The Lounge is rated Safe For Work. If you're about to post something inappropriate for a shared office environment, then don't post it. No ads, no abuse, and no programming questions. Trolling, (political, climate, religious or whatever) will result in your account being removed.
Is a keyless chuck when Charlie has locked himself out again?
His name is Carlos.
"I controlled my laughter and simple said "No,I am very busy,so I can't write any code for you". The moment they heard this all the smiling face turned into a sad looking face and one of them farted. So I had to leave the place as soon as possible." - Mr.Prakash One Fine Saturday. 24/04/2004
Don't worry, I will eat your share for you. I'm just nice like that.
Although, how can you not like pancakes? The beauty of them is that you get to make them taste however you want by choosing your own filling! There must be something you like that they could be filled with?! BACON!!! for example?
I received by mail a link to an article called "Microsoft apparently removing ‘Offline Accounts’ settings for international Windows 10 users", that links via codeproject.com.
This article alerts that Microsoft puts more and more pressure to create a Microsoft account to be able to start a Windows 10 session, outside complicated procedures.
So, the logical conclusion should be we all have to install Unix.
Well, OK, I already observed that, by being unable to read the taskbar tooltips above the age of 50.
But ... It is impossible to read that article without disabling all scripts, otherwise it is hidden by a panel asking your agreement for "all cookies".
So, I search for the usual button to "reject all", but there is none, and considering the number of options, reject all would take at least one hour. Well, the article is interesting, but not to the point of spending one hour before beginning to read it.
And you cannot write to onmsft.com, as this would need scripts, and relaunch the problem on top.
So, what is your idea : is not the sum up of this article "hypocrisy" ?
Oh, is it ?
I often see sites that invite to accept cookies, but generally with an interface that takes into consideration users who do not want to accept cookies, even if this is clearly not the default selection.
I sometimes saw sites where I have to click four buttons for categories of cookies, another to go to "partners" list, and there a button to "reject all", but it is the first time I see it would be so long to reject all and I renounce.
A hosts file can be a solution, but then I first have to compile the list "partners" to verify they all are on my hosts file, not sure it would really be quicker, particularly in this case.
And in fact, they are not very smart indeed.
The classical way to manage this until a law invites to clearly request the user's agreement, was to have a panel down the page, that did not take more than a centimeter height, that you could thus pretty ignore, and anyway there was a button to close it.
If they did it that way I should have accepted, and I realize I should have accepted much more than I should have thought.
Well I have got Cookie Quick Manager, that also deletes cookies when opening Firefox. But I had to install it and parameterize it -although Firefox sometimes appeared to be deceiving on this.
And this does not prevent a panel to hide the page, if the site conceiver had this idea. For this I have NoScript, thanks to the fact that the site conceiver did not push the absurdity further- but I should find it more normal that websites avoid to attack readers, rather than these adopt arms to defend themselves. More specifically if the aim of the page is to denounce Microsoft's practices on the topic.
After solving a few problems on my machine, maybe I shall have a look at Waterfox, at least to be informed, thanks for this.
Last Visit: 1-Jun-20 10:38 Last Update: 1-Jun-20 10:38