241–250 of 468 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Something like this happens on my Linux laptop: Firefox eats battery 2-3 times faster than Chrome & cooler activity is much more higher. Seems like Firefox cares only about Windows.
> Seems like Firefox cares only about Windows. …which is why all the work was done to support Core Animation on macOS?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I'd rather things be direct. I'd rather we live in a world where customers paid directly for the product and I was the customer (not the product). You don't have that choice - what happens is you pay and become the product. Cable TV used to be ad-free, since you paid for it, then they figured out they can make more money selling ads. There are ads on the buses and subways, even though you have to pay for tickets. W…
> You pay for a TV, yet 'smart' features get included, that spy on you and show you ads. I've heard about this, but what exactly does this mean? I have a smart TV, but I never see ads. Supposedly it's spying on me, but how is it spying on me any more than the Netflix and Hulu subscriptions I already pay for? This is not meant to sound defensive - I do believe it's too good to be true that my TV is as wonderful as I t…
Pro-Tip: At least for Samsung TVs you can un-accept the privacy-policy to disable this. This will also disable Netflix and all "smart" features but that's..exactly what I want in a TV. Alternatively just don't give the TV network access, but you may want to do a yearly software-update.
[1]: https://www.consumerreports.org/privacy/how-to-turn-off-smar...
Firefox + Mozilla are awesome. I still have a Mozilla 1.0 t-shirt from the first release party! I've recently seen a ton of FF fans state that the reason they love Firefox is that it doesn't have ads or track you and preserves your privacy. However, Firefox wouldn't exist without Google and (to a lesser extent, Google Chrome). They make 94% of their revenue via bundling and distribution deals with companies like Goog…
Of course in the meantime Firefox and Brave are doing well enough. I still feel as though I'm being towed along and probably the browser makers feel similarly.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I'd rather things be direct. I'd rather we live in a world where customers paid directly for the product and I was the customer (not the product). You don't have that choice - what happens is you pay and become the product. Cable TV used to be ad-free, since you paid for it, then they figured out they can make more money selling ads. There are ads on the buses and subways, even though you have to pay for tickets. W…
> You pay for a TV, yet 'smart' features get included, that spy on you and show you ads. I've heard about this, but what exactly does this mean? I have a smart TV, but I never see ads. Supposedly it's spying on me, but how is it spying on me any more than the Netflix and Hulu subscriptions I already pay for? This is not meant to sound defensive - I do believe it's too good to be true that my TV is as wonderful as I t…
If you need any proof that they profit off of this, "dumb" equivalents of various models, if they exist at all, tend to be significantly more expensive.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The performance is what has kept me on Chrome on Mac. Going to re-install FF now and give it a whirl. Thanks for this info!
You can also use Brave browser, it's basically Chrome with the ad tracking removed. With that, almost no reason to switch to another browser.
Firefox + Mozilla are awesome. I still have a Mozilla 1.0 t-shirt from the first release party! I've recently seen a ton of FF fans state that the reason they love Firefox is that it doesn't have ads or track you and preserves your privacy. However, Firefox wouldn't exist without Google and (to a lesser extent, Google Chrome). They make 94% of their revenue via bundling and distribution deals with companies like Goog…
> I'd rather things be direct. I'd rather we live in a world where customers paid directly for the product and I was the customer (not the product). You don't have that choice - what happens is you pay and become the product. Cable TV used to be ad-free, since you paid for it, then they figured out they can make more money selling ads. There are ads on the buses and subways, even though you have to pay for tickets. W…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You pay for a TV, yet 'smart' features get included, that spy on you and show you ads. I've heard about this, but what exactly does this mean? I have a smart TV, but I never see ads. Supposedly it's spying on me, but how is it spying on me any more than the Netflix and Hulu subscriptions I already pay for? This is not meant to sound defensive - I do believe it's too good to be true that my TV is as wonderful as I t…
Many new "smart" TVs have "ACR" that sends info about what you're watching (regardless of whether on netflix or hulu or a set-top-box) to the TV manufacturer. [1] Pro-Tip: At least for Samsung TVs you can un-accept the privacy-policy to disable this. This will also disable Netflix and all "smart" features but that's..exactly what I want in a TV. Alternatively just don't give the TV network access, but you may want to…
Firefox + Mozilla are awesome. I still have a Mozilla 1.0 t-shirt from the first release party! I've recently seen a ton of FF fans state that the reason they love Firefox is that it doesn't have ads or track you and preserves your privacy. However, Firefox wouldn't exist without Google and (to a lesser extent, Google Chrome). They make 94% of their revenue via bundling and distribution deals with companies like Goog…
I wonder how my younger self from twenty years ago would have responded to me now: I'd prefer to PAY money for software once rather than being suckled by subscriptions, annoyed by ads, frazzled by fingerprinting, or prickled by privacy problems. Give me a nice over-sized box to stick on my desk for fifty bucks and some clean, well-developed software. Of course in the meantime Firefox and Brave are doing well enough.…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Right ... It really isn’t inconceivable that they wouldn’t have got funding from somewhere else. It was a marketing opportunity for Google, them being the David to Microsoft’s Goliath. Remember that whole ”don’t be evil” thing? Turns out it was jusy a ruse to be abandoned once the market had consolidated.
There is also an argument that back in the day Firefox saved Google rather than the other way around. Why? Because when Microsoft had 90% browser share, gained through tying IE directly into Windows, there was a very real chance that they could have adapted IE so that it was harder to use Google than a default MS Bing search engine. Having a better, cross-platform alternative to IE allowed Google to stay in the game…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Oh, please. You make it sound like Mozilla is equivalent to Facebook. Is that a smear campaign ? You can donate to the Mozilla foundation. Have you ? Have you convinced your company or your friends to do so ? Because that's a better alternative than outright singling Mozilla out for their ties to Google. Which last time I checked didn't make the user the product of Google like Chrome or Android does.
Mozilla fired their CEO, the founder of JS, Brendan Eich, because he made a donation 10 years before to a Christian charity. Many SV people are missing the scope and scale of the impact of having OSS charities engaging in the political campaign – it is renouncing all donations from the other side. It is not their role. Every year I have thousands of dollars that I try to affect to OSS charities, but I’m yet to find a…
No, Eich specifically made a donation to a political campaign for CA's Prop 8 that used blood-libel-level lies to cast homosexuals as pedophiles and sexual predators and use that as a justification to deny them the right to marry.
And this was the state of the Prop 8 campaign at the time he made the donation. He knew what they were about, and he donated to them anyway.
So, yeah, he had it coming to him.