[HN Gopher] Handpicked No-Signup Tools
___________________________________________________________________
Handpicked No-Signup Tools
Author : scastiel
Score : 186 points
Date : 2022-08-16 13:03 UTC (9 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.nosignup.tools)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.nosignup.tools)
| asicsp wrote:
| Found https://www.onelook.com/ under writing, looks good for word
| related lookups.
|
| I'd add https://edit.photo/ "No popups to close. No ads to
| ignore. No cookies to accept. No account to create. 100% Free"
| zubairq wrote:
| Yazz.com, a low code tool needs no sign up to use
| nileshtrivedi wrote:
| A couple of my tools that don't require signup:
|
| - Grapher (a visual editor for graph datasets with features like
| nested nodes, custom attributes on nodes and edges, and export in
| Cytoscape JSON or SVG format. Accessible at:
| https://grapherx.netlify.app/
|
| - LearnDB (A curated collection of links to educational resources
| organized by topics, formats, reviews and other tags). Accessible
| at: https://learndb.vercel.app/
| theo_champion wrote:
| Oh, my site https://snaplink.dev in in there, so random!
| bongobingo1 wrote:
| Site needs some work:
|
| - Clicking text in filter categories doesn't work
|
| - Images have pointer cursor but clicking them wont open the link
| DitheringIdiot wrote:
| Doesn't load for me, just says "there's nothing here yet"
| ux wrote:
| Alternatively, you can use http://bugmenot.com/ (doesn't work
| that often I must admit)
| elwebmaster wrote:
| This used to be a great tool but hasn't worked for me since 5-7
| years. Maybe it can be implemented in Web3.0 to make it more
| reliable?
| turtlebits wrote:
| If there's no signup and it's free, you have to very wary on what
| the "trick" is, because nothing is truly free. Most of the
| potentially useful ones looks like trial with locked features.
| lis wrote:
| We've put mindwendel[0] out for free - no tracking, no ads, no
| data harvesting.
|
| It's a tool to brainstorm and vote on ideas.
|
| We did so because we are using it ourselves and the resource
| usage is so low it doesn't cost us more to share it with
| others.
|
| [0] https://www.mindwendel.com/
| jabbany wrote:
| This is a good point.
|
| There should be separate categories for FOSS and no-hidden-
| monetization tools v.s. the other fly-in-the-soup tools where
| you have to drink around the fly...
| bil7 wrote:
| the FOSS community might disagree with this statement
| justin_oaks wrote:
| The FOSS community is also aware that there are scammers out
| there masquerading as good folks.
|
| Besides, free online tools with closed source server-side
| components are fundamentally different than open source
| tools.
| Swizec wrote:
| Or it could be some dude's personal tool that's easier to also
| make available to others. I do that a lot because remembering a
| custom domain is quicker than some CLI incantation.
|
| For example: https://techletter.app - I use it to construct my
| newsletters. Markdown with a few customizations into HTML for
| WYSIWYG editors. It's cheap enough to run that I don't care if
| others use it. I think the AWS credits add up to $3/mo.
| turtlebits wrote:
| I'd like to believe you, but just looking at the network
| requests for your markdown tool, I see
|
| facebook, google, simpleanalytics, stripe, sentry,
| checkoutpage
| Swizec wrote:
| And yet you can use it completely for free without signup
|
| Once upon a time I thought about trying to monetize, but
| meh. There's bigger fish to fry
| jabbany wrote:
| I wonder if the tools are also vetted for security. IIRC there
| was some supply chain attack that had to do with similar no-
| signup tools injecting SEO scam code
| (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27427330)
| justin_oaks wrote:
| Good point. I'm very wary of submitting anything security
| sensitive to an unfamiliar web site, especially one I don't
| have a business relationship with.
|
| If you have a business relationship with them (i.e. give them
| money), they're less likely to do something bad with your data
| since it may cause you to stop giving them money.
|
| That's why I won't use tools like an online PDF tool when I'm
| dealing with PDFs that contain sensitive information.
| elwebmaster wrote:
| I would add https://scrumpoker.app/ to the list also. Great
| initiative otherwise, have you considered driving the catalogue
| through GitHub PRs so the list can stay up to date?
| _dain_ wrote:
| Trainline.com is for buying train tickets in the UK/EU, doesn't
| require any signup at all. Pretty good.
