Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?
Trust the World's Fastest VPN with Your Internet Security & Freedom - A Lifetime Subscription of PureVPN at 88% off. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. ×

Comment Re:You know.. (Score 3, Interesting) 113

If you've been to Holland, you'll notice that the drivers are extremely careful -- it would be hard to get hit by a car. I'm certain these light-lines are to keep pedestrians from getting run over by bicycles. In Holland, I think bikes actually earn points, Deathrace-2000-style, for aiming at pedestrians.

Comment Re: Why isn't Mozilla doing more?! (Score 1) 88

What's interesting about a lot of these fingerprinting metrics is that they aren't the result of just asking something like "navigator.getCoreCount()" -- these are sophisticated techniques that run very carefully crafted bits of code, and then measure the time certain operations take in order to deduce the number of effective cores. There's really no way to "lie" other than to intentionally be slow.

Comment Re:Why isn't Mozilla doing more?! (Score 1) 88

Mozilla is; there's just not much marketing around it.

To be clear, the level of de-featuring you're asking for makes for pretty good privacy, but a shitty modern browser. However, Mozilla is strongly committed to the prospect that the trade-off between features and privacy should remain in users' hands, which is why we work very closely with the Tor project to produce a browser that does exactly what you're proposing. The reason Firefox doesn't do this out of the box is that a browser that has been de-featured in this way does not come close to fitting the average user's needs. But you have choices, and Mozilla is committed to supporting Tor Browser to give people like you exactly what you're asking for.

In case you missed it, Mozilla recently started taking Tor's modifications in as part of core Firefox code, both to make thing easier for the team that maintains Tor Browser, and to allow users to turn certain Tor-provided privacy-focused features on in base Firefox.

Comment Self inflicted wounds (Score 0) 218

...and before that, it was Game of Thrones. Media companies don't seem to get that this isn't yesteryear where they could corral people into paying for a very broad service with exclusive content. Meanwhile, online sales of television series remain brisk, even at prices around $30 to $50 for a single show season. Sure, consumers aren't acting rationally here -- you can get the entire prime video catalog for the same price as two to three shows -- but that's how economies *actually* work. It blows my mind that the people selling these shows and services still can't see that. I really have very little sympathy for those content owners who choose not to sell their shows free-and-clear of other services. They get exactly the piracy they're asking for.

Comment Re:for a minute there i thought i had freedom. (Score 1) 236

While literally true, that's hardly an honest assessment. It's impractical for all but 0.01% of the userbase. The rest are just stuck with whatever mozilla decides.

Or you could click here:

You aren't as locked out as you're claiming to be.

Comment Re:Whoops (Score 1) 236

Right. What you want is horrifically insecure, which is why everyone is moving to disallow it. Chrome beat Firefox to the punch, but this change has been desperately needed for a long time. As long as you have a product used by millions of users, it's a giant blinking target for malware. Signing is entirely about being able to pull that malware out of the field after it is discovered -- and there's some really skanky add-on based malware out there.

As has been mentioned, if you don't like it, you have options -- unbranded builds and ESR releases let you do exactly what you want to do. And, again, that's far more than you can say for Chrome.

So, really, your complaint resolves to "Firefox will now be secure by default when it comes to add-ons, and I'll have to go through the inhumane and grueling task of downloading my Firefox from a different location on the web if I want to keep doing what I'm doing." That's a little hard to take seriously.

Comment Re:can we please (Score 3, Informative) 236

Alternately, you can grab the add-on and push it to the add-ons server for signing yourself -- it's all automated. The point of signing is that it allows Mozilla to shut off malicious add-ons when they arise. As mentioned elsewhere, all add-ons hosted on Mozilla's servers have already been signed, so you'd only have to do this if you found some unmaintained add-on lying around elsewhere on the web. To be honest, that sounds kind of fishy, so I'd proceed with caution.

Comment Re: The ego... (Score 1) 428

AM/FM radio still has commercials and does in fact pay the music industry (not sure about artists cut) to play songs. Internet radio, like Pandora, follows the same sort of rules as AM/FM radio. The product (music) is free to the consumer, but the distributor (radio station) gets paid by ads.

The same is true for Spotify, which he takes a swipe at as well. That kind of partisan bickering makes this seem far less like a principled objection to Youtube's business model (which does, by the way, pay revenue to artists) and more like an attack at anyone competing with his employer.

Slashdot Top Deals

Machines that have broken down will work perfectly when the repairman arrives.