|
I have a 4-year old HP Spectre ultralight that is all I need for work and more with Arch Linux on it. All of work is remote - Zoom and Citrix don't take up much CPU, though Zoom is wasteful of battery when idling. Lots of Chrome tabs, youtube videos, it runs like a champ. Wayland works well on the integrated GPU, didn't have to do anything Arch selected Wayland. Gaming is the only reason I'd need another machine, really. With RDNA2 APUs or maybe the RDNA3 APUs, I suspect I'd be happy enough for gaming too on an ultralight from the next couple of years. On Linux, of course - Linux gaming is so good now with Wine/Proton.
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2023 14:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 21:56 |
|
|
v1ld posted:I have a 4-year old HP Spectre ultralight that is all I need for work and more with Arch Linux on it. All of work is remote - Zoom and Citrix don't take up much CPU, though Zoom is wasteful of battery when idling. Lots of Chrome tabs, youtube videos, it runs like a champ. The 680m has been a hot mess for me under Linux. Hopefully the rdna3 ones coming out are better. Had to switch from amd p state back to acpi cpufreq to stop constantly crashing, and still can't get display output using USB c docks with Wayland - only x11.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2023 15:16
|
|
|
Keito posted:You'd think so but just a few tabs open in a modern browser is enough to bring most mid-range laptops to their knees. Ublock is a better PC upgrade than a $1000 CPU.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2023 15:24
|
|
|
VorpalFish posted:The 680m has been a hot mess for me under Linux. Hopefully the rdna3 ones coming out are better. Ugh, that's sad to hear.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2023 15:39
|
|
|
v1ld posted:Ugh, that's sad to hear. Yeah it was quite frustrating. On the bright side, now that I know the caveats I finally have a stable machine running fedora 37, and it's possible not all implementations have the problem. I think most of the reports were Asus or Lenovo. Details here: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/amd/-/issues/2068
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2023 16:34
|
|
|
Keito posted:You'd think so but just a few tabs open in a modern browser is enough to bring most mid-range laptops to their knees. Websites that show ads have ads and tracking use all available resources. Websites that show anything else have the website developers implement their own VMs in javascript, that your poor browser then has to run. https://www.nullpt.rs/devirtualizing-nike-vm-1 https://www.nullpt.rs/reverse-engineering-tiktok-vm-1
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2023 16:35
|
|
|
Klyith posted:Ublock is a better PC upgrade than a $1000 CPU. This so much. I also had to switch to old reddit because the new site was destroying my 8c Ryzen with so much loving JavaScript that I was getting 3-4 word lag in typing. Developers should have to test their apps on bog standard machines before release instead of saying ”well it works great on my 6c 9th-gen i9 w/32GB RAM, ship it". But that would require effort.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2023 20:59
|
|
|
It's always weird for me to use a browser that doesn't have NoScript and uBlock Origin running.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2023 21:58
|
|
|
uBlock Origin can do what NoScript does via the medium blocking-mode.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2023 22:05
|
|
|
BlankSystemDaemon posted:uBlock Origin can do what NoScript does via the medium blocking-mode. I don't doubt that, but I have years of ingrained habit using both, and my NoScript settings synced across machines, so a little redundancy doesn't bother me. If I'm running a seriously underpowered machine I might keep it in mind as an option, though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2023 22:09
|
|
|
BlankSystemDaemon posted:uBlock Origin can do what NoScript does via the medium blocking-mode. Unless I'm missing something, that isn't the same because it only blocks 3rd party js.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2023 22:30
|
|
|
VorpalFish posted:Unless I'm missing something, that isn't the same because it only blocks 3rd party js. pre:no-csp-reports: * true no-large-media: behind-the-scene false * * 3p block * * 3p-frame block * * 3p-script block behind-the-scene * * noop behind-the-scene * 1p-script noop behind-the-scene * 3p block behind-the-scene * 3p-frame block behind-the-scene * 3p-script block behind-the-scene * image noop behind-the-scene * inline-script noop
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2023 22:38
|
|
|
If you really want to lock things down, uBlock Origin's creator also provides uMatrix, which is definitely a gun to the knife fight of blocking content.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2023 23:24
|
|
|
Tesseraction posted:If you really want to lock things down, uBlock Origin's creator also provides uMatrix, which is definitely a gun to the knife fight of blocking content.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2023 23:31
|
|
|
uMatrix got EOL'd didn't it? I used it for years and loved it but I think it got pulled off extension sites. If it's back that's rad and I have something to do tonight.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2023 23:34
|
|
|
xzzy posted:uMatrix got EOL'd didn't it? I used it for years and loved it but I think it got pulled off extension sites. It's on Firefox and Chrome? https://addons.mozilla.org/en-GB/firefox/addon/umatrix/ https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/umatrix/ogfcmafjalglgifnmanfmnieipoejdcf No updates since 2021 but I figure its core functionality is pretty stable?
