Mozilla Firefox ships as the default browser with almost every Linux distro. Why is this not a problem? Is that hypocrisy really lost on everyone but me?
Open Letter to Microsoft’s CEO: Don’t Roll Back the Clock on Choice and Control
301–310 of 311 posts
Re: Open Letter to Microsoft’s CEO: Don’t Roll Back the Clock on Choice and Control
#302This is not rolling back the clock. Here are some important points to the debate: 1. Windows 10 users are upgrading from 7 and 8.1, these versions were heavily shipped with bloatware. If it took away default browsing from Firefox, it also took away volume control from OEM Volumizer 2010. 2. Your browsers like IE, Mozilla and Chrome might have Malware toolbars installed. Nobody can deny that it is far too common on Wi…
Microsoft wants to gain some browser market share, that's the only reason they changed the functionality to make it more complicated to change the default browser.
Re: Open Letter to Microsoft’s CEO: Don’t Roll Back the Clock on Choice and Control
#303Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nonsense. He was forced out. Forced to resign. How hard is that to understand?
But thanks for the opportunity to correct the misinformation you were spreading. Now please stop repeating things you now know are not true. I doubt Brendan intended for you to stop using Mozilla Firefox to avenge his resignation, which he did voluntarily against the wishes of the board. In fact, I suspect Brendan voluntarily resigned in order to LIMIT the damage he was causing to Mozilla's reputation and user base,…
Please learn about "constructive dismissal".
> In employment law, constructive dismissal, also called constructive discharge or constructive termination, occurs when an employee resigns as a result of the employer creating a hostile work environment. Since the resignation was not truly voluntary, it is in effect a termination.
Re: Open Letter to Microsoft’s CEO: Don’t Roll Back the Clock on Choice and Control
#304Earlier quoted context omitted.
But thanks for the opportunity to correct the misinformation you were spreading. Now please stop repeating things you now know are not true. I doubt Brendan intended for you to stop using Mozilla Firefox to avenge his resignation, which he did voluntarily against the wishes of the board. In fact, I suspect Brendan voluntarily resigned in order to LIMIT the damage he was causing to Mozilla's reputation and user base,…
Please learn about "constructive dismissal". > In employment law, constructive dismissal, also called constructive discharge or constructive termination, occurs when an employee resigns as a result of the employer creating a hostile work environment. Since the resignation was not truly voluntary, it is in effect a termination.
So you're calling Brendan Eich and the Mozilla board liars.
What's your evidence? Have you asked them yourself? What did they say? Have any of them made any statements that support your accusations that they lied, or are you just making up those accusations yourself, or parroting someone else's accusations that Brendan Eich and the Mozilla board are liars? Who said that?
Hey Brendan Eich: this guy "notsony" just called you and the Mozilla board liars, and claimed that Mozilla forced you out by "creating a hostile work environment" -- care to chime in to support or deny his accusation?
Re: Open Letter to Microsoft’s CEO: Don’t Roll Back the Clock on Choice and Control
#305Earlier quoted context omitted.
But thanks for the opportunity to correct the misinformation you were spreading. Now please stop repeating things you now know are not true. I doubt Brendan intended for you to stop using Mozilla Firefox to avenge his resignation, which he did voluntarily against the wishes of the board. In fact, I suspect Brendan voluntarily resigned in order to LIMIT the damage he was causing to Mozilla's reputation and user base,…
Please learn about "constructive dismissal". > In employment law, constructive dismissal, also called constructive discharge or constructive termination, occurs when an employee resigns as a result of the employer creating a hostile work environment. Since the resignation was not truly voluntary, it is in effect a termination.
This isn't the first time you've made that claim, or failed to back up your claim with any evidence.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9535977
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9536210
If you can't provide any proof of your accusation that Brendan Eich and the Mozilla board are liars when they said "It was Brendan’s idea to resign", then I think it's safe to dismiss you as just another angry Social Injustice Warrior.
So tell us your evidence supporting your accusation that this is a lie:
https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2014/04/05/faq-on-ceo-resignat...
Q: Was Brendan Eich asked to resign by the Board?
A: No. It was Brendan’s idea to resign, and in fact, once he submitted his resignation, Board members tried to get Brendan to stay at Mozilla in another C-level role.
Re: Open Letter to Microsoft’s CEO: Don’t Roll Back the Clock on Choice and Control
#306Earlier quoted context omitted.
Please read anything I've written on the topic over the years. Java runs as a plugin, like Flash. It has no deep DOM integration. Both Java and Flash have become security problems, so they're in various penalty boxes, beyond the plugin prison. Back in 1995, when I did JS in the shadow of Java, as a sidekick Robin-the-boy-hostage language, I did the primordial DOM too. Java was in only applets then -- pretty much the…
What aspersions? I've noted your opposition to Dart. You've explained that it has to do with memory management difficulties that seem intractable. I now understand this better, so I thank you. The world has moved on and now transpilers are coming into their own, so we do have real choice in the language we use in the browser, which as a programmer is all I want.
What aspersions? Let's start with your "Mozilla disliked Dart", full of personalizing words that obfuscate the objective arguments. Just the "dislike" usage is subjective and vague -- and inaccurate when applied to my comments on HN about Dart.
DartVM never had a chance, I told 'em so and gave concrete reasons why it didn't. Worse, the leaked DASH memo was arrogant and wrong in declaring that JS "cannot be fixed by evolving the language". Anders Hejlsberg gently pushed back against that bogus assertion in 2012:
https://channel9.msdn.com/Shows/Going+Deep/Anders-Hejlsberg-...
and events have proven him correct.
Read the leaked DASH memo if you haven't yet:
via
http://lambda-the-ultimate.org/node/4355
(Note that Mark Miller did not write this memo, he just accidentally posted it to a public Google Group thinking that group was private to Google employees.)
A lot of water under the bridge since 2010, and some of it had good effects for Dart users for sure, even with Dart now only a compile-to-JS language. But a lot was wasted. Dart could have used bignums (Dart `int` support) in ES6, for example, and this would have helped JS users too. The lack of it is a direct cost of focusing on DartVM at the expense of dart2js; see
https://github.com/dart-lang/sdk/issues/1533
You are right that I disliked the stinky politics and enormous question-begging on display in the DASH memo. (That's me disliking a set of bad arguments, not me disliking Dart.) It was a statement of intent, to fund a project because some people of note wanted to do that project, even if it wouldn't work cross-browser, and even if it imposed high opportunity cost to JS both in Chrome (the whole V8 team had to be reconstituted in Munich) and in Ecma TC39 (no one showed up to argue for better cross-compiling support in general).
WebAssembly should grow dynamic language support for Dart and languages like it, but that's years out. In the mean time, only JS as compile-from-Dart target is available. ES6 could have used the help.
It's fine for well-funded entities to waste money on boondoggles (well, not really, but I was not a shareholder, and Google is free to "experiment" for any reason it pleases). But I'm not obligated to praise a bogus justification when it leaks, or honor the two-faced way that JS was dealt with in the memo, and evident from the direct and opportunity costs of DartVM.
Re: Open Letter to Microsoft’s CEO: Don’t Roll Back the Clock on Choice and Control
#307Earlier quoted context omitted.
What aspersions? I've noted your opposition to Dart. You've explained that it has to do with memory management difficulties that seem intractable. I now understand this better, so I thank you. The world has moved on and now transpilers are coming into their own, so we do have real choice in the language we use in the browser, which as a programmer is all I want.
What aspersions? Let's start with your "Mozilla disliked Dart", full of personalizing words that obfuscate the objective arguments. Just the "dislike" usage is subjective and vague -- and inaccurate when applied to my comments on HN about Dart. DartVM never had a chance, I told 'em so and gave concrete reasons why it didn't. Worse, the leaked DASH memo was arrogant and wrong in declaring that JS "cannot be fixed by e…
> That's me disliking a set of bad arguments, not me disliking Dart.
I stand corrected. Yes, I've read all the memos and watched all the videos, including this one when I knew Dart wasn't going to make it into Chrome for the first time. I knew it by Blink engineering lead Darin Fischer's reaction when asked about Dart [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TlJob8K_OwE at 17:25] To me it looked like he laughed and sort of scoffed, then he and another member talked Dart down. Maybe it is a failing of mine to look at emotional content when considering issues, but doing so sometimes imparts useful information.
At one point I was passionate about Dart because I thought it hit the sweet spot between JavaScript and Java applets in the browser with optional typing and generics. It turns out TypeScript hit that spot well enough and Anders was right about that.
