621–630 of 752 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think it should but it was taken down from Firefox's store because of a DMCA copyright takedown. Firefox was required by law to remove it. Using the extension itself is a legal grey area, but distributing it is usually illegal.
> because of a DMCA That law doesn't apply to many HN readers
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> because of a DMCA That law doesn't apply to many HN readers
It does apply to Mozilla, and some version of it applies to every country that trades with the USA (because the USA makes all trade deals contingent on it)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They should have vetted ViolentMonkey instead of TamperMonkey the last time around.
> Tampermonkey - Rating 4.7 (5,306 reviews) - 760,294 Users > Violentmonkey - Rating 4.7 (793 reviews) - 164,622 Users On Google Web Store, it's 11,000,000 users VS 900,000 users. Their popularity seems different by a magnitude, hardly surprising Firefox/Mozilla would chose to focus on one above the other.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Websites already can barely be assed to care about supporting Firefox users, doing adblocking by default is a great way to get websites to start putting up banners that say "our website does not work with your browser, please switch to Chrome" en-masse. And Mozilla did develop anti-fingerprinting tech, but they can't enable it by default because it breaks lots of websites and when a website doesn't work they're not g…
With a normal Firefox on desktop on Linux, I get unsolvable recaptchas all the time, especially on cloudflare pages. Ironically, if I fake instead a chromium to be on Windows (UA and Sec-CH headers), I am allowed most of the time even though my TCP fingerprint must mismatch then. It's annoying to see what the normal web has become. Can't even read news anymore. Ironically, all these bot defenses make it easier for bo…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Tampermonkey - Rating 4.7 (5,306 reviews) - 760,294 Users > Violentmonkey - Rating 4.7 (793 reviews) - 164,622 Users On Google Web Store, it's 11,000,000 users VS 900,000 users. Their popularity seems different by a magnitude, hardly surprising Firefox/Mozilla would chose to focus on one above the other.
I see GP's point tho. The original Greacemonkey was open-sourced. Tampermonkey was the successor and is proprietary. Violentmonkey came to fix that. I wouldn't be surprised if Mozilla rejected TM because of not being OS and rejected VM because of lack of popularity
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If only they focused on making Firefox the definitive good browser instead of a platform for their AI efforts. Firefox will never convince people to leave chrome on philosophy alone. I detest Chrome with a passion and refuse to touch it with a ten-foot pole, but cannot in good faith recommend Firefox to anyone in today’s world. “It kinda works” is about as far a compliment you can give it.
"It kinda works" is factually incorrect. I have used Firefox exclusively every day on macOS for the past year, several hours a day, and have not one single time had to open another browser. None of the customers of my B2B saas use Firefox. Not once have I needed to test in their browsers except quick smoke testing to prove to myself that the rendering and details are identical. All my other browsing is indistinguisha…
I know when you’re balls deep in your own little box it’s hard to see the cracks in the foundation. But they’re very much there.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I currently don’t use ad blockers. The only time I used ad blockers was when a previous employer specifically asked me to, when using a company machine. > Can't understand why they put up with it To see which (rare) sites don’t put up a million ads and actually care about the reading experience. A lot of the top-listed sites on HN are small blogs without ads (or in the case of danluu.com or lwn.net - without almost a…
In an ideal world, I would do exactly what you do. I don't WANT to block ads everywhere. I would love to support my favorite websites, and if watching a couple of ads is what it takes for them to stay online, then I don't really mind. Problem is, the ads I see when I disable my ad-blocker are uniformly terrible. Maybe this is because I'm in India, but I've never once seen an ad that wasn't outright disgusting, let al…
I remember hearing about a lawsuit several years ago from several news organizations against an ad blocking company in which they described themselves as “ad companies that serve content” as opposed to “content companies that serve ads”.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The final death of IE6 was because corporates finally stopped using it⁰ and the reason for that had nothing to do with sites/apps refusing to work. If we'd said "we don't support IE6" they'd either say "the contract we signed years ago somehow says otherwise" or "fair enough, we'll use someone else's solution then". What killed it was IE6 not supporting TLS1.0 out of the box or TLS1.1+ at all, and that started to mak…
I'd like to think this conspiracy at least contributed: https://blog.chriszacharias.com/a-conspiracy-to-kill-ie6 Unless it's all fud in which case I shall archive this under headcanon.
Some management types might have even seen YouTube potentially blocking IE6 users as an advantage for keeping with IE6 to save bandwidth on their creaking external network links!