You are not logged in.

#1 2019-11-17 16:05:22

damo
....moderator....
Registered: 2015-08-20
Posts: 5,246

'The Guardian' article about Firefox

Firefox’s fight for the future of the web

Are they really that clean and holy? (Genuine question BTW)


Be Excellent to Each Other...

FORUM RULES and posting guidelines «» Help page for forum post formatting
Artwork on DeviantArt  «» BunsenLabs on DeviantArt

Offline

#2 2019-11-17 16:47:04

BLizgreat!
Resident Babbler - vll!
Registered: 2015-10-03
Posts: 1,217

Re: 'The Guardian' article about Firefox

Due to it being a non-profit, I'd say they definitely have more motivation to be. An actual on paper mission statement outlining a responsiblity to be. For real though, really something I doubt anybody can authoriatively say or know. It needs to do to Chrome(Google Inc) what it did to IE/M$ cause Chrome is in fact enjoying world domination and Google Inc long has had entirely too much control over the web. It's not an opinion, that's a painfully obvious fact. History repeats itself, many times moves in cycles blahblah. The results of too much power congregated into the hands of too few people always bear out with fairly predictable results. Those being whatever the end result is, tends to go against the best interests or wishes of the majority. This has always been, will always be in my view. If folks only knew some of the realities of how this world actually functions, they'd be even much more depressed than they/we are now.

Though the way I see it, honestly won't do much of anything even if they were. I mean if it comes down to actual suffering, having to do without, even basic things like food or running water. Much less became a kill or be killed type of thing. Which it's already LONG been. They're getting killed off, it's just slowly, are going without, many people go to bed hungry which don't or at least shouldn't have to. Anyway blahblahblah, bottom line think a better question than are they really holier than thou, is are they really as black hearted and scummy as the other Corps (and the Govt's)those Corps and the minority owners behind them actually control ? big_smile

My opinion ... mostly don't know but do think Mozilla is making some real efforts. Also think it's too little and too late. They beat M$ though, supposedly rakes in like 90 billion a year, purportedly more than Google Inc, last I checked 20bil, likely a nice chunk more. Google knows the power of diversificaton, is always stretching out, moving into this or that other (often tech related)field. Some of the best of the best in tech are on Google's payroll and they have some massive advantages. Been wanting or at least comtemplated long ago to see FF implement some backend tweakage. Talking about distributed CDN/compression and caching servers. What the overall goal and intent here would be or could be is a MUCH faster browser. Your browser gets it's stuff in an ideal format and compressed appropriately from a close-by CDN server. However Google Inc owns many massive data-centers all over the world. So even if they aren't already using such, if Mozilla did come out with something new, they'd soon enough copy it and find ways to do it better. They have MANY more resources, both technical and financial.

As open sourcers would like to see more of us focus on using Firefox, do more to support and promote it. Try to keep it hanging on and making up some of the huge amount of ground they've lost to Google Inc. Not even so much cause it's an open source browser but because it's the friggin gnu/Linux of web browsers, can be tweaked, config'ed and optimized to hades and gone. In terms of speed the thing can be made to have plenty of get-up-and-go regardless. They(Mozilla) at least has to keep enough users (contributors such as add-on devs etc) to keep the lights on at it's HQ. Honestly can't call how this is going to go but it's not looking good for FF or folks like me who wuv it. Argh !!! Screw it what we need to do is email Chuck Norris a mass-plea for help. He might get fed up with all this techie BS and go kick da hell out of everybody @ Google Inc. tongue

Now that's what we need, introducing the new web browser fellas ! Found at chucknorris.com, not only is it A LOT faster than Chrome, it'll literally beat the hell out of it. big_smile

Last edited by BLizgreat! (2019-11-17 16:56:34)

Offline

#3 2019-11-17 16:49:32

Sector11
The Tpyo Knig Mod
From: 77345 ¡#
Registered: 2015-08-20
Posts: 5,665

Re: 'The Guardian' article about Firefox

Yes they are.... in a pigs eye they are!

A bunch of things stuck out in that artical, and being part of the "older generation, this first one RANG A VERY LOUD BELL:

“In the early days, we thought all companies and social networks cared about us and cared for us,” says Baker, speaking for web users as a whole. “And increasingly it has become clear that, no, you need someone looking out for you.”

I really do not believe that that someone is (insert some internet "biased" company here)

Yes I meant: biased vs based.  They ALL want - and are getting - huge slices of our so called privacy.

privacy ~ noun
1. the quality of being secluded from the presence or view of others
2. the condition of being concealed or hidden
3. a concept destroyed by the advent of the internet and the first "cookie".


