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

Firefox 39.0 released

mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 105 posts

Re: Firefox 39.0 released

#61

Post by taosat »

cromantin wrote: post #19
JonnieCache wrote: post #10

If you're wondering what "unicode 8 skin-tone emoji" is about, here you go: http://unicode.org/reports/tr51/#Diversity Hmmmm, I'm on ff 40.0a2 and they don't render for me: http://emojipedia.org/man-with-dark-brown-skin-tone/

If i ever go to hell i know what my punishment will be - implement unicode

There is a Unicode character PERSON WITH BLOND HAIR, but no corresponding PERSON WITH BLACK HAIR. This is obviously discriminatory. We need new emoji modifiers for: blonde-hair, black-hair, brown-hair, red-hair etc.

Re: Firefox 39.0 released

#62

Post by Flimm »

jbrooksuk wrote: post #54
owly wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

YES. Force them to upgrade their weak sites!

Which unfortunately costs time and money. Whilst yes, they should be up to date and secure, banks are pretty big businesses and require more time. One day they'll catch up.

Malicious crackers aren't going to wait.

Re: Firefox 39.0 released

#63

Post by nawitus »

ponyous wrote: post #3

How much does Project Silk improves scrolling performance? Can you "feel" it? Scrolling/motion performance is the only thing that is keeping me away from FF at the moment - Even dev tools are getting amazingly good.

I noticed a huge difference with this site: http://www.2ality.com/2015/02/es6-classes-final.html

In the previous Firefox version scrolling on that site was laggy to the point of being unusuable for some reason.

Re: Firefox 39.0 released

#64

Post by muizelaar »

kozukumi wrote: post #28

And yet there are still issues on my Sandy Bridge system with display corruption even with the latest Intel drivers. Also has anyone else noticed that Firefox is no longer keeping the page state when navigating back? For example on Reddit go to the comments section, minimize a few comments then navigate to a link then go back and none of the minimized comments remain minimized, in Firefox prior to 38 things worked co…

Can you post a screenshot?

Re: Firefox 39.0 released

#65

Post by jammaloo »

chippy wrote: post #59

"Drag and drop enabled for nodes in Inspector markup view " This is going to make me never use Chrome dev tools again. Nice

I can't think of a situation that would make me want to move nodes around from place to place. Where would that be useful?

Re: Firefox 39.0 released

#67

Post by TazeTSchnitzel »

wongarsu wrote: post #39
TazeTSchnitzel wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How so? If you're white, perhaps you see no problem with making everyone's skin white. But the billions of people who aren't white might have a problem with it.

I have never thought of emoji as having any particular skin colour, until this recent trend to make skin colour selectable. Emoticons and emoji have traditionally been displayed as yellow cirlces with large faces. White emojis have been the exception, not the rule. I have never had a problem with being represented by a character with Jaundice (a medical condition turning your skin yellow).

> White emojis have been the exception, not the rule.

Not at all true. Most emoji implementations (Japanese mobile providers, Apple) used white faces.

Re: Firefox 39.0 released

#68

Post by TazeTSchnitzel »

sp332 wrote: post #30
TazeTSchnitzel wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How so? If you're white, perhaps you see no problem with making everyone's skin white. But the billions of people who aren't white might have a problem with it.

The color was not specified before, so it was up to the font creator. I think yellow was the most common choice. The test page shows all the icons as blue in my browser. I'm not against the new changes, but I think the old version was more popular in Asian countries than anywhere else, and wasn't really pro-white.

> The color was not specified before, so it was up to the font creator. I think yellow was the most common choice.

Nope. Usually white (Apple, Japanese phones).

Re: Firefox 39.0 released

#69

Post by TazeTSchnitzel »

chimeracoder wrote: post #37
TazeTSchnitzel wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How so? If you're white, perhaps you see no problem with making everyone's skin white. But the billions of people who aren't white might have a problem with it.

> How so? If you're white, perhaps you see no problem with making everyone's skin white. > But the billions of people who aren't white might have a problem with it. I'm not white, and I have a problem with "skin tone" emoji. Previously, skin tones for emoji were left up to the font creator. In practice, this meant that they were usually lime green, neon blue, or Simpsons yellow, all of which are cartoonish enough not…

> Beyond that, the skin tones used are incredibly reductive. Human skin tones are not as simple as 6 different shades of brown.

Yes, they are a bit more complicated. But 6 choices that correspond to a widely-used system (Fitzpatrick) is far better than none.

Re: Firefox 39.0 released

#70

Post by TazeTSchnitzel »

Grue3 wrote: post #38
TazeTSchnitzel wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How so? If you're white, perhaps you see no problem with making everyone's skin white. But the billions of people who aren't white might have a problem with it.

Billions of people who aren't white were using and invented emoji before white people even got to them.

> Billions of people who aren't white were using and invented emoji before white people even got to them.

There are not billions of Japanese people and their skin tone is light (though they're not European).

Post reply on HN