> I noticed that Whatsapp is even worse than Chrome, it opens HTT PS even if I share HTTP links.

Firefox does this when I type in a URL and the server is down. I absolutely hate this behaviour, because I run a bunch of services inside my network.

If I tell my browser ‘fetch http://site.example,’ I mean for it to connect to site.example on HTTP on port 80 nothing more. If there is a web server run ning which wants to redirect me to https://site.example, awesome, but my browser should never assume I mean anything I did not say.)

Sorry for the offtopicness but could you please email [email protected] so I can explain why your comment only appeared here 14 hours after you tried 9 times to post it? :)

Some motherboards only support firmware updates applied from Windows. In 2025, which is just crazy to me.

Ironically, this Google page itself fails to work without Javascript enabled!

Ironically? For maximum monetization, Google needs js, to turn "your" web browser into their web browser. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42747092

> I applaud the author for trying. The underlying viewpoint is valid

Is it valid? I’m not really convinced. I’m not particularly a fan of copyright to begin with, and this looks like yet another abuse of it. I consider myself a creative person, and I fundamentally do not believe it is ethical to try to prevent people from employing tools to manipulate the creative works one gives to them.

Is the restriction on grantees not violating federal law a new one, or has it been around for ages?

Reaching out only to members of certain groups rather than others is still invidious discrimination. When based on characteristics like race, sex or national origin it is probably illegal, although I am not a lawyer.

Not that this is a wholesale defense of DEI initiatives, but what you're describing was exactly the state of affairs before DEI policies.

If I misunderstood your comment as being critical of DEI policies on the basis of being discriminatory along protected characteristics, I apologize in advance.

Regardless of what others do, the best thing to do is to choose the best license for one’s own software. One which preserves the freedom of one’s users and the openness of one’s code.

Sadly people don’t always do what’s best. We sometimes do what other people are doing on the theory that maybe someone else has thought it through and already decided that it _is_ the best thing to do. It’s not perfect, but then heuristics rarely are. But it’s cheap to implement.

> I have never once thought Visual Studio needs some way to edit its own source code on the fly... whats [sic] the actual use case?

Writing Visual Studio, for example. Debugging Visual Studio. Extending Visual Studio in more than the ways it has already provided.

It means not being constrained to do only those things someone else had seen fit to permit you to do. It means freedom.

> Extending Visual Studio in more than the ways it has already provided....It means freedom.

if youre able to edit the source code of a program, youre probably a programmer. you already had the freedom. and that can be done with git and the offline source code. its not freedom its convenience if anything

> with your logic, you can take the lisp interpreter out of emacs, stick it into say mspaint, and have an equally powerful program.

Yes, that would be pretty awesome. The GIMP tries to be something like that.

> direnv does exactly what you describe (and a lot more) using flake.nix

Direnv is awesome! Note, thought, that it does not depend on Nix, just a Unix-like OS and a supported shell: https://direnv.net/#prerequisites