Can I ask where you found a good bead mold that works with uv resin
It’s not to prove someone wrong. It’s to determine whether there is a new bug or merely an old one. The goal of this type of thing isn’t to prove who is right or wrong… the goal is to learn, and to make the software better.
In general, a bug report should include instructions for reproducing the bug. Without that, the bug report gets closed as “incomplete”, meaning it lacks sufficient info to be useful or actionable. If that is not the result you want, then as the person reporting the bug, it is up to you to provide the missing info… i.e. a reliable method for making the bug happen – in a manner which is distinct from any other similar bugs.
… and if someone has previously reported issues which turned out to not be real, or measurement results which turned out to be inaccurate, they face an additional level of scrutiny.
5 Thanks
*Never mind, it’s not worth the hassle. For the record, after a factory reset, I managed to recreate the unrampability on a 1 blink cell, floor set to 1 and ceiling set to -71. As per my prior post, I was able to get around it by using manual memory, then disabling the auto timer. Because that seems to fix the issue for me, I’ll disengage.
1 Thank
I’m a little confused. What does this mean?
it means nothing. I’m disengaging as it’s not worth either of our times.
1 Thank
You really suspect people building an open source software to gaslight bug reporters? To what end? Community input, be it actual code, feature ideas or bug reports, is the core of open source software.
4 Thanks
It’s weird, but I’ve actually had someone do that to me. The author of Zen Browser flat-out lied to me repeatedly when I tried to report bugs in his code. (short version: he completely broke multiple entire modules in the extension API, so it’s not possible to make whole categories of extensions work in Zen)
Then after discussing it with him on GitHub and providing details showing that the bug was real, and only in his code, and not upstream… I was talking to some rando about it on reddit. Kinda repeated the whole discussion, going into detail all over again, because they seemed to have a really hard time understanding and kept asserting that it couldn’t possibly be real, and if it was, it had to be upstream, but it couldn’t be real anyway because the APIs I was using (and linked to the official docs for) didn’t even exist, and … all sorts of BS.
Then I found out that the clueless rando I was talking to on reddit… was an alt owned by the same guy – the project owner who I had previously talked to on GitHub. Repeating the same lies he told before, only harder.
Granted, that was highly unusual. Have been doing free software for decades, and I don’t think I’ve ever encountered a project owner that bad before. Zen Browser is, by far, the buggiest browser I’ve ever tried… and now I understand how it got that way.
But I’ve never seen the word “shadowfix” before this thread. I tried looking it up in a search engine and an AI, and it told me the word doesn’t exist. I can guess at the intended meaning, but given that it doesn’t seem to be a thing, I figured I should ask instead of assuming.
6 Thanks
Wow, I didn’t realize the problem was that bad.
Zen Browser is remarkably popular despite being so darn buggy. 
I went on a bit of a deep dive while I was trying to add support for it, and what I found was just … layer upon layer of drama and bugs and epic fails.
Like, long before I ever heard of it, when Zen was just a few months old, people were already pretty upset that extensions didn’t work in it. The dev broke the extension API pretty badly. So instead, he started a new browser-specific extension system called Zen Mods. And the users, being very enthusiastic, started making Zen specific extensions. Some grew quite popular. But the dev didn’t like how some of them looked, and didn’t like how popular they were getting, especially the ones which changed how his browser looked. He seemed to take it personally that so many people wanted to change the aesthetics of his masterpiece. So he banned the most popular extensions and their authors.
The community did not take this well. They forked the entire extension system and mod store and made their own, called Sine. The upstream Zen Mods system became almost entirely abandoned, so the dev stopped even trying to maintain it, but hasn’t actually taken it down. It’s just … decaying. And the Sine folks stopped caring about Zen, and instead prioritized compatibility, becoming a userchrome extension store for any and all Firefox-based browsers. They don’t really use Zen any more. Zen lost a large chunk of its user base simply because the dev did petty and hostile things to the users.
Then, for the next year or two, it kept getting more and more buggy. It became notorious for losing user data and corrupting their sessions. The dev kept trying to fix it and kept making it worse instead. Like, if you used more than one window, you were practically guaranteed to lose data on a regular basis. Things got so bad that he spent months working on a major new feature which completely transforms how the browser works, in an attempt to fix the session corruption bugs. He called it “Window Sync”… and it’s pretty much mandatory.
When he silently slipped the new feature into an auto-updated minor version bump… all hell broke loose. Users were leaving in droves. Because, first off, the update basically deleted all the user data. And Window Sync was horribly misguided, because it basically meant users could only have one window.
In pretty much any other program ever written, if your window starts getting full, the normal thing to do is open another window to get a fresh blank working area. And if you want, you can move some items between windows whenever you want to reorganize things. But not in Zen. In Zen, if you open another window, it has a copy of everything you had in your first window. All the same tabs. And whenever you change windows, it’ll freeze for a moment as it copies the internal state from some other window to the current window and then lock the old copy. This completely broke a ton of common workflows. And to make things worse, it also exacerbated the session corruption issues.
