brymaster

Thank you for your dedication on this. Now on the subject of energy use, how about the patch for the following critical macOS bug landing in a Firefox 67 point release?

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1551990

  Electrolysis isn't enabled by default

It is enabled by default, you just may have a plugin installed that is blocking it. The plugin(s) could be multiprocess compatible but unmaintained and missing the multiprocess=true flag in its package.json.

You can go to about:support to see if multiprocess is truly enabled. If not, go to about:addons and start disabling extensions until it does work.

  Media playback on new tabs is blocked until the tab is visible

^^ That feature was in the Beta release notes but didn't seem to make it into 53 release...disappointing because it appears to work great in Beta/Developer Edition. Can anyone from Mozilla explain why it was scrapped?

> odds are good emu and rom scene would deteriorate

This is a rather limited point of view - the draw to emulation is much more than convenience.

There are thriving communities based around homebrew, preservation, ROM hacking, translations, prototype collecting, debugging, tool-assisted speedrunning, enhancements, music, artwork and reverse engineering.

These were simply citations; adding context to someone's statement. I find it hard to understand that the information we all post freely online is creepy when we are confronted on it. Shouldn't we just stand by what we say?

Actually was disturbed that you felt 'exstudent2 should craft the conversation around whatever you want instead of his valid points about who this new Twitter committee associates with.

No goalposts are being moved. Your relevant history on the subject is what was being pointed out. I think you know exactly why and it doesn't have anything to do with "generating" drama.

Not a weird comment and you know why. I pointed to your comments about "GamerGate" because you singled him out with:

> The best "radical" quotes you have from this person are criticisms of video games?

"Video games" being the focus there.

I disagree and I wouldn't call it a dossier. If someone takes a stance on a certain issue it is helpful to know why.

Edit: ...and I could have just the same pointed out to past comments on HN.

If you post here long enough, you'll find that when certain topics arise there are a group of three-letter acronyms prevalent in tech that make rational discussion of said topics nearly impossible.

Previously: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8511084

> The domain connect.facebook.com isn't in there, for example

"Anti-ThirdpartySocial" aka "Anti-Facebook List‎" list https://www.fanboy.co.nz/fanboy-antifacebook.txt

> ||connect.facebook.com^$third-party,domain=~facebook.net|~fb.com

> ||connect.facebook.net^$third-party,domain=~facebook.com|~fb.com

> ||facebook.com/connect/$third-party

Is that not what you are looking for?

>rationalwiki

Very ironic that you decided to link to that RationalWiki piece, actively edited by the notorious 'Ryulong' who was banned from Wikipedia largely in part by his bad behavior (rule-beaking, undoing edits, bias and unethical practices) on the GamerGate entry. (https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=ryulong%20banned)

Wow, I mean come on!

This is disappointing because I think you're smarter than this.

A running joke, "ethics in journalism", by detractors and the very same "journalists" being criticized for ethical transgressions is not effective for anything, besides perpetuating the "this is really about misogyny" meme.

If one is "cautious", one can certainly do their due diligence to investigate this matter and learn that reporting on games, tech and all sorts of other journalism really are cause for ethical concerns.

I'm aware you don't care about games or game reportage, but I'll cite a few examples anyway: take corrupt "journalists", such as Nathan Grayson (http://www.deepfreeze.it/journo.php?j=nathan_grayson) or Jenn Frank (http://www.deepfreeze.it/journo.php?j=jenn_frank) who collude, fail to disclose relationships and give favorable coverage and reviews to friends.

By the way, trolls and shit-stirrers are not the "loudest people" nor do they represent a label. No amount of Twitter reweets, likes and favorites will make that a reasonable argument.

> If you, like me, or tptacek [1], were confused why this is a big deal, that's because it's not.

Ah yes, because you two are certainly the authorities on the matter.

> Standing up for "ethical journalism" was and continues to be one of GamerGate's most popular smoke screens.

What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. It's getting stale that the diverse group of people associated along with GamerGate are merely harassers: you know that isn't true.

Downvoted. You use scare quotes and have to link to someone else's post in an attempt to add weight to your clearly weak argument, make no attempt to add evidence to your points and eventually fallback on claiming thinly-veiled harassment and misogyny. Absolutely no legs to stand on.

For some reason, your particular group of people cannot have a real discussion about ethics without dismissing it all together and then dropping your boogeyman term "GamerGate".

Why do you think that is?

> Ellen Pao being at fault for everything is a meme spawned by the Gamergate/MRW/anti-SJW crowd.

No, it wasn't.