BunsenLabs Forum Rules ---== I'm a Conky 1.9'er ==---
System:    Host: d67 Kernel: 4.9.0-9-amd64 x86_64 (64 bit gcc: 6.3.0)
Desktop: Openbox 3.6.1 Distro: Debian GNU/Linux 9 (stretch)

Offline

#4 2019-11-17 17:01:49

Sector11
The Tpyo Knig Mod
From: 77345 ¡#
Registered: 2015-08-20
Posts: 5,665

Re: 'The Guardian' article about Firefox

BLizgreat! wrote:

Now that's what we need, introducing the new web browser fellas ! Found at chucknorris.com, not only is it A LOT faster than Chrome, it'll literally beat the hell out of it. big_smile

hahaha really: https://chucknorris.com/

Warning: Potential Security Risk Ahead

Firefox detected an issue and did not continue to chucknorris.com. The website is either misconfigured or your computer clock is set to the wrong time.

It’s likely the website’s certificate is expired, which prevents Firefox from connecting securely. If you visit this site, attackers could try to steal information like your passwords, emails, or credit card details.

What can you do about it?

Your computer clock is set to November 17, 2019. Make sure your computer is set to the correct date, time, and time zone in your system settings, and then refresh chucknorris.com.

If your clock is already set to the right time, the website is likely misconfigured, and there is nothing you can do to resolve the issue. You can notify the website’s administrator about the problem.

Learn more…

Report errors like this to help Mozilla identify and block malicious sites

Gotta love that "or your computer clock is set to the wrong time."

Clicking on advanced:

Websites prove their identity via certificates, which are valid for a set time period. The certificate for chucknorris.com expired on October 30, 2019.

Error code: SEC_ERROR_EXPIRED_CERTIFICATE
View Certificate

So much for chucky!

Now how is it Blitz didn't see that?


BunsenLabs Forum Rules ---== I'm a Conky 1.9'er ==---
System:    Host: d67 Kernel: 4.9.0-9-amd64 x86_64 (64 bit gcc: 6.3.0)
Desktop: Openbox 3.6.1 Distro: Debian GNU/Linux 9 (stretch)

Offline

#5 2019-11-17 17:04:34

BLizgreat!
Resident Babbler - vll!
Registered: 2015-10-03
Posts: 1,217

Re: 'The Guardian' article about Firefox

Which btw: I still prefer google search, yep ... when using their services you/we are the product. This is likely not a minority and Mozilla has no control over this, they can't be like hey, we're the free, safe, trust-worthy browser BUT you can't use the services you want. big_smile

Ahhhhh google inc provides some quality services. It's part of the deal that I look at their ads, I can't really bytch about it, that's the deal. They're a for profit business in it to make money and expand, so they can make more money and take over more stuff. Mentioned in another thread, there's usually a door #3(or 4/5 .. 6), sucker might be hidden, might not be easy to find but bet it's there. Fricken Mozilla better think outside the box here. Workout some really effective ways to gain ground and alternative ways to bring in revenue to put back into the project.

Obviously one critical thing is they better really start implementing improvements and ditching chuff and bloat. Though that's one of open source software greatest weaknesses in my view too. Anyone who wants to can study how it works. Thus any highly skilled techie on whoevers payroll can use it in their stuff or fiddle with it enough to make it legal for them to benefit from. Etc.

DAMMIT CHUCK !!! Errrrrr I mean mister Norris, mmmm, Sir Mister Norris ? big_smile

Last edited by BLizgreat! (2019-11-17 17:06:27)

Offline

#6 2019-11-17 17:20:09

BLizgreat!
Resident Babbler - vll!
Registered: 2015-10-03
Posts: 1,217

Re: 'The Guardian' article about Firefox

LMAO Sector ! big_smile

Did you go through google search ? They may be censoring Mr Sir Norris sirs website. Though he better not find out about it or Google's in trouble !!!

Offline

#7 2019-11-17 17:52:32

BLizgreat!
Resident Babbler - vll!
Registered: 2015-10-03
Posts: 1,217

Re: 'The Guardian' article about Firefox

That'd be one Mozilla, how about a feature to easily toggle profiles. Like a speed mode kinda deal, disables a bunch of chuff and what-not at push of button, sets things for pure and raw speedage !?!?!? This could be done by users, no doubt is by some but generally speaking people are lazy and/or stupid. Everything has to be done for them, doing for themselves isn't cool.

