potentially escaping the notion that because Qt is C++, it is not as safe to use.
How does this even potentially escape the notion? Qt is still C++, and still unsafe, no matter what you use for the rest of your application. And the fact that Widgets is being left out in the cold doesn't sit well with me either.
They still won't even say what these "bridges" are, other than it "does not necessarily replace existing bindings". Does that mean it's still yet another binding?
What would have been really nice IMO are some plain C bindings, for both widgets and QML.
My experience with IPFS over the years has been abysmal, and I think people have said the protocol design cannot sustain any more growth, which is not even that big yet at all.
You also cannot realistically search for files reliably by its hash, because of how files are divided into smaller pieces, whereby the method of dividing can change between clients, making the hashes incomparable. BitTorrent v2 solves this to my understanding, but almost nobody uses it for some reason.
Often times you need to wait several minutes for IPFS to find a file, assuming it ever finds it, which sometimes fails even on two boxes next to each other.
IDK about "still" since you can disable the GIL and also use multiple threads/processes, but I get your point. But rust is certainly not the only other language that can bring more efficiency or parallel performance, was my point. Yes it allows you to use multiple cores, but so do many other languages, including python.
Can you name any private trackers that actually have a need for federation?
The biggest issue I personally have with BT (v1) is not being able to search for a file by its checksum. I think v2 can do this, but almost nobody uses it in my experience.
And even if the game did greatly benefit from it, most people are already using esync/fsync in lutris/proton/etc. and so they also won't really see a difference from what they're used to.
What you’re doing is filtering out bots that can’t be bothered to execute JavaScript. You don’t need to do a computational heavy PoW task to do that.
Most bots and scrapers from what I've seen already are using (headless) full browsers, and hence are executing javascript, so I think anything that slows them down or increases their cost can reduce the traffic they bring.
Canvas fingerprinting filters out bots better than PoW
Source? I strongly disagree, and it's not hard to change your browser characteristics to get a new canvas fingerprint every time, some browsers like firefox even have built-in options for it.
it assumes computational costs are significant expense for scrapers compared to proxy costs
The assumption is correct. PoW has been proven to significantly reduce bot traffic... meanwhile the mere existence of residential proxies has exploded the availability of easy bot campaigns.
Canvas fingerprinting would work.
Demonstrably false... people already do this with abysmal results. Need to visit a clownflare site? Endless captcha loops. No thanks
many native elements either do not function like people want or cannot be styled the same