My next article will be on the topic of bypassing the Cloudflare bot protection. You can then compare with how Selenium handles this problem (if at all).
Any examples besides Linkedin? Tell me what sites you're trying to target and I'll have a look to see what can be done with them. It takes some pretty evil Javascript obfuscation to block me and only one site has been able to do that. I doubt that the sites you're hitting are anywhere near that evil, lol. I would appreciate it if you have a good example that I could use in a future article.
WASM runs in a sandbox. It can only talk to the outside world via Javascript so you can forget the idea that it might be a way to crack through browser security.
Maybe somebody will make a web browser with all of the security locks disabled. Sort of like the Russian commander in "Hunting for Red October" who disabled his missiles' security features in order to more effectively target the American sub but then got blown up by his own missile.
Is there a happy in-between? Maybe not. What looks perfect to one user might appear atrocious to another. What is a poor website operator to do???
I dislike black-on-white and don't understand gray-on-black which seems to be popular now due to gamma settings being cranked up to 11 or something. I try to use some color as an in-between but that may take some time to "perfect".
I see. I don't have a wide-screen monitor (still using an old tube type until it finally expires but it's taking a few decades, lol). I've wondered whether people actually like reading websites on wide-screen. Some do and some don't. What would you suggest for a max width?
You could also try zooming in. My apps don't expand to full width because of the video box but you can zoom.
I voted "light" because there is no "medium" option. Why is it a choice between gray-on-black or black-on-white? I would choose a "color" mode if there was such an option on the table. Maybe we can see a return to the yellow-on-blue mode which was popular with text editors a few decades ago?
I've been asking the same question myself though I'm not trying to get paying customers. I'm offering free stuff but I can't get many takers. One customer per 1000 views is pretty much the best you can expect. You need a million views to snag 1000 customers. I would suggest that you stick to your plan and go through the free routes first. This will help you to gauge the level of interest before you bankrupt yourself paying for marketing (which never lives up to expectations).
I do have an anecdote. I have a repository on the Internet Archive. One of my items had just a few hundred views but, all of a sudden, it accumulated over 3000 views. I posted a comment on the item asking what sparked the sudden interest. Someone replied that it was a user comment on Youtube. Makes me wonder if I'm not making a huge mistake by not registering on Youtube so I can post self-promotional comments everywhere.
I've updated the app to remove the user agent string so that the link will not redirect to "m.youtube.com". I hope that's all that's needed to fix this.
I have information that Youtube is redirecting from "www.youtube.com" to "m.youtube.com" when it detects a mobile user agent. The page data that is returned appears to be incompatible with the app's parsing code.
Who uses the Start Menu? I click on that maybe once in a blue moon to maybe uninstall something. This is just another reason to start doing the Linux thing once this Win10 machine needs to be replaced. Ironically, the reason why I didn't get into Linux is because whatever it was that I installed long ago looked the same as Windows and it had a Start Menu (by a different name). Yeah, I guess I could have reconfigured or replaced the desktop manager but it wasn't worth the bother at the time. The calculus, however, is changing rapidly.
The strong nuclear force is a figment of the physicists' imaginations. Likewise the weak nuclear force, dark matter and dark energy. The Standard Model does not align with reality nor reality with the mythical Big Bang, hence the need to dream up these unicorns. For some enlightenment, check out Miles Mathis:
He may be wrong on some things and maybe he's really the CIA leaking secret info to the rest of us pleebs for whatever reason but a lot of what he says makes scary good sense. Regardless of whether you are convinced, you will come away with the impression that modern physicists are indeed a bunch of whackos who are just going through the motions in exchange for billions of dollars in grants. When they can't get their observations to match their predictions, they just fake it (the Higgs boson).
I sympathize. The task is easily accomplished with a properly coded regular expression but, damn, regex is haaaard. Also, there are too many gotchas in parsing random text. It's a no-win situation sometimes. Doing nothing might be the better idea.