| skilled wrote:
| remove.bg marked as Free has to be a joke, right? It's literally
| 1 credit for the "Free" experience...
|
| nice "Staff pick"
| codetrotter wrote:
| Agree. They only let you download a low resolution version of
| your image by default. To download full resolution, sign up is
| required, and to use it again will require getting credits if
| you want to download full resolution of those other images.
|
| Should not be considered a "no-signup tool" imo
| byyll wrote:
| In case the owner reads this, category filter check boxes are
| missing IDs which makes the label not associated with them and it
| can't be used to check/uncheck.
| 3np wrote:
| Friendly reminder to consider that any and all information
| supplied to these services may be harvested (with or without
| knowledge by the creator, depending on how they deploy).
|
| Consider using tor or similar to mask your IP, don't upload a
| scan of your passport to an online image editor, and so on.
|
| For tools that provide source, it's often straightforward to run
| them locally.
| kelnos wrote:
| Came here to say this too. A super useful addition to this
| website would be a blurb on each tool page that discloses how
| they make their money to keep the lights on, and what their
| privacy policy looks like. If they're fully supported by
| donations (or paid users, but have a no-account freemium plan
| somehow), and have a strong privacy policy, great! But if they
| support themselves by granting themselves a perpetual-use
| license to anything you upload, and sell whatever data on you
| they can, that's... not so great.
| [deleted]
| rozenmd wrote:
| I love when the website you land in _is_ the app, with no signup,
| like tldraw (https://www.tldraw.com/).
| justin_oaks wrote:
| Although it's got some nice things listed, the site seems to be
| missing some of the best tools out there. I recommend
| Diagrams.net [1] for creating diagrams. I use it as my primary
| diagramming tool.
|
| [1] https://www.diagrams.net/
| pawelkobojek wrote:
| Disclaimer: I'm a Co Founder of the service I'm linking.
|
| Scraping Fish (https://scrapingfish.com) doesn't require a sign
| up. It _is_ a paid service though. We (obviously) don 't sell
| your data.
| kwanbix wrote:
| RemoveBG is clearly not free (unless we count one single image)
| and you need to register (to get that single image). Love the
| product, but the "to-go" prices are too high imho.
| jakub_g wrote:
| Semi-related:
|
| Ever since moving from Windows to MacOS, I was desperately
| looking for a replacement for MSPaint for the following use case:
| "paste an image, crop it properly, crop further, put red bold
| square box around the interesting part, add some text and
| arrows".
|
| All tools are tried make this way less ergonomic than ol' good
| MSPaint.
|
| Then I remembered this ridiculous idea someone had to port
| MSPaint to JavaScript: https://jspaint.app/
|
| Hallelujah!
| ecopoesis wrote:
| Preview, despite its name, does this really well. Its freeform
| drawing tools are a little different (shapes and lines are
| vector, not pixel) but they're very easy to use.
| vladvasiliu wrote:
| You can do this with Preview - Annotations
|
| You can have the annotations palette always displayed. I
| haven't used MSPaint since the Windows XP days, but I don't
| think it can be any easier than this.
| justin_oaks wrote:
| I mostly need to do that kind of thing on screenshots. The
| Flameshot app has worked really well for taking screenshots and
| annotating them.
|
| https://flameshot.org/
| etaioinshrdlu wrote:
| I like photopea nowadays.
| unsupp0rted wrote:
| I would take a screenshot of part of my screen (CMND+Shift+4),
| mark up the screenshot with a red box then send.
|
| A screenshot is plenty high res enough already. If anything
| you'll want to shrink or before sending.
| ryangittins wrote:
| Great idea! I've submitted my side project, https://siftrss.com/.
|
| It lets you add filters to any RSS feed for free in a few
| seconds. It's great for filtering news, podcasts, and anything
| else you get via RSS down to just the items you want to see.
| subeadia wrote:
| I bookmarked this two months ago--what a fantastic utility!
| ryangittins wrote:
| Thanks, I'm glad you're liking it!
| dasil003 wrote:
| No Excalidraw?
| justin_oaks wrote:
| I just checked it out. That's a really cool drawing tool. I
| love how it allows you to give a hand-drawn feel to your
| drawings and diagrams.
| foobazzy wrote:
| I've been using it during design interviews. Love the
| plethora of shortcuts. It's great!
