is it just me or more people switching to Firefox these days?
Not according to their own metrics. Monthly Active Users and New Profile Rate are the relevant metrics, and both are in decline.
Firefox 85 cracks down on supercookies
391–400 of 786 posts
Re: Firefox 85 cracks down on supercookies
#392Re: Firefox 85 cracks down on supercookies
#393Whenever a change to an ecosystem / business model comes along and some entrenched interest complains, I think:
"I have no doubt that someone will succeed under these new rules to come. You're just upset that it isn't you any more."
Re: Firefox 85 cracks down on supercookies
#394Earlier quoted context omitted.
You need the temporary containers plug-in to manage it for you. https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/temporary-con...
This is not something that should require a plugin. Each plugin is an additional source I need to trust.
The reason it is a plugin is because it's really complicated and confusing. Even as someone who has a deep understanding of web protocols I get tripped up by temporary containers sometimes when things don't work quite right.
Firefox built the core container technology, which drives their built in Facebook container (isolating Facebook from everything else). But isolating everything has a lot of weird edge cases, and I can't blame them for not supporting it out of the box.
Re: Firefox 85 cracks down on supercookies
#395These advertising networks are destroying web performance. Most of these "Supercookies" are optimizations to improve performance. By abusing them, advertisers have turned what should be a great performance tool into a liability. I know FF suggests this won't significantly affect most websites performance, but web advertising and trackers are already responsible for a huge chunk of performance issues already. Of cours…
Modern ad networks are essentially the “fax machine flyers” of old: someone you don’t know using your resources and your time, denying you use of your own resources temporarily, to send you something you don’t want. Except now it’s like every “normal” fax page includes 15,000 flyers.
If people didn’t want ads it wouldn’t be a multi billion business. Also your analogy is wrong. Your browser won’t execute code unless it requests it. Fax machine spam you don’t have do anything except have it connected to a live telephone connection.
It’s more like complaining that your sole of your shoes is being worn out more because grocery stores put the milk in the back forcing you to walk past items you don’t intend to buy. You can always go to a different store just like you no one is forcing you to browse websites that are ad supported.
Re: Firefox 85 cracks down on supercookies
#396Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wonder how many people reading this comment are thinking, "what's a fax machine?" :o) I like the analogy, but I wonder how effective it is on anyone under the age of what, 35?
I had to use a Fax machine in 2018. In the United States. As the only acceptable way to submit certain documents. I should also point to non-Unitedstatians that checks (that physical paper worth as much money as you write and sign on it) are still in use in the USA.
I maintain a legacy service at work (I originally wrote it back in 2014) that is responsible for sending eFaxes from our various other services and platforms. It's one of the most internally trafficked services we have. We're in the healthcare space. Almost every document created on our different platforms results in a fax being sent.
Re: Firefox 85 cracks down on supercookies
#397Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not trying to manipulate anyone. I'm voicing my opinion. I don't buy anything from advertisements. Period. When I need something, I shop for it. And if you think I'm alone, you're kidding yourself.
that's totally fine. I prefer a world without advertisement, ideally. I disagree with you that there is no spectrum of ad ethics. And while you are not "trying" to manipulate anyone (maybe), I also disagree that you are not effectively influencing your reader thoughts to some degree. The analogy I made is: even an internet comment does, on a smaller scale, less maliciously, use persuasion techniques: should we get ri…
You're right that an ad-less world is impossible. Advertisements existed before you and I were both alive and they will exist when we're gone.
But that does not mean I have to partake in them, watch them, or allow them to consume my attention and time. I also don't need to spend my limited time on this planet trying to "fix advertising". I can simply block them and ignore the ones that slip through, and get on with my life. If this is an issue that is dear to your heart, that sentiment undoubtedly feels dismissive. I'm sorry about that.
Re: Firefox 85 cracks down on supercookies
#398Earlier quoted context omitted.
Modern ad networks are essentially the “fax machine flyers” of old: someone you don’t know using your resources and your time, denying you use of your own resources temporarily, to send you something you don’t want. Except now it’s like every “normal” fax page includes 15,000 flyers.
If people didn’t want ads it wouldn’t be a multi billion business. Also your analogy is wrong. Your browser won’t execute code unless it requests it. Fax machine spam you don’t have do anything except have it connected to a live telephone connection. It’s more like complaining that your sole of your shoes is being worn out more because grocery stores put the milk in the back forcing you to walk past items you don’t i…
People don't want adds. how do you infer that people want ads because the ad industry is profitable?
It's profitable because a few people want to influence and spy on a lot of people.
Most people don't want ads they just tolerate them for getting actual services. Most these people don't even know how much tracking is involved and how nefarious this industry really is.
Re: Firefox 85 cracks down on supercookies
#399Is there any movement in tech centered on security/privacy allowing web viewing without relying on cookies and local browser storage?
Re: Firefox 85 cracks down on supercookies
#400Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think you’re overestimating the impact of this. Most web site content these days are served from the web site owner’s own domain. It’s only if a.com and b.com have (for example) the exact same image URL (c.com/img123.jpg) embedded, and you visit both sites, that this cache partitioning will make a difference. In essence, there’s very little legitimate Internet traffic that would be effected by this change, but lots…
What about JS libraries or CSS hosted by a CDN? I'm thinking jQuery, Bootstrap, etc etc. I learned that using a common CDN was the way to go because the content would likely already be in the user's cache and often not need to be loaded.
This was discussed when Chrome made this change. It makes almost no difference because to get any saving you have to have lots of websites that use the same CDN and the same version of jQuery etc. Unlikely enough to not matter.