mard

Extensions are one thing, but I'd also welcome granular permissions to various JavaScript capabilities for every website. I don't like when some websites capture native browser hotkeys (CTRL+F), disable my right mouse button, change scrolling behavior or perform asynchronous HTTP requests. The only solution I found to protect against these practices is disabling JavaScript completely for given site, but more often than not it prevents the page from rendering altogether.

I'm so happy to see it! I had much fun with original OpenComputers, back then I used to wonder if ditching custom Lua OS and running micro Linux VMs would be possible. OpenComputers 2 is the answer, and I'm happy to see it's in active development by OpenComputer's author and most active contributor.

It's early in development, but I see in the source code it comes with some basic networking, with IPs, DHCPs and so on. I think it's possible to build real networks inside the game, or will be possible at some point. Can't wait to try it out later. Very exciting!

It was never about creators or dislike attacks. There's a reason why they didn't adopt an opt-in solution.

It's about corporations complaining about their ads running on unpopular content. It's about making people waste more time on low quality content, scam and disinformation across the platform.

What you hear from them are pure PR lies. They don't care about small creators and they never did. All they want is to make you watch more ads at the expense of your time and welfare.

Fair enough. Merely bundling some software was not a violation by itself, but that bundling was also additionally reinforced with "concerted series of actions designed to protect the applications barrier to entry", which caused "consumer harm by distorting competition" [1].

[1] https://www.justice.gov/atr/us-v-microsoft-courts-findings-f...

In 2001, Microsoft "constituted unlawful monopolization" under Antitrust Act for bundling a web browser with their operating system.

20 years later, Apple and Google bundle not only their browsers, but whole irreplaceable app stores with no legal consequences.

I don't know how the law sees it, but it's simply illogical from the common sense standpoint.

It matters because you could sue a domestic seller for trademark infringement. It's much harder to do so if the seller is under jurisdiction where US trademark law does not apply.

You can still use BitLocker completely without TPM, but it needs an explicit change in Group Policy. If opted in, BitLocker setup will behave much like well known TrueCrypt/VeraCrypt, offering encryption options with a password or a keyfile.

It's weird to see the term "App" in relation to anything before iOS era. Back then such software used to be mostly called applications or just programs. [1]

[1] https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=app%2Ccomputer...

There are thousands of bakeries out there, but only a handful of payment processors.

The lack of typeahead in GtkFileChooser is my biggest annoyance that I've ever come across. Ever since I started using computers nearly 25 years ago I used typeahead to navigate through directories and I can't imagine doing it otherwise. The idea of removing typeahead is anti-human to me, I couldn't adapt even though I really tried to.

The cursor in input field at the bottom is blinking too, making user think it's focused when in reality is not.

It's quite disappointing that it took a Google UX design lead to come up with something like this.

I found an Observer article[1] from 2011 that gives some more insight. It looks to me that Aaron could indeed be considered a Reddit co-founder. However, Huffman and Ohanian may have felt threatened by being associated to the criminal later on, so they went with a new narrative.

[1]: https://observer.com/2011/07/rumors-acquisitions-did-reddit-...

Free speech stands against the financial interests of social media. Reddit is the real estate for ads, and the best value for top global advertisers are safe spaces that are free of controversy. In the end, it's the advertisers that decide what is allowed to be published there.

I'm not impressed. Wiki.js is supposedly "built with performance in mind", but its documentation wiki [1] is much slower than any DokuWiki site I could find [2]. It also requires JavaScript to be enabled in the web browser.

[1]: https://docs.requarks.io/

[2]: https://www.dokuwiki.org/

I've noticed that many people abandoned their blogs in favor of Twitter, where they developed a habit to build long threads in form of 1/2-sentence paragraphs. It troubles me, because I think Twitter is not a healthy medium for public discourse.

I believe microblogging is reshaping the way we approach public discussion as a whole. Limited capacity for expression and implicit ability to take everything out of context can lead to frustration and miscommunication.

I think the Web Dark Ages are yet ahead of us. I've grown extremely pessimistic with the state of modern web, with corporate censorship and disinformation on ad-driven social media, dissolution of many open Web standards and WebKit/Blink hegemony that is impossible to topple. A decade ago I expected Web to become more open, but instead it has become a hellscape of closed gardens where maintaining even reasonable amount of privacy is nearly impossible.

90s web was a wild west, but it was a far cry from its "dark ages".

Netscape.

I am under impression that some web designers tend to follow the lowest common denominator, which is the vertical mobile touch display, then enforce the same experience across all platforms. This is why I sometimes see hamburger menus on desktop even though they have no place in any possible desktop design. PC games ported from consoles suffer from problems of similar nature.

It advertises itself as "prevent Google from tracking you around the web", which I consider a false and misleading statement. It doesn't prevent it. It is not "not perfect", it is not even far from perfect.

I think it is very important to make Internet users aware that cookies are the red herring in all privacy issues that are plaguing the World Wide Web. Cookie feature in modern browsers is just a tiny puzzle piece in a larger picture, consisting of wide range of entry points used for collecting data. It includes invasive JavaScript fingerprinting that can easily extract a list of installed fonts, local IP address and list of media devices from WebRTC, device capabilities, WebGL/Canvas fingerprinting, content filter list detection and much much more. Even with JS disabled most browsers share so much explicit information that is enough for precise identification without the use of cookies.

Is it impossible? For 99.99% of Internet users it requires so much hoops to hop through it might as well be impossible. However, I believe that awareness could slow down this privacy decline. I hope users will finally start demanding more native privacy controls in their browsers. Native JavaScript filter in Firefox would be a good place to start.

That happened behind my ISP's NAT in a densely populated area, so I don't think so, no.

>to prevent tracking I mostly use CookieAutoDelete

Removing cookies will not prevent anyone from tracking.

Simple example: I once visited an online shop from browser profile in which I never logged into Facebook. Few hours later I switched to another browser profile, used exclusively for Facebook, and I got an ad on my timeline from said online shop, for the exact product I was looking for earlier in another browser profile. Facebook associated my two browsing personas without cookies, most likely using a combination of my browser's request headers and IP address. Not to mention that JavaScript (if enabled) provides additional and extremely detailed fingerprinting capabilities.

In my experience, Google seems to have a better track record in terms of respecting cookies (or lack thereof) as the main carrier of online privacy management. But I think it's just an illusion. They're just obscuring it to not freak people out too much the way like Facebook does. The information is still there. They have it, from analytics, fonts, reCaptcha and all other means of their creep.

To prevent tracking, you need to have a full control over information you send to the internet, including browser request headers, IP address, behavior patterns of web browser, and so on. Cookie management alone is just a fallacy and gives a false feeling of control over privacy.

This is also why I consider those "privacy containers" broken by design. They just operate on cookies and don't contain anything besides cookies. I would even consider them harmful because of their misleading nature.

It's a step in right direction, but would certainly feel safer if in addition to cookies/storage/geolocation permissions, Firefox allowed to whitelist JavaScript on certain domains out of box, with no need to resort to NoScript. Using NoScript results in two different whitelist mechanisms with completely different UI which breaks the browsing experience.

Ironically, as far as "privacy-oriented browsers" go, Chrome has domain whitelisting of Cookies/JS/Plugins easily accessible from address bar and it works as expected.

The true nightmare scenario will become true when advancing from plateau of scientific advancements will become too hard for human minds. Maybe it's impossible for people to comprehend or navigate in ideas located above some level of complexity, the same way most animals can't notice themselves in a mirror. So far our progress has been quite impressive, but what if there's some sort of human "Moore's Law" for science, where further advancements without AI will be close to impossible?