201–210 of 410 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It might be falling back to hosts for them or if they're ending with .local or .home, it's hitting hosts file first for them.
You can locally host .com aswell
It is time for Mozilla to stop messing around. They are losing user trust extremely fast. A silent FireFox update that cripples the browser? No active update was done since yesterday and this morning: a broken browser. Please stop non-browser development and let me pay a monthly fee for a decent browser! I don’t want a VPN service, bookmark readers or other crap. I want Mozilla to defend the open web and create an op…
I don't understand the anger about the VPN. I think it's a good idea. Reader mode is useful, especially if you block a lot of CSS and JavaScript by default with uMatrix. I don't know why people use DOH anyway. It bypasses your hosts file, so you can't block things as easily.
Pretty sure they meant Pocket when referring to a “bookmark reader”.
What worked for me was disabling HTTP3 support with the 'network.http.http3.enabled' key in about:config and then restarting Firefox. Seems like it's stuck in the 'SocketThread', repeatedly doing this: 2022-01-13 08:20:53.075936 UTC - [Parent 4106991: Socket Thread]: V/nsHttp Http3Stream::OnReadSegment count=333 state=4 [this=7f6e295623a0]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If that's the case then I might be wrong. But I remember updating somewhere yesterday and using FF for a couple of hours before stopping for the day. This morning no pages loaded anymore. Hope I didn't jump to conclusions, but still.
It definitely stopped in the middle of the night - I saw it happen in real time - what's more likely is that some third party is to "blame". Although the blame still rests squarely on the shoulders of Mozilla, since Chromium browsers all worked fine. Apparently the going explanation is that something involving HTTP3 runs into an infinite loop and never resolves (explaining why it also sends a core to 100%), and Cloud…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think Mozilla's income is a problem. They are making money. The problem is how they spend that money. My impression is that they lost the original spirit. Mozilla lacked a BDFL that would embody that spirit. What's going on at Mozilla is probably what's going to happen for Linux once Linus is out. Both these pieces of open source software are way too big to be replicated now by a dude or a bunch of dudes and…
Agreed, income isn't a problem. It's vision. But I don't want to support Mozilla in a financial way if their vision doesn't match my own. This may sound presumptuous but we really need an open web and Mozilla is one of the last defenders (and failing). I don't want my monetary donations to go to side projects, I want a great open source browser as the focus.
Remember the early days of Firefox? It crashed often, it was slow, but we had great expectations ad supported it. It wasn't easy to use it at all. At some point it made a breakthrough and installing Firefox was the first thing to do on a fresh install of any machine. People don't remember or know these times and take the web browser for granted. But now that Google has long left their original "Don't be evil" mantra and all tech is focused around the web, having an open, neutral browser is more important than ever. I wish people - including the ones at Mozilla - appreciated this fact more.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Oh wow, thank you so much for this. I've been trying to troubleshoot this for hours but because my browser didn't work I never thought of checking HN to see if other people had this as well. Another score for automatic updates I guess.
As others said, this happened to all kinds of versions, not just 96.
Edit: reading further comments it occurred to me that maybe I'm not affected because I'm not sending any data to Mozilla so I don't hit their HTTP3 load balancer.
I suggested that data collection should be opt-in since it is (almost) the cause of this issue, and my comment was hidden for "advocacy". https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1749908#c11
"Advocacy"?! This is crucial information that should help them solving the problem! Switching Firefox Data Collection completely solves the problem and allows users to use HTTP3, but it looks like they prefer us not to use HTTP3 but have Firefox Data Collection turned on instead. I mean, in normal circumstances I'd understand it, but hiding this kind of key information as "advocacy" is unacceptable.