Also think they need to implement some better way to integrate search into the browser, which snatches people away from Google, it'll have to be convenient and useful. But they could partner with a search provider or hades start their own thing and start copying some of the junk google makes all it's friggin billions doing. Would be good in more than a few ways, Google's strangle-hold on search does need some competition, Mozilla needs money and more users. The details is up to others.

Actually have started keeping my start page Mozilla's/Firefox's default home page vs it used to be Google.com. So that hopefully in a passive way when I search and click on something Mozilla might get some kind of kickback from it. Also need to go ahead and start trying alternative search providers. At least try to find/use one which has close to what I can do with what google provides. Is there a thread about that already in BL forum anyone ?

Though many of those are no doubt "powered by" Google or could dang well be outright owned by Google Inc behind the scenes. Have search agreements or who friggin knows what all with Google etc etc etc. Nothings friggin simple, except for the simple minded.

ie: Someone looks at a drop of water, hey it's just a friggin drop of water right ? Well there's a microscopic world in that damn thing, there's hydro-dynamics going on with it and plenty of other chit. Just better many times to not bother thinking too much about all that crap, other than it's a damn drop of water. big_smile So what's the bottom line ?!?! I've had wayyyyy too much coffee, that's the friggin BL !

Offline

#8 2019-11-17 18:21:37

Sector11
The Tpyo Knig Mod
From: 77345 ¡#
Registered: 2015-08-20
Posts: 5,665

Re: 'The Guardian' article about Firefox

BLizgreat! wrote:

LMAO Sector ! big_smile

Did you go through google search ? They may be censoring Mr Sir Norris sirs website. Though he better not find out about it or Google's in trouble !!!

Yup, I do use GUGL search ... but anonymously through "StartPage" have been using that for a long time.

DuckDuckGo or Startpage or Ixquick

I have used all 3 and settled on StartPage, what can I say.

Then click on View Anonymously  {BSEG} for some sites, but Startpage will now allow you to connect to chucky's site because of the security risk.

So, SIR! Mr., KING AliBabba (or anything "he" wants to be called) Chuck Norris can go after GUGL as far as I'm concerned.


BunsenLabs Forum Rules ---== I'm a Conky 1.9'er ==---
System:    Host: d67 Kernel: 4.9.0-9-amd64 x86_64 (64 bit gcc: 6.3.0)
Desktop: Openbox 3.6.1 Distro: Debian GNU/Linux 9 (stretch)

Offline

#9 2019-11-17 18:34:06

Sector11
The Tpyo Knig Mod
From: 77345 ¡#
Registered: 2015-08-20
Posts: 5,665

Re: 'The Guardian' article about Firefox

BLizgreat! wrote:

{snip a whole bunch of chit-chat ....}
So what's the bottom line ?!?! I've had wayyyyy too much coffee, that's the friggin BL !

So the BL¹ on that drop of water is that some fish may have expelled that out of his south end.

And the BL¹ of that is, we turn it into coffee in the BL² Coffee Room. big_smile

Anyone want a coffee!  MUAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

_____________
¹ Bottom Line
² BunsenLabs


BunsenLabs Forum Rules ---== I'm a Conky 1.9'er ==---
System:    Host: d67 Kernel: 4.9.0-9-amd64 x86_64 (64 bit gcc: 6.3.0)
Desktop: Openbox 3.6.1 Distro: Debian GNU/Linux 9 (stretch)

Offline

#10 2019-11-17 19:06:02

ohnonot
...again
Registered: 2015-09-29
Posts: 4,159
Website

Re: 'The Guardian' article about Firefox

damo wrote:

Are they really that clean and holy?

HET.
Someone said "it'sthe least evil of all choices".
That said, it is possible to customize the holy shit out of it (ghacks user.js).
And the Addons available surely beat everything available on the big G's kiddy ground.

Offline

#11 2019-11-17 21:34:54

BLizgreat!
Resident Babbler - vll!
Registered: 2015-10-03
Posts: 1,217

Re: 'The Guardian' article about Firefox

Other misc FF thoughts.

