today. Circuits naturally go stale relatively quick so it would be different exits that I visited from. Perhaps you got lucky and got a new exit node that was not yet cataloged by Codeberg’s firewall.

Not all demographics of people are excluded. Try it with Tor.

I’m undecided on whether the js inventors fucked up on this, but ATM I’m convinced that the browser devs are at fault for giving users no indication that the dialog box is an instruction from the payload and not from the browser itself. It’s an infosec shit-show that users cannot discern a browser msg from a website msg.

If you don’t want to see them then turn scripting off.

We can do better, in principle. Now that I have come to distrust the confirm() method by iheartumami.com, I would like the granularity to configure my specific distrust for that particular call by that particular js source. When a confirm() instruction is reached on that site, I would like the js program to be killed. I suppose this would be comparable to controlling perms given to an AOS app.

you don’t trust the site.

Also about trust: trust is not all-or-nothing. Trust has context. I might trust my drug dealer to bring me some good quality cocaine. But I might distrust that very same person to house-sit for me. I do not wholly bluntly state: “I distrust Alice” and therefore wholly refuse to talk to Alice. I engage Alice in accordance with my trust for a particular situation.

It’s fucking annoying how people talk about trust as a binary… something you have or have not. I don’t trust a website with running Javascript from Cloudflare, but maybe I trust it enough to run its 1st party js. People have a right to autonomy. I will be the judge of what I trust and to what extent.

Either way, just close the tab since you don’t trust the site.

That makes sense if you have a non-defensive browser. The whole purpose of a defensive browser is to visit websites I do not trust. Is the browser disservicing me? “There was a problem loading the page. Click OK to learn more: [cancel] [OK]”. Clicking “OK” gives:

(note “failed to fetch” is misinformation – but we can see that that lie is obviously generated by the website)

The browser told me “There was a problem loading the page,” not the website. That’s deception. The browser should not know (nor give a shit) about the wishes of an ad-blocker-hostile website. The browser should talk to me about connectivity issues (e.g. syn-ack-synack handshaking failure) and html that is so broken it cannot cope. The browser should not be the spokesperson for a website owner (which it does by using the browser-to-user comms mechanism). Why? Because the browser serves the user, and only the user. Or at least anyone self-respecting should expact as much. (sidenote: Mozilla does not agree with the principle that software should serve its user in light of this mothballed bug report).

Then what? So clicking OK gave me the info, but I never told the browser it was okay to give that info in place of the webpage that it rendered. It should come in a separate tab so as to avoid data loss.

Clicking “cancel” causes the browser to needlessly re-fetch everything at the user’s own expense and then re-ask the same question in a loop. That’s not what cancel means. If you hit ESC while a page is loading, you will see that it stops fetching and executing, but it does not destroy what is there. That’s what cancel means. Cancel certainly does not mean “toss what you ahve and try to reload the page”.

There’s no ‘tricking’ going on.

Why do I feel lied to? The page renders just fine and yet there is a msg “There was a problem loading the page.”

Is it possible to avoid the continuing decline in quality of consumer products brought on by corporate greed?

Consumers determine what quality is good enough. Not the suppliers.

If consumers were organised, united, disciplined, and smart, the answer would obviously be /yes/. But the answer is /no/ because consumers are none of those.

so you have to buy new shit every few years instead of once or twice per generation.

Indeed we can blame the consumers too. It’s a codependency supported by enablers.

If consumers weren’t such pushovers they would refuse to replace their obsolete by design goods. But no… they keep buying new phones every couple years.

eBay is in itself an enshitification. Pushes Paypal which steals ppls money by using a fraud check swindle. eBay pushes JavaScript that port sniffs your LAN. Probably exploits your data to the max.

Of course it’s easy for me to flip the middle finger to eBay when I live in a city. Rural dwellers probably don’t have decent local flea markets and street markets, where I buy most of my goods. If it’s going to be junk quality, it might as well be cheap and not feeding the ecocidal retail maketplace.

My site, my rules I guess.

Of course. You can be a dick if you want. And the naive boot-licking CAPTCHA-solving masses will even let you get away with it.

I clicked on the link https://slrpnk.net/post/41362413 and I got… Funny isn’t it?

What, that slrpnk.net does not have the CAPTCHA transparency problem that I described? It’s literally the first and only thing you see. It consumes the whole page. If you cannot make an informed decision on the spot to leave or stay, the incompetence is yours alone.

You know that all captchas are not about AI training, but a simple solution to bother bots?

Whatever reason a web dev has for demanding uncompensated labor from visitors, the opacity of not informing visitors when they approach is a dick move.

(edit) btw, plz look up /proof of work/. Try to grasp the difference between making a human perform uncompensated labor, and making a machine work. And if you can manage that, your next homework assignment: study Selenium until you understand how Anubis differs from CAPTCHA.

Cloudflare, who thinks Tor traffic is inherently malicious. Who cannot figure out how to separate malice from non-malice or humans from bots. Who thinks bot traffic is inherently malicious. Who does pre-emptive attacks with mass colatteral damage. Who has a long history of deception and false statements (par 12).

From the article:

“But the same FAQ admits that users can be locked out if X detects “unusual activity,” suspects fraud, or thinks a user violated the terms of service.”

Exactly what happens with Paypal, another shitty platform by Musk. As mentioned in ¶3.ii of this page.

I can say 1st hand Paypal stole my money. It spontaneously demanded a digital photo of my ID due to some bogus or false postive fraud suspicion. I sent it but it had no effect. Paypal froze my acct and kept my money.

Agreed. But I must say it’s surprising to see this insight come from a lemmy.world acct. Surely you must know that LW is in Cloudflare’s exclusive walled-garden, no?

I would really prefer if users would just stop being pushovers. If people were wise enough to not solve CAPTCHAs, the problem would vanish. But ppl are too fucking lazy to use analog mechanisms.

But ppl are pushovers.

I tried to buy something online recently. The merchant’s website pushed a CAPTCHA as a precondition to submitting the order. WTF. People have become spineless pushovers to the point of doing work as customers, who never learned that it is the suppliers who must be subservient to the client. And because people have no discipline, the tyranny works. So the CAPTCHA-pushing merchant remains in business.

It does not replace the ambulance, which is still enroute when the aircraft arrives.

Just like the cycling medics in London who can sometimes arrive faster than the ambulance.

When human hybernation emerges, these very-first responders will be able to put someone into hibernation while the ambulance makes its way.

sciencedirect is always tor-hostile, but your 1st link is good. Thanks for posting it because Youtube is dead to me.

I have always wanted a green facade, either moss or covered in vines. I like the moss idea the most in terms of aesthetics and comfort, but I have concerns. Humidity and dampness is a serious problem where I am. I would not want having moss on the exterior to come with mold on the inside. The walls really need to breath and it’s unclear if this moss-supporting concrete can handle that.

I needed a new roof a couple years ago. Only 1 roofer in my whole city offered vegetated roofs. He only had experience with commercial installations, not residential.

So indeed there is a shortage. No idea why roofing companies are not on the ball with this.