|
| https://excalidraw.com/
|
| https://github.com/excalidraw/excalidraw
| Retr0id wrote:
| Add https://8mb.video/ to the list - it does exactly what it says
| on the tin (and while it doesn't explicitly mention it, its
| broader purpose is to compress videos down to Discord's file size
| limit)
| iamjackg wrote:
| I've had a bash script in my PATH that uses ffmpeg exactly to
| do this for the longest time. This is great!
| skybrian wrote:
| Looks like this does the work on the server? I wonder if it
| could be done in WebAssembly to avoid the round trip and server
| load?
| zozbot234 wrote:
| It _could_ be done, but it might be slow.
| WMaking wrote:
| Thank you! I've spent far too much time in HandBrake when I
| could've been using this. You have improved my life
| justin_oaks wrote:
| For developer tools, I noticed that CyberChef [1] wasn't on the
| list so I submitted it. I regularly use it for
|
| - URL encoding/decoding
|
| - QR code generation
|
| - JSON and XML pretty-printing
|
| - Base64 encoding/decoding
|
| but it does way more than that.
|
| [1] https://gchq.github.io/CyberChef/
| franga2000 wrote:
| For anyone who isn't convinced yet: it can not just _do_ all
| those things, it can _chain_ them. You can build a pipeline
| jist by dragging and dropping blocks, with live results and
| even recommendations when some formats are detected .
|
| During a reverse engineering project I built this to extract
| some audio data from a very strange API: string replace | json
| parse + query | base64 decode | gunzip | add wav header.
| Switching to zstd and a different bitrate took 2 clicks. Really
| helped me stay "in the zone" while working - having to open up
| a code editor and Python docs to write this from scratch
| would've taken me completely out of it and wasted a significant
| amount of time.
| TazeTSchnitzel wrote:
| I feel like I shouldn't trust an encryption website by the
| British NSA not to steal my data, but given a million other
| people must have had the same thought, and that it's open
| source, maybe someone would have noticed by now.
| justin_oaks wrote:
| Those are valid concerns and it's smart to think about those
| things. I had the same thoughts initially.
|
| Using your browser developer tools, you can see what HTTP
| requests it makes. It's all just loading code.
|
| Also, you can use a local copy of it to ensure you're not
| getting a hacked/targeted version that's different between
| times that you use it. I use a local copy. You can find a
| downloadable zip file in the releases section:
| https://github.com/gchq/CyberChef/releases
|
| You could also build it from the source, but I haven't
| bothered to set that up.
| ho_schi wrote:
| Why I should... * Remove a background "online"?
| * Write a resume "online"? * Create an E-mail signature
| "online"?[1] * Create a profile picture "online"? *
| ...
|
| Operating systems are happily executing programs on your
| computer, quick, autonomous and reliable. The first in the list
| which makes sense is Jitsi.
|
| Here some personal recommendations: * Use GIMP
| or KRITA * Use LibreOffice or Latex with moderncv[2]
| (We're on hackernews, right?) * Use your E-Mail
| application and plaintext! * Again GIMP or use included
| tools of the application or network (Signal and other provide it)
| * For polls you can use often included features of messengers
| (e.g. reactions in Signal) or non-commercial sites [3]
|
| [1] Please use plaintext
|
| [2] https://github.com/moderncv/moderncv
|
| [3] https://terminplaner4.dfn.de
| jccalhoun wrote:
| A lot of people would rather use a single use web site than
| install a program and learn how to use it. There may be valid
| reasons to download and install a program but I can't even
| convince anyone to install a password manager so if my friends
| ask me how to remove a background on a pick I'm more likely to
| point them to a website than a program.
| asicsp wrote:
| Resume is understandable, if there are themes to choose from
| (kinda like Overleaf).
| Cthulhu_ wrote:
| You're already making the assumption that people use desktop or
| laptop systems and can actually install software; what if they
| don't have administrator access? What if they're using a
| chromebook? What if they're on mobile? What if they don't know
| Latex? And LibreOffice is kinda... ugly and slow in my opinion.
|
| They're low-barrier alternatives to the options you provide,
| and that's absolutely fine.
| Retr0id wrote:
| RemoveBG is very good at what it does, and it certainly would
| be nice if there was an offline version. However, there isn't,
| and I don't think you'll find an offline tool that comes close
| in terms of quality of result.