Can't do it but in FF > Preferences one of the categories they have something like "let Mozilla install and run tests" or something similar, errrr, nope just can't bring myself to authorize something like that. Even though am sure they have docs up about it, flat out doesn't seem like a good idea.  Plus at least hey, they give people a choice, whereas what are the others (Chrome) doing like this ? Also keep debating enabling the send crash reports and usage info box. However I sometimes intentionally crash the thing and don't want to corrupt their data. Like I'll poweroff with FF running or reboot into another install with same( I left FF running), because I want to dork with something on another OS. Next time I boot that OS and launch FF it helpfully offers to restore whatever tabs I had open when I killed the thing. Not sure how that'd show in their data, might very well come up as a crash. Errrr could even be a good thing, someone at Mozilla might see it and go dang, FF sure is crashing a lot on Debian gnu/Linux, maybe we should give it more attention on that platform ? big_smile

Cause yeah, FF + Debian, also has to mainly apply to FF Ubuntu + LM, as such Mozilla likely would consider it somewhat serious considering the known # of users of those distro's. Am going to start looking at alternative search portals but it's hard to beat google's. I particularly like their search modifiers ! ie: This type of thing. tongue

Oh the irony, am going to have to google about truly independent alternatives to google ? Yowza ... hmmmm, wonder if they'll fiddle with the search results. That's the kind of thing entailed with "shaping the web", they could really be doing A LOT of shenanighans behind the scenes if desired. Making sure people see (thus more likely to believe or think XYZ) and making sure they never see XYZ too. Not saying it's happening though just saying someone who has that kind of control over the gate to the interwebz and what people find there, truly does have a scary degree of mass-media, mass psych powers and thus potentially disturbing implications become possible. Think mostly, yep ... are going to always have mass data collection and the folks endeavoring to do such collection are so much more skilled than those thinking they can avoid such efforts. Honestly ... ah nevermind, as yet again, where da feck is Chuck when we need him !!!!? hmm

Come on Mr Norris sir, stop selling workout equipment and go kick da US govt and a buncha scumtastic corporations in the face !!! big_smile

Last edited by BLizgreat! (2019-11-17 21:43:25)

Offline

#12 2019-11-17 22:30:56

damo
....moderator....
Registered: 2015-08-20
Posts: 5,246

Re: 'The Guardian' article about Firefox

BLizgreat! wrote:

That'd be one Mozilla, how about a feature to easily toggle profiles....

Hot key to this command tongue

firefox -P <profile>

Be Excellent to Each Other...

FORUM RULES and posting guidelines «» Help page for forum post formatting
Artwork on DeviantArt  «» BunsenLabs on DeviantArt

Offline

#13 2019-11-17 23:37:11

BLizgreat!
Resident Babbler - vll!
Registered: 2015-10-03
Posts: 1,217

Re: 'The Guardian' article about Firefox

^ True enough, I have used different profile fiddlery, errr if that's a word and I just used it so it must be and/or I just invented a new word ! Ah had something I was gonna say/type but forgot it. People can bet their butt-skins it was interesting too. Probably, maybe .. if I could remember what it was, I'd prove it ! big_smile

Believe Mozilla actually does have people somewhat sincerely committed to the cause that the whole thing was established for. Of course hoping FF rebounds, they did it once. Though actually anyone who's looked into the origins of Mozilla/FF knows it was really a final F YOU! gesture by Netscape, M$ had effectively crushed them, was no hope, so they said ah screw you, we'll release our browser code and hopefully somebody else kills you and ye chit-head bastid child IE ...F-U M$ !!!

Want to see the Fox make a dramatic underdog ( or underfox) come back, been using the dang thing since a couple of versions before it went v 1.0 ! sad Am somewhat scared to even go looking for what it's alleged browser share is nowadays. Haven't bothered in a long time. If they/Mozilla can recover to but a solid 10-12% would be happy.

Last edited by BLizgreat! (2019-11-17 23:41:52)

Offline

#14 2019-11-17 23:48:34

BLizgreat!
Resident Babbler - vll!
Registered: 2015-10-03
Posts: 1,217

Re: 'The Guardian' article about Firefox

Speaking of M$ mentioned from a not all too long ago annual profit statement had supposedly cleared 90bil, Google Inc weighing in around (at that same time)at 20bil. This kind of gives a person somewhat of an idea of how damn good the techies working for Google are though and the intellect of the suits-etc running the thing. A Corp making 4.5 times what they do and Google still crushed them (and everyone else too)effortlessly when they set sights on the browser arena. Can say mucho about the people assoc with Google Inc but one thing someone really can't say is that they're stupid or don't know their stuff. big_smile

Last edited by BLizgreat! (2019-11-17 23:49:20)

Offline

#15 2019-11-18 15:38:29

earlybird
ほやほや
Registered: 2015-12-16
Posts: 734
Website

Re: 'The Guardian' article about Firefox

Let's not forget that FF is by no means an indepedent browser. It's a Google browser as Mozilla is still heavily dependent on that cash flow for shipping the Google search ... if Google decide to stop pumping money over to them, then Firefox as a project on that scale has to slim down by a huge lot.

