Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Firefox 74

mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 269 posts

Re: Firefox 74

#141

Post by SAI_Peregrinus »

katet wrote: post #73
IanSanders wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wish every domain could automatically be opened in an individual container. I don't even need to know about them.

Ask and ye shall receive: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/temporary-con... I use this in combination with "normal" containers and it works a treat

Same. The mix is IMO the best way to get privacy while keeping usability. It obsoletes things like cookie auto-delete.

There is some annoying UI lag when opening a new tab though, as it takes a fraction of a second to swap from default to a new temporary container.

Re: Firefox 74

#142

Post by unethical_ban »

apetresc wrote: post #123
unethical_ban wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm on a 2019 Macbook Pro and my battery lasts for hours. Then again, I haven't run Safari for an extended period of time.

Well of course it lasts "for hours", what would the alternative be? A brand new laptop dying in minutes?

My 2019 Lenovo E485 with Ryzen 7 was lasting about 90 minutes on Ubuntu due to a microcode bug that was recently fixed.

Re: Firefox 74

#143

Post by Santosh83 »

dao- wrote: post #135
MasterYoda wrote: post #95

The 74 release says "New: Facebook container..." Do they mean the facebook container addon will come as standard, pre-installed with 74 or do they only mean they updated the addon? Little bit confused, feels a bit strange if they meant the later (under the new firefox release), but a at the same time when I updated 73 to 74 I could not see any traces of the "facebook container" in 74, no added addon. Is it meant fb c…

> Do they mean the facebook container addon will come as standard, pre-installed with 74 or do they only mean they updated the addon? The latter.

Why is that being mentioned in the main application's release notes? Isn't it more appropriate on the addon's main page? This confused me too. I thought they were including Facebook Container by default like they did with Pocket, then could find no trace of it after updating.

Re: Firefox 74

#144

Post by groovecoder »

ape4 wrote: post #138
sp332 wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But that site would have to know what your Facebook profile is. And with FB domains blocked outside of the FB container, they're going to have a harder time putting that info together.

Could they just use your email address?

psst ... check out https://monitor.firefox.com/protect-my-email

Re: Firefox 74

#145

Post by groovecoder »

stavros wrote: post #14

The Facebook container is great, but I wish there was an option for the built-in Multi-Account containers to work this way. I've been doing what the Facebook Container extension does, but with built-in containers, and the experience is very clunky. The two biggest issues are that I can't give the container a list of domains beforehand and say "everything under google.com should open here". I have to go to each Google…

Note: we have an update coming that includes a "Limit to Designated Sites" feature in the base Multi-Account Containers extension: https://github.com/mozilla/multi-account-containers/pull/165...

Re: Firefox 74

#146

Post by bzbarsky »

cdubzzz wrote: post #84
Semaphor wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Multi-account works great with containers, far superior to chrome. What you mean is probably multi-profile. I have never used that with chrome, but with FF I can go to about:profiles to open a new one or (according to a quick search) have a shortcut to the profile switcher or to a specific profile. What does Chrome do better?

> What does Chrome do better? I haven't used Chrome in a long time, but this is the primary major thing I miss from it (possibly the only thing). E.g. we have a family computer that my spouse and I use. I have set up separate profiles for us and forced Firefox to ask which profile to use on launch. But this means that if she has the browser open and has stepped away, I can't just open a new window, switch to my profi…

> I have to fully quit the browser and restart it.

You can use about:profiles and click the "Launch profile in new browser" button for the relevant profile. The UI is not amazing, and I would not recommend it to a non-techie given all the noise in it, but it does work....

Re: Firefox 74

#147

Post by onyva »

abledon wrote: post #110
onyva wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because I trust Mozilla with my data. Would love it to support alternative backends, like NextCloud, though.

Trust a small portion of a web browser company instead of an entire company dedicated to the security application?

Absolutely zero trust in for-profits, especially ones who only care about an exit or getting bought by Microsoft, Google, Facebook, etc. It'll be too late to get your data out of their hands at that stage. Regardless, so far we've seen that no software/company is 100% reliable, no matter what their expertise...

Re: Firefox 74

#148

Post by jorvi »

Please just fix the macOS CoreAnimation patch. It was introduced with so much fanfare ~6 months ago but it doesn't do anything, in terms of power use, for a large contingent of Firefox users. Firefox still nukes batteries, especially with video playing.

Re: Firefox 74

#149

Post by bluGill »

StavrosK wrote: post #120
bluGill wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't want google to know that I clicked on the link. That is sensitive.

Switch to an email provider that doesn't want to track you. You can be on Fastmail in an hour if you have your own domain.

I have used fastmail for ~10 years. However google still has far too many ways to track me.

Re: Firefox 74

#150

Post by roblabla »

wackget wrote: post #99
cptskippy wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> whenever I click a link on Gmail that goes to Github, Github opens in the Google container Google intercepts clicks and redirects them through a Google Domain to track clickthru. If you're in Gmail and hover over a link it will show the actual destination but onclick your browser opens a mail.google.com URL that redirects to the destination URL.

This is the real problem in my opinion. The URL shown in the status bar should always match the URL which is opened after clicking on the link. Anything else is deception. I don't know how you'd enforce it at the browser level because obviously there are tons of legit uses for modifying a link on click... but it should be enforced somehow.

What are legit uses for modifying a link on click? I've only seen that used for tracking.
Post reply on HN