|
| There are cases were privacy of data isn't a real concern -
| e.g. you're about to publish the resulting file anyway. If you
| need to keep your data private, then sure, don't pipe it
| through an online tool. But that doesn't mean the usescases
| aren't there.
| bertman wrote:
| >However, there isn't, and I don't think you'll find an
| offline tool that comes close in terms of quality of result.
|
| There is: https://github.com/danielgatis/rembg
| Retr0id wrote:
| This is great, but again does not come close in terms of
| quality of result.
|
| Take the lion example from the readme: https://raw.githubus
| ercontent.com/danielgatis/rembg/master/e...
|
| The alpha blending of the fur around the edges is way off.
|
| Compare to RemoveBG results:
| https://i.imgur.com/Jt2ICsD.png
|
| Unfortunately it won't let me export in full-res without
| creating an acount, but the fur is handled properly.
| [deleted]
| solardev wrote:
| In short, because dedicated developers making one-off projects
| that do one thing well (a la the Unix philosophy) can serve it
| over the internet easier than making standalone cross-platform
| apps.
|
| RemoveBG, for example, does a FAR better job (in less than a
| second) than manual lassoing, feathering, etc. Eventually
| Photoshop added a similar feature, but not until RemoveBG and
| its ilk were on the web for a few years. I'm not sure if GIMP
| has similar auto-bg removal, or if it works as well... but even
| if it did, it's still more of a learning curve than "upload
| picture and push remove". Even after two decades of Photoshop
| usage, it's still faster for me to use RemoveBG to create, say,
| a new Slack emoji... often I can finish before Photoshop even
| finishes loading.
|
| For resumes, I use Kickresume all the time because they make
| the process FAR easier than creating a similar thing from
| scratch in Illustrator, InDesign, or Word. Unlike a dumb
| template, the resume websites understand the "semantics" of a
| resume (as in, this section is your employment history, this is
| your skills, this is your references) and can theme them
| intelligently, such as displaying skills as numbers, stars,
| progress bars, or words ("Advanced", "Beginner"), or easily
| reformatting the dates for you. Then it saves all your resumes,
| one per employer, in its own easy to use cloud storage. When
| submitting a bunch of applications (because I'm not fancy
| enough to have a huge personal network), it takes the time-per-
| resume from hours down to minutes. It's a huge timesaver.
|
| Email signature: Agreed, HTML sigs are overkill.
|
| Profile picture: Again, like RemoveBG, it's so much easier to
| use this than having to learn a vector graphics program,
| manipulating/centering circles, adding strokes and fills,
| figuring how to properly place text inside a shape (THIS
| circle, not that one, and flowing this way, not that!), etc.
|
| There's nothing wrong with desktop apps for complex use cases
| (Office is still way better on the desktop than on the web, for
| example) but for one-offs, having an easy web app to go to and
| get the job done in a few seconds is waaaaaaay easier.
|
| Not all of us on HN are ideological purists. No way I'm going
| to bother with LibreOffice and the JVM and Latex just to make a
| resume when a website can have it done in 5-10 min in a WYSIWYG
| and zero learning curve.
| zzo38computer wrote:
| What if you want a "one thing" simple program to be used by
| command-line (with pipes), though? What if you want to work
| without internet connections, too? Interaction with other
| programs (specified by user)? Use local display options for
| GUI? etc? HTML is not very good for that, I think. (While you
| can make local HTML files that work without internet
| connection, it isn't very well for some kinds of uses. And,
| this does not solve any of the other issues that I had
| mentioned, too.)
| solardev wrote:
| > command-line (with pipes)
|
| Most people just wouldn't. You're still free to use imagick
| or gd if you, yourself, want to, but RemoveBG is a far
| better choice for most users.
|
| > What if you want to work without internet connections,
| too?
|
| Then you have to find special tools for that, because it's
| a less and less common scenario. But the online-only tool
| is still useful if you're online 99% of your work life
| anyway.
|
| > local display, GUI, other uses cases, etc.
|
| Yes, absolutely you're right, there will always be cases
| where tool X doesn't fit edge case Y for user Z. But the
| web is the "good enough" option for an overwhelming
| majority of situations, and I'd argue the _preferred_
| option over a desktop app for many use cases -- everything
| from background removal to Google Docs.