Offline

#16 2019-11-18 16:59:25

BLizgreat!
Resident Babbler - vll!
Registered: 2015-10-03
Posts: 1,217

Re: 'The Guardian' article about Firefox

Isn't as bad as I'd been thinking. On desktop FF still has like 9.24% browser share. That's A LOT of users still. Was expecting it to be much worse and to have continued declining as it was last time I'd bothered to check. They still have a lot of "eyes" on the web and those eyes mean yep, people will try to work something out with them to get those eyes on their ads-etc. Still Mozilla isn't going to override a users choice of search, they can't and for a good majority (including myself atm)that's google.com. Do believe they need to find another way of resolving that. For any/every dollar Mozilla/FF could possibly send google inc's way, they'd be lucky to get 10 cents, if that.

Money might not make the world go round necessarily but it dang sure greases the wheels eh. big_smile Mozilla can't pay highly skilled, thus developers who can demand being highly paid for what they do too, with shiny-happy-people holding hands and good intentions. However like a gazillion others they can also off-load much of such to the 3rd world, places like India etc. Where software development has long shifted and professional developers are willing to work for less.

Ah in my view it's basically like this, there's what 98.21% of what most people think/believe and then there's reality.

Last edited by BLizgreat! (2019-11-18 17:03:32)

Offline

#17 2019-11-18 19:22:43

BLizgreat!
Resident Babbler - vll!
Registered: 2015-10-03
Posts: 1,217

Re: 'The Guardian' article about Firefox

Also fact that Mozilla is getting killed in the browser wars is strong indication that they are taking their commitment seriously, aren't engaging in the same crapness which google does out-of-box, they tend towards being more conservative in settings and resources they could take advantage of. Leaving it up to end users, expecting them to actually learn something about and know something about the browser they use every day. Firefox can be uber-tweaked, this or that set to do whatever better (faster/lighter etc) This is mistake on their part because the avg user isn't willing to do anything for themselves, isn't willing to learn, even if it's in their best interests.

Mentioned in another thread, users will endlessly gripe, oh it's too heavy, oh it's not as fast out-of-box, omg, invading my privacy and data collection. They partner with Google  OMG !! Yep, they have to actually pay the electric bill and the devs who work on Firefox. Hey Mozilla you better do xyz for me ASAP or I'll quit using this software I never have, never will pay a dime for nor do absolutely anything to support (active or passively.) or I'll just install Chrome !!! Lol ... yep, google Inc also knows most people are lazy and/or stupid. Give em what they think they want. Even if it's craptasticness at the bottomline. End result ? Lot$a user$ and lotsa ca$h. Plus the whole lot$a more power and control of the interwebz.

Situation actually reminds me of someone, that someone being the Debian gnu/Linux project. Sitting by while Ubuntu + LM slaughter them, using their own software and hard work against them, rather than just facing reality and including non-free (proprietary) out-of-box. They've taken the high-road and stuck to their principles and are paying the price entailed. Ubuntu + LM, gazillion users, Ubuntu has become synonymous with the word gnu/Linux. Been that way for quite awhile. Still is ... opted to make their distro binary incompatible with upstream, implement restrictive licensing etc etc. Debian kicks back in a dark corner, drop in the bucket of total users compared to Ubu/LM, oh our hands our tied ?

Fighting the good fight is one thing, letting yourself be slaughtered, in my mind is something else. Though in terms of numbers, Firefox is still doing better, all their forks combined likely don't have 9% of desktop browser share and almost none in other form-factors ie: mobile etc.

This has been a moment of self-righteous and mostly pointless babble rant brought to you by Babble Inc. smile

Last edited by BLizgreat! (2019-11-18 19:27:52)

Offline

#18 2019-11-18 19:45:39

BLizgreat!
Resident Babbler - vll!
Registered: 2015-10-03
Posts: 1,217

Re: 'The Guardian' article about Firefox

Gotta ... tongue

You take the high road and I'll take the low road and I'll be in Scotland beforeeeeee youuuuuu.

Pointless but feel necessary clarification: Which is not to say the key people behind Debian gnu/Linux aren't very much aware of the painfully obvious stuff above. Believe they actively endorse the distro's basing off them, which include and enable non-free out-of-box. Thus they do endorse Bunsenlabs and all the others as well. However am sure there's many a geek which looks at Canonical Inc's(Ubuntu's)activities and are kinda disgusted. Though it's all fair in luv, war and gnu/Nix. big_smile

Last edited by BLizgreat! (2019-11-18 19:55:08)

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB