I had this exact experience with my workstation SSD (NTFS) after a short power loss while NPM was running. After I turned the computer back on, several files (package.json, package-lock.json and many others inside node_modules) had the correct size on disk but were filled with zeros.
I think the last time I had corrupted files after a power loss was in a FAT32 disk on Win98, but you'd usually get garbage data, not all zeros.
> but you'd usually get garbage data, not all zeros.
You are less likely to get garbage with an SSD in combination with a modern filesystem because of TRIM. Even if the SSD has not (yet) wiped the data, it knows that a block that is marked as unused can be retuned as a block of 0s without needing to check what is currently stored for that block.
Traditional drives had no such facility to have blocks marked as unused from their PoV, so they always performed the read and returned what they found which was most likely junk (old data from deleted files that would make sense in another context) though could also be a block of zeros (because that block hadn't been used since the drive had a full format or someone zeroed free-space).
They may be pointing to unallocated space which on a SSD running TRIM would return all zeros. NTFS is an extremely resilient yet boring filesystem, I cannot remember the last time I had to run chkdsk even after an improper shutdown.
As somebody who worked as a PC technician for a while until very recently, I've run chkdsk and had to repair errors on NTFS filesystems very, very, very often. It's almost an everyday thing. Anecdotal evidence is less than useful here.
So anecdotal evidence is not useful, as proven by your anecdotal evidence? :)
FWIW I've found NTFS and ext3/4 to be of similar reliability over the years, in general use and in the face of improper shutdown. Metadata journaling does a lot to preserve the filesystem in such circumstances. Most of the few significant problems I've had have been due to hardware issues, which few filesystems on their own will help you with.
It is worth noting that when you run tools like chkdsk or fsck, some of the issues reported and fixed are not data damaging, or structurally dangerous, or at least not immediately so. For instance free areas marked in such a way that makes them look used to the allocation algorithms.
There's a difference between your personal experience and my experience in a professional role handling multiple customer devices every day.
However, I'm also not making a statement about NTFS's reliability vs ext3/ext4. In the years that I worked in that position, I maybe dealt with Linux systems 3 times.
Reminder of the original statement:
> NTFS is an extremely resilient yet boring filesystem, I cannot remember the last time I had to run chkdsk even after an improper shutdown.
I never said anything about catastrophic failure of an NTFS filesystem. I have experienced that, but it was comparatively rare (still happened though). I have, however, have had to run chkdsk fairly often to correct errors. Sometimes user data was affected to some degree, but it was often a matter of system stability and getting Windows back to running without issues.
I still find that NTFS is reasonably resilient and have no qualms with it. I just want to push back against the idea that nothing ever goes wrong with NTFS, which was implied by your statement that you can't remember the last time you used chkdsk.
> not making a statement about NTFS's reliability vs ext3/ext4
I should have been a bit clearer there: I only mentioned those specific filesystems because those are the ones I have a lot of experience with, rather than intending to bang the drum for them (or one in favour of the other). I expect other much-tested journaled filesystems could be substituted into the same sentences.
Well you can, it just takes the extra step of grabbing the download from the page. I have done it before but I dismissively misspoke and should have said full index of subtitles available.
But can you -- without paying? AFAICS, only if there are fewer items in that full metadata list than the number of pages you can download for free. And the impression I got from this discussion was that this is definitely not the case.
I'm not logged in into Google on my laptop. Of course they can use fingerprinting and get me when I eventually log in because I have to do something in there for one of my customers.
Luckily many websites won’t need to, since I’m sure Cloudflare will offer disabling Google topics as a sign you’re a bot. (I say this after getting stuck on a Cloudflare “are you a bot?” loop that I couldn’t get out of and that prevented me from getting to my site.)
Of course, the actual bots will just enable topics and fill it with random data, and only the privacy conscious will be negatively affected.
If only these web sites could get some kind guarantee from the user’s browser that the browser will show ads and the user’s eye balls will see them… some kind of “web integrity” if you will…
How many projects do browser detection and block everything that isn't Chrome? A tiny fraction of websites do that.
It's absolutely a concern, just as sites relying on WEI is a concern. But it seems unlikely that sites will intentionally choose to exclude a non-trivial portion of their visitors.
If you want to make it even less likely, though, this is a great time to switch to Firefox (for its independence, as a browser not based on the Chrome engine at all).
people who care about this kind of thing will simply cease to use those websites.
I have never clicked on facebook/instagram links because of their login walls, I have ceased to click on twitter links since they've implemented theirs, I will do the same even with youtube when it inevitably follows the same path.
ultimately, I understand why we don't matter to them, so I don't really mind.
Depends, but either the topics never changing, or them changing too randomly, could all be detected when combined with other tracking, and become part of your identity as such...
More and more sites are detecting and blocking adblockers.
I’ve encountered so many articles on my phone recently that are completely unreadable. I click a link from mastodon or reddit or wherever and all I get is a full page unskipable “disable your Adblock to continue” message. And then I click back, and scroll past. Never getting to read past the headline
I'm surprised how many sites now have "you seem to be using an ad blocker" popups. Many of them still let you see the content after clicking away a nag, but it's only a step away from fully disabling. (uBlock Origin does a good job hiding these so I mostly don't notice it; but with NextDNS as an ad blocker it's a big problem.)
Many videos had the dislike count collected by the extension and stored before YouTube completely removed the counter from the videos. That number is now combined with dislikes sent by the users.
New videos will only show dislikes sent by people using the extension. There's no way to know the real number anymore.
Microsoft now is doing the same with Edge. If you want to change your default browser on Windows 11 you need to individually click and select it for every file extension/protocol.
I just tried this, there's a "make XYZ your default browser" button at the very top of the page, which changes the default for most of the relevant file extensions. Some, like MHT, it doesn't. Not sure why. But they have everything on one page, so for the extensions it missed, you can easily change.
That seems about as simple as one could make it. Is your concern that it didn't change every extension to whichever browser you made the default?