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2023 23:37
|
|
|
VorpalFish posted:Unless I'm missing something, that isn't the same because it only blocks 3rd party js. Look again, you can block inline scripts 1st-party scripts 3rd-party scripts 3rd-party frames Ublock is actually finer-grained than noscript, but if you already have noscript fully set up I can see being reluctant to switch over. I bet it would be relatively to convert an export of noscript's rules into an import to ublock though. I should look into that. Tesseraction posted:If you really want to lock things down, uBlock Origin's creator also provides uMatrix, which is definitely a gun to the knife fight of blocking content. uMatrix is not being developed anymore, so I would generally not recommend picking it up now
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2023 23:38
|
|
|
Ah, the uMatrix repo has been archived over on github. In an ideal world, there'd also be deprecation notices on the add-ons.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2023 23:46
|
|
|
BlankSystemDaemon posted:Hmm, then I don't know where my rules are from, but I have this: Huh. Is it as easy/quick to whitelist by domain on a permanent/temp basis as noscript? I run both but could see consolidating if it does the same thing and is as easy to use.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2023 23:48
|
|
|
VorpalFish posted:Huh. Is it as easy/quick to whitelist by domain on a permanent/temp basis as noscript? I run both but could see consolidating if it does the same thing and is as easy to use. Go to site. If site is broken, click ublock origin icon (read: use the keyboard shortcut). Select FQDNs based on what's likely to be a CDN and/or what's hinted as having a bigger share of the traffic (going by the number of plusses, though this doesn't always work), and make these FQDNS per-domain noops. If that fails and I can't find an alternative elsewhere, I set a temporary noop for third-party scripts on the domain (ie. the right part of the columns), and look for FQDNs through the same procedure as above. Finally, if I get a site to work, I make sure to save it. It's a lot of work to start out with, but it quickly becomes second-nature and I'd much rather do it this way than trust sites with third-party javascript on first-pageload. BlankSystemDaemon fucked around with this message at 00:00 on Jan 22, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2023 23:57
|
|
|
BlankSystemDaemon posted:Hmm, then I don't know where my rules are from, but I have this: The behind the scene rules are set automatically on a new install - I noticed those too recently and did a bit of googling. In short, they have no effect unless you go out of your way to delete them and enable "hard" mode. https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/issues/1068
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2023 00:02
|
|
|
VorpalFish posted:Huh. Is it as easy/quick to whitelist by domain on a permanent/temp basis as noscript? I run both but could see consolidating if it does the same thing and is as easy to use. Yes.  Here I've just clicked the microsoft.com box on the local side. That gives you a handy refresh to see if the page is working without closing the UI. Also a padlock to save or an eraser to revert. Anything you don't save is temporary by default. Once you get used to it, it is IMO a way better way to manage it than noscript. But it's also a bunch of totally unexplained boxes so it takes a minute to learn. For normal people noscript is easier, but if you're in this thread you can probably handle an impenetrable UI.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2023 00:21
|
|
|
Satire Forum Mom posted:The behind the scene rules are set automatically on a new install - I noticed those too recently and did a bit of googling. In short, they have no effect unless you go out of your way to delete them and enable "hard" mode. https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/issues/1068 My profile is getting on in years, so it's likely that quite a few things have changed. Alternatively, I've just forgotten that I did that at some point - because it sure looks like it's been done/hasn't been needed.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2023 00:26
|
|
|
Klyith posted:For normal people noscript is easier, but if you're in this thread you can probably handle an impenetrable UI. Maybe it's changed since then but last time I used noscript its interface sure as hell was much less intuitive then uBO, advanced user or not. There's also the master setting to allow/deny all JS execution (1st and 3rd-party) that can be toggled for each site with a click on the </> icon on the right-side of the panel, and that functionality is available even when "advanced user" mode isn't.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2023 00:53
|
|
|
Been playing with it in a vm and it is... not intuitive. Imo way steeper learning curve than noscript. Neat though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2023 03:06
|
|
|
Normal people won't bother to learn either Noscript or UBO's advanced mode. Nor to deal with the occasional web-designer-didn't-test-for-Firefox issue. If I were to setup a non-nerd friend's browser, I'd just put them on Brave and install UBO with default settings + ClearURLs + maybe Decentraleyes (it's maintained again). Add Sponsorblock and I Don't Care About Cookies for convenience.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2023 11:29
|
|
|
Doesn't Brave use some weird cryptocurrency token?