Like, if you have 5 windows, each will, on average, have about 1/5th of the “current” versions of tabs, and the other 4/5ths will be stale copies with old data. When you close the browser, it saves the session. But in this example, 80% of that session data will be stale. And if you’ve never accessed a particular tab in a particular window, it’ll just be a blank placeholder. So instead of stale data, that copy will have no data at all. Then when you open the browser later, it loads the session but has trouble figuring out which copies are “current” vs stale, so it’ll frequently load the wrong ones and lose the user’s data. And it’ll corrupt the session data even during a session, mixing active and stale data inside of a single tab. It no longer needs to be closed and reopened to lose data; it happens in real time while you’re using it.
That’s when I discovered the browser. Someone was laughing about the drama and shared a link, because it was such an epic fail that they felt the need to tell everyone about it.
And given that I had just written a tab / window / session management extension which solves all of those problems, and I was trying to support every browser, I immediately started trying to add support for it.
That’s when I discovered Zen’s extension APIs are horribly broken. And they’re broken in ways which are extremely strange. Like… some functions return an array. In pretty much all of computer science, array indexes start at 0 (or occasionally 1) and count up by 1 for each index. 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, etc. But not Zen. Its array indexes go 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10. Indexes are missing from the beginning and middle. And, like, if you ask it to put the tabs in a specific order and pass it an array, as the API requires, it fails. Because Javascript arrays start at 0 and don’t have holes, and Zen can’t handle the standard array format of its own built-in extension language.
Or if I want to track the state of the tabs… the tab API lets extensions listen for tab events. Each event has a tab ID and some details about what happened. But in Zen, it silently changes the tab IDs without telling anyone. One moment, a particular tab might be ID 42, and then the next moment, its ID is 789. And while there is a mechanism in the API to handle tab ID changes… Zen doesn’t implement that part of the API. So it’s just broken.
I tried reporting this bug, and the dev first insisted it’s an upstream Firefox issue, and closed the bug as “completed”. But the issue doesn’t exist in Firefox… only Zen. So I reopened it. Then he insisted that the bug can’t exist because tabs don’t have IDs. Even though just one comment prior, he linked directly to the API docs which disprove this claim.
… and he closed it again, as “won’t fix”. Like he does with most of the bugs people report.
That’s just a small sample. The browser’s entire history is like this, day in and day out, ever since the project first began.
Yeah, it’s weird that he has any users left. But I get the feeling it’s just that the folks who stuck around are people who don’t look into things very deeply, don’t tend to notice or care about problems. Part of the reason I didn’t realize the “reddit rando” was the project owner… was because he keeps changing his name and erasing his history, and the flair next to his name is a DOGE flag. In 2026.
4 Thanks
I could swear I’ve seen the term shadowfix before. Might have possibly been on forums relating to video games. It’s really odd that chatgpt acts like it is a totally new word.
1 Thank
No idea what shadowfix means, but I’d guess the intended definition might be something like a half-assed fix? Closest word I’ve heard to this was a jazz-fusion band called Shadowfax which is apparently named after something from Lord of the Rings.
A shadowban is where someone gets banned but they can’t tell, because everything looks normal to them… except they suddenly stop getting any responses. They’re invisible to everyone else. They can shout as loud as they want, but no one will ever hear it.
I’m guessing a shadowfix would also involve doing something secretly or silently, in a way that the target can’t see… but instead of a ban, it’s a fix? Like, sneak in a bugfix without telling anyone, and pretend it was never broken?
That would be awfully hard to do in an open-source project with full history stored in a public distributed VCS like git. Someone could easily just bisect the history to find out exactly when an issue got fixed, then look through the diff to see how the code changed. It would also be particularly weird to attempt this on code which doesn’t get auto-updated. Like, Windows updates itself frequently unless you completely disconnect it from the internet, and it’s nearly impossible to make it stop. But with Anduril, I’d have to sneak into someone’s home and secretly update the firmware on their flashlights.
That would be kind of funny, but… I’m not a ninja. 
10 Thanks
Yeah you are; that was a shadowcompliment 
1 Thank
Transparency in patchnotes is a bit of a hotbutton topic in gaming circles lately. This is how I think it goes:
- Company develops extremely addicting game that is engineered to keep players playing.
- Players feel the balance of the game is rooted in player retention instead of fun and want transparency in patch notes so that they can give feedback for improvements.
- The developers make some amount of effort to comply but there are things they want to keep secret for non-nefarious reasons leading to them changing things at times and hoping no one notices. Also, documentation is time consuming and many developers are notoriously bad at doing it.
Legit reasons not to tell players what you changed:
- Games cheat by design in order to challenge players, they generally have to. Some players just don’t understand this
- Listing exact values of stat changes could help cheaters reverse engineer your game
- Numbers can be misleading and may not give a full picture of how something is to actually play.
The problem is that companies like Arrowhead Game Studios will actually lie about making a change and go out of their way to hide it. They went so far as to nerf the entire fire mechanic just so they could stealth nerf a particular gun in a PVE game.
Another time they “balanced” vehicles by increasing the damage dealt to them by enemies and “forgot” that this would also affect all the already-squishy turrets and emplacements too. Seems like they balance by spreadsheet and determined that turrets were too efficient or something.
None of this is relevant to patching flashlight firmware imo, but I find this topic interesting and this is where I imagine the idea of secret patches might have come from.
2 Thanks