81–90 of 180 posts
Thank you and kudos.
My only question is with the promotion of a paid Safari extension whether the developer is concerned about a possible trademark infringement suit.
How can I trust that this extension, which has access to every page I visit, doesn't steal my data? How can I trust that if someone else takes over the project and releases an update, that my data is still secure? Looks great, but I'm just so skeptical of browser extensions now.
Firefox add-ons pass full source code review before the submission after the Stylish incident. Safari extensions also pass manual review, Apple asks developer to send an ID card photo. Not sure about Chrome, you have to simply trust me, the code is not obfuscated and you can always locate the files and see what the extension does in your browser. Google recently announced some security changes https://blog.chromium.o…
To me this sounds like the most vital thing to improve trust. Having browser developers review all the source code in detail is unrealistic, and even then, won't defeat underhanded programming (is it a bug or a deliberate vulnerability?). Legal accountability combined with auditability at least provide a deterrent to publishing malicious software.
The security settings do seem to be concerning, but I'm not sure if it's due to how much Firefox, Safari and Chrome have locked down their worlds.
Edit: One unintended side effect is copying and pasting text into an email (like an address from a google search) copies the text with a black background. I could do a plaintext copy, but it would be nice if text was copied in the original formatting if possible.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can always load your own from source.
Sure - but do you? Does anyone? EDIT: a better solution would be if the store itself allowed you to inspect the source that went into building the plugin. Then you would only need to trust the store itself, which you already do (when you trust the browser).
I tried this a few months back, I liked the visual effect and the configuration flexibility, but it ate at my CPU waaay too much. Anybody else have this? Was meaning to look for a lightweight alternative. Maybe I'll try this extension again to see if it's still a resource hog. Note: I'm on Firefox.
HN now looks like an old school amber monitor, and its default rules get 9 out of 10 sites spot on, with perfect contrast. Unlike other similar addons seems able to leave the right highlight and banner colours alone. If some rare site doesn't work well with the defaults you can tune individually or even add custom css for that site only. The few times I browse without it my middle-aged eyes are instantly resenting the excessive whiteness.
So I have to thank you, a lot, for your attention to detail with this. I hope you receive lots and lots of donations. :)
The only negative I find is it's sometimes very greedy with CPU, especially if you're switching between a few tabs a lot.
It's a document repository for caching HTML content offline, managing PDFs, annotating and creating flashcards on the documents you're managing.
We looked at adding dark mode but it didn't work exactly like I would have hoped so I'm going to take a look at this extension and see if they used any tricks I didn't think of.
Does anyone actually prefer reading text on a bright background? If so, what are your reasons? For me, the choice is obvious to the point that I'm often annoyed at the lengths I need to go to in order to browse the web comfortably. I feel like we should have moved to the sane default of dark-themed UI ages ago.