I understand your frustrations about opportunity costs and lost effort that could have gone into JavaScript, but there is another possibility -- and this is just my opinion, which I voiced at the time -- that the Dart team was more focused on Dart on the server as a Java replacement. This was at a time when Oracle's lawsuit with Google over the Java interfaces was a big question. I thought Dart might be a plan B on the server and why Dart2js was not getting the attention I thought it deserved.
The JavaScript output on the client was unreadable, very large and much of the disdain for Dart from JavaScript devs was for this reason (17000 lines for a "hello world" if I recall correctly - I am not a systems guy but isn't most of that the DartVM translated to JS. Couldn't it be compiled to asm.js and loaded ahead of time if so desired?)
I think we agree on most of this and I apologize. It wasn't my intention to offend you. Dart still has a chance if they can get the translator to ES6 to work, and I don't see why not, so I hope to use Dart when and where it makes sense.
Re: Open Letter to Microsoft’s CEO: Don’t Roll Back the Clock on Choice and Control
#308Earlier quoted context omitted.
If the NSA is a targeted attacker, then yes, the James Mickens "Mossad / Not Mossad Duality" applies. To paraphrase, "either your attacker is or is not the Mossad. If your attacker is not the Mossad, you can use strong passwords and avoid shady websites and you should be okay. If your attacker is the Mossad, there's nothing you can do and you are definitely going to die". However, the average citizen is not a target…
>However, the average citizen is not a target of the NSA. The average citizen is exactly the target of the NSA. Their goal is to own everybody and then figure out what to do afterwards.
Owning everyone is the very opposite of the definition of a targeted attack. My point is not allowing your data to be collected en masse is a reasonable precaution against mass surveillance.
Re: Open Letter to Microsoft’s CEO: Don’t Roll Back the Clock on Choice and Control
#309Earlier quoted context omitted.
What aspersions? Let's start with your "Mozilla disliked Dart", full of personalizing words that obfuscate the objective arguments. Just the "dislike" usage is subjective and vague -- and inaccurate when applied to my comments on HN about Dart. DartVM never had a chance, I told 'em so and gave concrete reasons why it didn't. Worse, the leaked DASH memo was arrogant and wrong in declaring that JS "cannot be fixed by e…
> That's me disliking a set of bad arguments, not me disliking Dart. I stand corrected. Yes, I've read all the memos and watched all the videos, including this one when I knew Dart wasn't going to make it into Chrome for the first time. I knew it by Blink engineering lead Darin Fischer's reaction when asked about Dart [ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TlJob8K_OwE at 17:25] To me it looked like he laughed and sort of…
Thanks for the reply and apols -- no hard feelings.
At least the new Dart compiler generates nice JS, and the future efforts on Dart and JS look more aligned. We still don't have a bignum champion in TC39, but we do have great SIMD championing from John McCutchan (who started it) and Daniel Ehrenberg of Google; Dan Gohman of Mozilla; Peter Jensen, et al., of Intel; and others at Microsoft whose names I'm not remembering. This leads to value types as an extension mechanism, so we should get bignums sooner or later.
On whether DartVM was justified as a hedge against Java going away on Google, I've heard that too, but both for Java on the Google server side and for Android Java, I have never seen any evidence to support this notion. I'd want to see an efficient AOT compiler from Java classfiles to Dart, for example. Another example: some convincing work on library/framework parity on the server side to go along with Dart's (very nice) DOM and client side libraries.
Perhaps such work was kept behind firewalls. If instead it was just a case of saying "oh, we may be able to use DartVM if things go south with Oracle", that velleity hardly counts as an intentional, operational Java replacement strategy.
Re: Open Letter to Microsoft’s CEO: Don’t Roll Back the Clock on Choice and Control
#310Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, this is the most "pot calling the kettle black" article I've seen all month. Let's see: * no opt-out for Australis * removal of tabs on bottom * forced signed extensions * removing option to not retain download history (unless you give up browsing history too) * bundling of Hello * bundling of Pocket (requires a lot of effort to disable) * bundling of DRM web extensions * bundling ads out of the box (can be dis…
I'm not going to defend Mozilla's hypocrisy. Microsoft is in a different league with Windows 10, however. This was what they dreamed of 15 years ago. Once you install Windows 10, it's no longer your PC, it is Microsoft's. You can't choose to avoid an update. Think about that. This means Microsoft can do anything it wants to with your computer: * change your settings * farm your compute cycles * put in advertising * i…
Didddkdckccifffkfkfkfkfkf