Pirate2377@lemmy.zipEnglish
1 hourWait, browsers still had RSS support? I thought that was deprecated a decade ago. I’ve been using dedicated apps for them
- Clay_pidgin@sh.itjust.worksEnglish38 minutes
Vivaldi does. I assume there are chrome and Firefox plugins too.
Gormadt@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
2 hoursYouTube broke my RSS feed for YouTube subscriptions by breaking how embedded videos works.
Now when I try to click on videos in my RSS feed it just gets me “Error 153” every time.
It’s so frustrating!
I’m currently using Feedbro on Firefox (the add-on hasn’t been updated in 2 years) but if anyone has any recommendations that don’t get that error I’m all ears!
vortexal@sopuli.xyzEnglish
3 hoursI’m a little confused about this. While I’ve been using RSS feeds for several years, my only experience with RSS feeds is with Inoreader. Will this cause issues with the way that I’ve been using RSS feeds or will I be unaffected?
- 2 hours
Only if you’re using the Chrome extension, maybe. This is just Google trying to kill even the memory of Google Reader by fucking with the biggest competitor to social media in Chrome.
MinnesotaGoddam@lemmy.worldEnglish
4 hoursi browsed the web via RSS for a while. Maybe it’s time to get back to that. at least for some food blogs or something. anyone got a good rss reader?
- 31 minutes
Got FreshRSS running on my home server and feeding a couple of client programs. RSSGuard on my computers and Readrops on my phone. No complaints, got it doing exactly what I want it to do.
- flameleaf@lemmy.worldEnglish56 minutes
Thunderbird. It feels right at home paired with Firefox, and has extremely powerful message filtering built in.
- Vegafjord eo@lemmy.mlEnglish3 hours
I like miniflux. Lightweight, web based, selfhostable, assisted hosting and compatible with third party clients.
SpookyBogMonster@lemmy.mlEnglish
3 hoursI use FluentReader, and an extension that restores Firefox’s old RSS functionality.
MinnesotaGoddam@lemmy.worldEnglish
3 hoursi currently use firefox. mind sharing that extention with us please?
JuvenoiaAgent@piefed.caEnglish
7 hoursI remember using XSLT to make my site’s RSS look good around 20 years ago. I thought it was so cool, though XSLT was awful to write.
- Feyd@programming.devEnglish11 hours
Chrome’s team argues that because only about 0.02% of page loads use XSLT, it’s not worth the maintenance burden.
Surely given the volume of browser usage, 0.02% is still a very substantial amount of usage. Lazy fucks
- cecilkorik@piefed.caEnglish2 hours
0.02% of page loads is honestly way more than I would’ve expected. The fact that they would look at that number and see an excuse to remove a feature like this is honestly a gigantic red flag for the way these browsers are being developed. Granted, it’s not that surprising if you’ve been paying attention to the embrace-extend-extinguish march of web technologies towards a walled garden controlled by tech giants, but this is part of the writing on the wall, folks.
Kushan@lemmy.worldEnglish
10 hoursI’m not entirely sure what the “maintenance burden” even is on a tech that hasn’t changed in decades.
- halfapage@lemmy.worldEnglish9 hours
what burden? I thought burdens don’t exist anymore thanks to the power of LLMs???
- floofloof@lemmy.caEnglish5 hours
From the article:
Google says it’s removing XSLT to address security vulnerabilities. The underlying library that processes XSLT in Chrome (libxslt) is an aging C/C++ codebase with known memory safety issues. Chrome’s team argues that because only about 0.02% of page loads use XSLT, it’s not worth the maintenance burden.
It’s debatable whether Google, with all its resources, really needs to do this, especially given that 0.02% of all page loads is still quite a lot. But there are certainly times when it’s better to just delete seldom-used old code from your project to lower the maintenance burden and reduce the surface area for attacks.
- 5 hours
Big tech has been straining the libxml2 dev who recently got annoyed with them. Instead of helping maintain the libraries they ship on billions of computers, Google is trying to reduce there use.
https://socket.dev/blog/libxml2-maintainer-ends-embargoed-vulnerability-reports
confuser@lemmy.zipEnglish
10 hoursIt seems to have to do with how it looks formatting wise and not about availability or not, that is what is being meant.
Björn@swg-empire.deEnglish
9 hoursThat’s just for those few websites that use their RSS feed as their content source. If they want to keep doing that they can just get a JavaScript library that provides XSLT functionality. The feed itself is untouched.
- Papierkorb@feddit.orgEnglish1 hour
Would be easy to render the XSLT in the server. Could be cached nicely as well.
Björn@swg-empire.deEnglish
4 hoursIt’s really hard to decide whether XSLT or JavaScript is worse. On the one hand XSLT wasn’t cobbled together in a weekend. On the other it requires you to write XML and its “arrays” start at 1.
- Serinus@lemmy.worldEnglish9 hours
Should be fine. They don’t have to use a browser to retrieve that feed.
- smh@slrpnk.netEnglish4 hours
We use it at my library/archive to convert EADs (XML finding aids) into something we can present to a human.
This change breaks something that’s been working for us without issue for over a decade, and it’s personally a PITA because I’m the only dev-adjacent person in the library and fixing this takes me away from other stuff. (I’m spread thin and we’ve been in a hiring freeze for 5 years. I love my coworkers but there’s so much work stuff I have to deprioritoze in order to do the important stuff, it feels unfair when a big corporation decides to break something on me.)
- Clent@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish11 hours
There are libraries that can polyfill this with almost zero effort. List should not effect any active site that offers rss feeds.