|
| Web apps can (and have) replaced email, office tools,
| encyclopedias, disc drives, etc. because they are so low-
| barrier, even if they don't have 100% feature parity with
| the older tools. Simplicity is very attractive, and quite
| valuable, for people who don't need all the power user
| features.
| [deleted]
| ranger_danger wrote:
| Why? Because 99% of the world's population prefers it.
| TekMol wrote:
| Because of the sandboxing browsers provide.
|
| The barrier to install native software should be very, very
| high. It is like having unprotected sex with someone. There
| needs to be a high level of trust and a long term commitment.
|
| Using a website on the other hand is like exchanging a few nice
| words. You can do that with a stranger, without much risk.
|
| It is also easier to handle. A website can be bookmarked and
| usually loads in a second or so.
|
| Websites are also easy to customize. Usually you can bookmark
| individual pages directly. Often with the parameters you
| regularly need. You can zoom in and out of the interface. You
| can customize the HTML and CSS and even the functionality via
| bookmarklets.
|
| And you can link to websites and everybody - independent of
| their OS - can instantly use it.
| bertman wrote:
| >Using a website on the other hand is like exchanging a few
| nice words
|
| This is absolutely not true if you're supposed to upload
| (possibly private) images to some random server for e.g.
| background removal.
| TekMol wrote:
| Sure, the words you exchange are now known to the other
| party.
|
| But a native app can upload anything it wants anywhere. Not
| just the images you processed but anything it can access on
| your computer.
| jcelerier wrote:
| > But a native app can upload anything it wants anywhere.
|
| can you exhibit one single instance of this happening in
| for instance Debian or Arch official packages
| eitland wrote:
| Good points on both sides.
|
| But I am absolutely still in the camp that trusts Gimp
| way more than uploading photos to a random website.
| nonrandomstring wrote:
| > Good points on both sides.
|
| All the points are true, so we need to dig a little
| deeper and be more specific about what is at issue here.
|
| Online and Native are quite different trust and utility
| models.
|
| Web applications protect the execution environment owned
| and managed by the user. They do so at the cost of
| compromising _some_ of the user 's data, which must
| usually be processed remotely. The protection applies to
| _most_ of the user 's data. This trust tradeoff is
| iterated/ongoing, so that benefits and harms accrue over
| time.
|
| Native applications make a one-off trust transaction. "Is
| it safe to install on my device?". In the win situation
| the benefit is speedy and safe processing of _all_ the
| user 's data for all future time. If the user is tricked,
| then the loss is catastrophic, exposing potentially _all_
| of the user 's data, perhaps silently/undetectably for
| considerable future time.
|
| That's a very simplified and perhaps naive distinction.
| Despite the pressures of surveillance capitalism, some
| web services are honest, TLS and GDPR work, and some
| users are sensible about what they share online. On the
| flip side we are seeing that devices come pwned from the
| factory, at the hardware or firmware level, which makes a
| nonsense of the whole "endpoint security" paradigm.
| probably_wrong wrote:
| > _Sure, the words you exchange are now known to the
| other party_
|
| ... and their business partners, and _their_ business
| partners, and so on. That 's a lot of ToS to go through
| just to check who gets a copy of my data.
|
| Gimp may have access to my computer, but I would be
| _shocked_ if it were to upload a single file without my
| permission.
| lupire wrote:
| xzjis wrote:
| > Using a website on the other hand is like exchanging a few
| nice words. You can do that with a stranger, without much
| risk.
|
| Considering surveillance capitalism and all the trackers
| these commercial websites have, it's more like dating a spy
| that tries to know you better. The risk you take is that the
| small amount of data you give to them will be linked to the
| huge amount of data they already have on you.
| whartung wrote:
| > The barrier to install native software should be very, very
| high.
|
| No, the barrier that the software must leap to do awful
| things to your computer should be very high.
|
| Folks complain about the secure enclave, the signing
| requirements, the notarization, sandboxes, etc. But those are
| all barriers on the producer side. App stores help mitigate
| this. Folks don't think twice about downloading an iOS app
| from the app store (I do, but I'm not normal -- I hate apps).
| Look at the hoops Apple had to, and continues to, go through
| to keep applications from unknowingly looting the user.
