harsh3466

This is entirely anecdotally just my experience. I’m using musicbrainz Picard for my id/tagging and so far I haven’t had any issues.

I’ve got my music in Jellyfin as well, and I can always use that as a fallback if Navidrome does end up fucking me.

• Jellyfin
• Audiobookshelf
• Navidrome
• wiki.js
• Joplin server
• Wordpress
• Matrix (dendrite) server
• Ntfy
• Vaultwarden
• Baserow
• Forgejo
• more that I can’t think of off the top of my head

edit: added Forgejo

First, fuck Roku. This is exactly why my roku tv is not connected to the internet and never will be. My kodi box handles my entertainment needs.

It’s not specifically anti-ad, but the lemmy privacy community regularly discusses ad-blocking as it very much overlaps with privacy.

The article has some valid points about wanting certain kinds of notifications from an app, and hating the spam notifications those apps send.

However, iOS does indeed allow you to grant or deny an app notifications permission on first launch, and my default is to always deny.

The only apps I allow notifications for are phone, calendar, messages, my tasks, and my automations (shortcuts and some associated apps)

Yes!

Nah. Fuck the slotted screw. I hate that piece of shit screw. Phillips is acceptable. Torx is my preferred.

I know nothing about Qwant. I do have to say I’m kinda surprised to see Mozilla posting this. Being as the google search deal is Mozilla’s #1 revenue source.

I’m not mad that they’re bringing awareness to the ability to change the search engine, regardless of the merits of Qwant. Just a little surprised that their kinda openly thumbing their nose at Google.

Edit: spelling

It’s not exactly desktop, but I use Voyager. It’s a web app. You can also self host it if you don’t want to use the developer instance (I’ve got mine running in docker for desktop use. I use the Voyager app for iOS)

If only. It’d be a real April fool’s if Canonical announced they were abandoning snap and throwing their supory behind flatpak.

I don’t understand the actual mechanics of it, but my understanding is that it’s essentially like what happened with Volkswagon and their diesel emissions testing scheme where it had a way to know it was being emissions tested and so it adapted to that.

The malicious actor had a mechanism that exempted the malicious code when built from source, presumably because it would be more likely to be noticed when building/examining the source.

Edit: a bit of grammar. Also, this is my best understanding based on what I’ve read and videos I’ve watched, but a lot of it is over my head.

Great read. Thank you for sharing.