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2023 11:38
|
|
|
Tesseraction posted:Doesn't Brave use some weird cryptocurrency token? You have the option of enabling Brave's non-tracking ads in exchange for a token that you can then gift to your favourite youtubers or whatever. It's turned off by default so I don't consider it a problem. If you want a 100% pure Chrome-based browser the best choice is Ungoogled Chromium (or Bromite for Android), but non-nerds will get annoyed when Prime or Netflix refuse to stream in HD on it, and updating it isn't always fully automatic. I consider Brave as the next best option. Vivaldi is almost certainly fine too, but it isn't open-source so you need to really trust the devs. --- New question: I was trying to read some EPUBs on my Fedora PC, and I noticed that the selection of available fonts was pretty minimal. I'm not interested in adding individual fonts one by one, is there a package somewhere that will provide a reasonable selection?
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2023 12:53
|
|
|
My BF used to work for Opera and lost his job around the same time as the rest of the Oslo office, when the Chinese investors took over and moved development to Poland. He's now in Vivaldi (with many of his old colleagues), and my impression is that it's mostly "Jon von Tetschner just wants to make a browser" - so the feature priorities are more about what he finds interesting that day and less about what makes market sense. They're really bad at monetisation, though (they rely on von Tetschners private income to break even) - which I guess could be seen as a plus?
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2023 14:43
|
|
|
Computer viking posted:my impression is that it's mostly "Jon von Tetschner just wants to make a browser" Being fair to the guy that's basically been his entire Thing since the mid-90s. If there's one thing you can trust him on, making web browsers is his cocaine.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2023 16:29
|
|
|
NihilCredo posted:but it isn't open-source so you need to really trust the devs. I've said this in the browser threads, but I trust just about anyone more than I trust a crytocurrency company. Brave are a bunch of grifters, they've demonstrated it with previous behavior. All I can hear when someone says they're trustworthy is "well I haven't been a victim of the grift". Yet. VVV e: Nitrousoxide posted:unless folks fork and disable that. Vivaldi and Brave are both continuing to support manifest V2. Edge is not. In the long term, I'm not sure whether manifest V2 will continue forever, or if the chromium forks will go with a hybrid approach where they use Manifest V3 but with additional capabilities. FWIW that seems to be Firefox's plan: they will eventually be removing support for V2, but the Firefox version of V3 will include WebRequest blocking and other APIs that google is not. Klyith fucked around with this message at 16:54 on Jan 23, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2023 16:42
|
|
|
NihilCredo posted:You have the option of enabling Brave's non-tracking ads in exchange for a token that you can then gift to your favourite youtubers or whatever. It's turned off by default so I don't consider it a problem. Brave has the advantage of having a built in ad blocker that will ignore the change to manifest v3 since it doesn't use the extension API by virtue of being baked in. So it will probably be the most powerful blocker once manifest v3 is enforced upstream for chromium browsers in a few months unless folks fork and disable that. Font Manger has a gui that makes downloading whole font families easy https://flathub.org/apps/details/org.gnome.FontManager
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2023 16:45
|
|
|
Klyith posted:I've said this in the browser threads, but I trust just about anyone more than I trust a crytocurrency company. Brave are a bunch of grifters, they've demonstrated it with previous behavior. *rolling in in a wheelchair from all the times my legs have been shattered by a rugpull* I'm sure THIS crypto dev team won't rugpull my investment!
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2023 16:49
|
|
|
what Linux should I run on the random HP thin client that I have which has a surprisingly powerful CPU on it? I'm tired of running my various Dockers on my Mac because all they do is leak memory, but I've never lived on any server-y platform for more than a few hours.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2023 18:54
|
|
|
For use as a desktop or (mostly) headless server?
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2023 19:04
|
|
|
Headless server to mostly just be a reverse proxy
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2023 19:14
|
|
|
I'd probably pick ubuntu server. Lots of good docs and answers on the internet for "how do I do x" questions. All the crap that's made ubuntu annoying or bad on desktop doesn't apply. And it's free.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2023 19:20
|
|
|
Again I'd personally recommend Debian or something based off RHEL. But, you know, "Which distro is best" - the greatest thread in the history of forums, locked by a moderator after 12,239 pages of heated debate,
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2023 19:29
|
|
|
If you have no background or preference for a distro I'd avoid RedHat derivative stuff at this point. The OS works fine and all that, there's nothing technically wrong with it right now but the company has made some dumb decisions in the past few years and it feels like IBM is slowly loving the whole organization up. Fedora will probably be just fine for many years to come but I don't like the vibe coming from the company anymore.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2023 19:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 21:56 |
|
|
Yeah, that's fair, I don't like the precedent of them ditching CentOS, so I'd probably push more Debian - I've tended to be a bit sceptical of Ubuntu ever since that abortive Amazon partnership debacle.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2023 19:38
|
|