|
| The most criminal thing, historically, done by Windows over
| the ages was simply requiring EVERYTHING to be "admin". You
| couldn't install Minesweeper without typing in your password.
| So, everyone, naturally, automatically, does so without a
| second thought. They're conditioned that this is OK.
|
| It's not OK. It was never OK. The whole idea of having to do
| that, type in your password to install software, should have
| a big red, DO NOT DO THIS, bouncing and dancing bear around
| it.
|
| The Mac has always had less of this. Seems most of the
| exploits require users to download software and give it admin
| privileges. Yea, Don't Do That.
|
| Of course, the problem is the culture. It would be nice to
| not have to Caveat Emptor every darn thing under the
| assumption that it's horribly dangerous. It would be nice to
| grab a plum off a display and eat it without having to vet
| the vendor. But, bad actors, rampant bad actors, and rampant
| "good actors" behaving badly, have proven that we just don't
| live in that kind of world.
|
| Installing "safe" software, should be simple.
| solardev wrote:
| We have an ecosystem where running nontrusted software can
| be relatively safe... it's just on the web.
|
| Legacy desktop OSes don't have the permissions models that
| make this easily achievable outside the browser. Even the
| mobile platforms are only slowly evolving (I want this app
| to access ONLY this folder or that picture, not all my user
| files).
|
| Frankly I would never trust users to be able to
| differentiate between sane and unnecessary permissions. If
| you make everything super granular or repetitive it's just
| going to lead to banner blindness (yes, damn it Google, I
| want this hiking app to know precisely where I am... I told
| you the last seven times you asked). Or on iOS, having to
| enter my longass Apple password just to download a free app
| whenever the fingerprint scanner doesn't work (which is
| usually). Even without security concerns, native apps are a
| pain in the ass.
|
| The web is nice in that most of the sandboxing is invisible
| unless you need special sensor permissions (location, mic,
| camera, etc.) and so the user never gets bugged about it.
| Or has to worry about platform idiosyncrasies, disk space,
| versions, etc. In many ways the web is a superior app
| delivery platform. Why bother installing "safe" software
| when you can just run it in a sandbox without any
| installation or prompts at all? What Java and .NET tried to
| do back in the day now just happens, sight unseen, in
| browser windows.
| zzo38computer wrote:
| Unfortunately there are problems with running it on the
| web (and many problems with its design, and problems with
| implementations), as well as problems with native
| permission models of some systems, too.
|
| For example, it is not very good working for: command-
| line with pipes, non-Unicode character encodings, non-USB
| devices, non-HTTP(S) protocols, working local files
| without internet connection, interaction with other local
| programs in a good way, etc.
|
| Permissions need not be asking every time (if user will
| configure it to always allow or deny or other settings),
| and need not only be "allow"/"deny"; for example, if it
| requests the camera access then the user might enter a
| command to use instead, which might access the camera
| (possibly with filters such as fault simulation), or do
| something else such as returns a still picture (which you
| can use if you do not have a camera, for example), and
| this can be "wired" by the user configuration if not
| wanted to enter every time.
|
| Disk space is going to matter for any program that stores
| files, although one which is designed well will allow the
| end user to specify a disk quota for this program if
| desired, and will also allow specifying default disk
| quotas in the manifest, in order that you can use it
| without needing to know about these things and manually
| set them up, too.
|
| I had tried to make the specification of "VM3" which is
| meant to, among other things, solve these problems. A
| program can be install or just run, and all I/O must use
| extensions, which makes both extensible capabilities and
| highly user configurable capabilites. The same is true
| for program entries (e.g. command-line, GUI, etc). There
| are also some other minor things I had done differently
| due to I think being better than what some other designs
| are working.
| solardev wrote:
| I think that kind of computing will become more and more
| the realm of specialists (devs, computer scientists,
| whatever) doing their work, with specialized tools and
| permissions models. For 99.9% of regular people, there is
| no reason to expose them to so much unnecessary
| complexity.
|
| Just like with supply pipelines, most people don't need
| to care or know about information pipelines... they just
| want to consume the thing they're there to get, whether
| it's refined petroleum or some unit of information.
|
| All tools are built up from layers of primitives, like a
| car is made up of components and nuts and bolts and such,
| but drivers don't need to know or care how its ECU or ICE
| works. I think the web / mass-market computing is
| similar... it just doesn't (and I'd argue shouldn't)
| matter to most people. It's the difference between
| engineering for other engineers and designing for end-
| users, two related but ultimately separate concerns.