> If the CEO was some boring old white man, nobody would be calling for his head like this

Nice meme. Let's address both the race and sex parts:

https://encrypted.google.com/search?q=fire+brendan+eich

https://encrypted.google.com/search?q=fire+tim+armstrong

https://encrypted.google.com/search?q=fire+satya+nadella

https://encrypted.google.com/search?q=fire+mark+pincus

https://encrypted.google.com/search?q=fire+yishan+wong

https://encrypted.google.com/search?q=boycott+papa+johns

https://encrypted.google.com/search?q=hobby+lobby+scotus

and extra special: https://encrypted.google.com/search?q=cancelcolbert

Earlier discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9840805

> vocal minority

That's interesting because it mirrors Ellen Pao's attitude:

> But Ms. Pao says that the most virulent detractors on the site are a vocal minority, and that the vast majority of Reddit users are uninterested in what unfolded over the past 48 hours.

- (source: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/04/technology/reddit-moderato...)

... yet here we are with over 100K signatures and quickly rising. When your largest subreddits and influential content creators take a big chunk of the site down, it's not a vocal minority with zero ramifications - it's you about to become the next Digg.

This isn't an issue for Reddit to take lightly. If content creators pack up shop, Reddit becomes just another cat photo and yesterday's news dump like your facebook feed (read: low quality content). Users will end up where ever your cool content creators defect to.

This is like RewindHN.com (created by user https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=kami8845) before it bit the dust.

It's open source: https://github.com/doda/rewindhn

> What does being white or a gamer have to do with this?

Absolutely nothing, in reality. In terms of Randi Harper though, she is a misandrist using a convenient boogeyman to push her own agenda.

> Internet hate can often turn into real life hate

> I have no idea why people think it's socially acceptable to say things on the internet to people that you wouldn't say to them IRL in front of a police officer.

Whoa. Incredibly hypocritical of you to lecture others on hate, harassment and tone policing. You have routinely said awful things online and harassed people.

- You tell people to "set themselves on fire", a favorite phrase of yours used to those that disagree with you (http://s2b20blog.mukyou.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/8-579... & https://twitter.com/search?q=%22set%20yourself%20on%20fire%2...)

- You harassed a data scientist, Chris von Csefalvay, and set your followers on him to the point he quit Twitter after he conducted some research that didn't suit your narrative. (http://s2b20blog.mukyou.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/10.jp... via http://s2b20blog.mukyou.com/the-hidden-face-of-hypocrisy-ran...)

- You wrote a non-review on Amazon to bully an author you disagreed with: (http://www.stopthegrbullies.com/2015/06/01/randi-harpers-bul... & http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/06/03/renowned-author-c...)

... just the tip of the iceberg. Now you are posting on HN and masquerading as an online anti-harassment activist. Unreal.

Except that Game Boy games didn't look like that screenshot either. The point being that programmers and artists took advantage of the screens (be it a handheld LCD or CRT television) to compliment their artwork and achieve effects they couldn't pull off by their pixels alone.

One can see a Cg shader here that attempts to recreate the look of an actual Game Boy screen, complete with several characteristics including motion blur and contrast settings:

http://filthypants.blogspot.com/2013/04/customizing-harlequi...

Some previous discussion on the same topic:

"Facebook Is Making Us Miserable" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3335947

Found some cons http://www.drop-dropbox.com/

This is a tech board where anyone can post anonymously, so sockpuppeting and astroturfing are quite common, especially as employees of these companies post here. In every thread about Apple/Amazon/Google/Facebook/IBM/Microsoft/etc you'll always have to wonder who's behind that post or who clicked the upvote and downvote arrows.

The amount of cognitive dissonance you practice is astounding.

You're quick to dismiss but you games and tech "journalists" collude, push agendas and fail to recuse yourselves from conflicts of interest all the while seeing nothing wrong with that. https://twitter.com/leighalexander/status/556905004632920064

Games "journalism" has always been a stones throw away from advertising and you all don't have an ethical bone in you. Basic journalistic values such as skeptical inquiry, critical thinking or independent judgment are foreign concepts.

> People have elaborated on it for months. It's so thoroughly discredited in every way that if you don't see it now, you're not going to. Consider it "unfairly maligned" if you want - no one cares any more.

Oh the corrupt journos showed up. I wonder why. https://twitter.com/totalbiscuit/status/521737847758663680

No, I don't think so. It will be 2016 and we'll still be having this conversation. Money.

> So we're trying to show you ads that you want to see, rather than ads that try to provoke you into clicking (like Buzzfeed articles)

Huh, really? Then why aren't you actually doing that?

http://imgur.com/a/KGsQh