| nayuki wrote:
| > having unprotected sex
|
| Ah yes, the Jargon File said things about that:
| http://catb.org/jargon/html/S/SEX.html
|
| > SEX: /seks/ 1. Software EXchange. A technique invented by
| the blue-green algae hundreds of millions of years ago to
| speed up their evolution, which had been terribly slow up
| until then. Today, SEX parties are popular among hackers and
| others (of course, these are no longer limited to exchanges
| of genetic software). In general, SEX parties are a Good
| Thing, but unprotected SEX can propagate a virus.
| jcelerier wrote:
| yet in my life I need a lot more hands to count the number of
| times visiting some website caused problems, vs something bad
| happening due to installing $OPEN_SOURCE_SOFTWARE (exactly
| zero times to me)
| teknolog wrote:
| Heck, a pencil worked great back when I was a kid!
|
| As someone who has to deal with IT security, I will never
| install anything local if I can avoid it.
| ho_schi wrote:
| Therefore upload the resume online on a random site? Which is
| the most sensible data and a security breach. There tough
| requirements on companies regarding handling your resumes for
| reasons.
| jehb wrote:
| I understand the concern, but looking at LinkedIn suggests
| this is not a threat model the vast majority of users are
| bothered by.
| gonzo41 wrote:
| Your ignoring that most people have linked in accounts. A
| resume isn't exactly secret information.
| WA wrote:
| Why install software, if I can do this quickly in a browser,
| especially if I need to do this only once?
| Retr0id wrote:
| Not to mention the fact that the browser is very well
| sandboxed and security hardened.
| ryanianian wrote:
| > browser is very well sandboxed and security hardened.
|
| But the back-end of a browser-only tool may not be. And it
| may not be online the next time you go to use it. Or it may
| lose or sell your data.
| Retr0id wrote:
| Sure, there's a confidentiality issue with whatever data
| you upload, but there's low risk of the rest of the data
| on your system being compromised.
| egberts1 wrote:
| Very ... well ... sandboxed ... browsers?
|
| Ummm, there's Spectre in JavaScript.
| Retr0id wrote:
| And everywhere else? Although it does present a risk to
| sandboxed environments, Spectre is not a sandboxing
| issue, it's a CPU bug.
| egberts1 wrote:
| Semantic, shemantic; Risk remains the same.
| Retr0id wrote:
| The risk is very much not the same. Running native code
| is much higher risk, compared to running JS inside a
| browser.
|
| The list of bad things a web app can do is a strict
| subset of the list of bad things a native app can do
| (after all, the web browser is just another a native
| app).
| zzo38computer wrote:
| While it is true, there are problems with customization
| and other features; a better sandboxed environment will
| be needed which e.g. can use command-line, better ability
| to control and make connections/interactions with other
| programs in the computer, locally storing file (even
| using without internet connections), etc. The web browser
| / HTML is, I think, not a very well designed sandboxed
| environment, really.
| egberts1 wrote:
| Notably if JavaScript can access a file system then all
| bets are off.
| mcshicks wrote:
| Because websites change the rules when they get popular.
| wahnfrieden wrote:
| I think you're confused, browsers don't require server
| custody of your data. browser vs app isn't the meaningful
| distinction
| marzell wrote:
| Even just in the first example of removing a background, it
| is very intuitive how to do it using the website listed. But
| GIMP, for all it's improvements in recent years, does not
| make it nearly as intuitive, fast, and easy for a brand-new
| user to remove a background. And being presented with that UI
| would be intimidating for a lot of users compared to using a
| single-purpose website with a specific workflow.
| sabr wrote:
| Smort.io doesn't require a signup too! Smort lets you easily
| annotate and share an article or arXiv paper. Just add Smort.io
| before any URL to read it in Smort.
|
| Demo: https://smort.io/demo/home
|
| Disclaimer: I built Smort
| TekMol wrote:
| I typed "upscale" and got nothing.
|
| Is there any good AI based image upscaling software online?
| xzjis wrote:
| Search for waifu2x websites, there are tons on the internet.
| Here's one: https://waifu2x.io/
| adamhowell wrote:
| https://letsenhance.io/
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-08-16 23:02 UTC)