The latest news and developments on Firefox and Mozilla, a global non-profit that strives to promote openness, innovation and opportunity on the web.
You can subscribe to this community from any Kbin or Lemmy instance:
Related
While we are not an official Mozilla community, we have adopted the Mozilla Community Participation Guidelines as far as it can be applied to a bin.
Always be civil and respectful
Don't be toxic, hostile, or a troll, especially towards Mozilla employees. This includes gratuitous use of profanity.
Don't be a bigot
No form of bigotry will be tolerated.
Don't post security compromising suggestions
If you do, include an obvious and clear warning.
Don't post conspiracy theories
Especially ones about nefarious intentions or funding. If you're concerned: Ask. Please don’t fuel conspiracy thinking here. Don’t try to spread FUD, especially against reliable privacy-enhancing software. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Show credible sources.
Don't accuse others of shilling
Send honest concerns to the moderators and/or admins, and we will investigate.
Do not remove your help posts after they receive replies
Half the point of asking questions in a public sub is so that everyone can benefit from the answers—which is impossible if you go deleting everything behind yourself once you've gotten yours.
I remember how excited I was when google released a browser. They've become such a joke since then.
I have a copy backed up, works fine when loaded manually
Why wouldn't you just use something like Firefox? Why the actual fuck would you opt to continue using Chrome?
They might simply prefer it, or be in an environment where they have no choice (e.g. office, education).
I'm a stubborn Firefox user but I have to say, this feels a little aggressive and not at all likely to convince anyone to switch.
So you're saying they'd be allowed to sideload a discontinued chrome extension onto their work laptop but not allowed to download another legitimate browser? Yea....not buying it. Same with an educational setting. Pretty sure the person I reaponded to just simply is used to Chrome and doesn't want change (which I do understand.)
I stripped it from all google crap, extra features, etc. Then the features I want I added in using an extension I wrote and maintain myself
Why would you use a browser like firefox when you could use brave which has built in ad blocks which firefox has not
You realize that Brave is Chromium and the „built in Adblock” is renamed ublock origin?
Yes I know that but firefox is lacking features. An old chromium browser on mobile has the same amount of points in benchmarks as the newest firefox on desktop
Noice. I'm sure there's mirrors up already. Article says it'll eventually stop working tho. I know I have a few extensions that eventually were disabled daily and I had to enable them each time I started chrome
This might be what makes he leave for Firefox full time. A bummer indeed
Edit: ha, just saw what sub/community this is. I use FF but only for browsing... privately ;]
Why not just use Firefox all the time? Literally zero reason to use Chrome except for the rare website that doesn't work with Firefox?
I can understand them, I use Firefox on my PC, but Chrome on my phone, as I can't live without tab groups there, for me it's almost unusable without it, as I always have 100+ tabs open on my mobile browser
When they'll add it, I'll use Firefox on both
@[email protected] Have you tried using Firefox Multi-account containers for this purpose?
Yo that's handy! No I've just been using chrome profiles
That's a great feature!
You do realize that bookmarks exist, right?
Using bookmarks as a substitute for tab groups is a very different user experience, though.
But you can make folders in bookmarks....is this not the same thing?
I don't think so. As far as context switching goes, tab groups are faster and, having used both Chrome's tab groups and Firefox's bookmarks, I'd argue they're easier to manage too.
The way I see it, each feature has different intended uses. Ideally, I wouldn't use tab groups as a bookmarks substitute either... but sometimes it happens due to their advantages.
Is Google's similar to grouping android apps into clusters?
I'm not sure what exactly you're talking about.
This article—which I haven't read—has a screenshot of mobile Google Chrome tab grouping. Hopefully this'll help.
@[email protected] Not really, I use bookmarks too, but I need tab groups for organizing active tabs, not closed ones
I use the extension Simple Tab Groups for Firefox.
@[email protected] It's not on Android sadly
kiwi browser takes files in Dev mode just like chrome
You can probably force it to be by using a custom extension list, but the result might not be functional or pretty to look at.
I mean, they are different so it is totally possible for someone to like one over the other, and that's aside from the very simple reason of being used to it and/or not wanting to copy everything over like, passwords, payment methods, bookmarks, extensions (most important reason for me), etc.
I honestly just keep think I'll eventually switch permanently when Google forces me to. It's the same reason I'm here; reddit forced my hand. I'm equally waiting for Microsoft to force me to switch to Linux.
Also, typing that out, I do realize this isn't a great mentality to have (I'm being forced to do x) but maybe that's just the result of building my castle in foreign kingdoms. It's basically damage control out here! lol
If you aren't motivated at this point to switch to Firefox (or at least away from Chrome) then you never will be. I just don't understand man. I really don't.
I mean, would there really be a difference in the data they're collecting on me, assuming that's your main concern?
I use an android phone which includes: android pay, youtube music/premium, maps and whatnot. Trying to keep my most sensitive data out of their hands honestly seems impossible at this point. I guess I just don't really see the benefit. That said, blocking ads would of course be significant enough of an issue for me to make a change. But, as of earlier in the week, everything still worked fine (I think)
Really tho, I barely use my PC to browse the web for fun anymore - just the odd gaming sesh and the Plex server for mom. It's kinda depressing to think about, tbh
I can only assume that firefox on andoid OS (set up properly) collects less data about your browsing history vs. Chrome on android OS. So I'd say you would at least be giving less browsing data to Google. But in this case I just cannot imagine browsing the web without a fully functional ublock origin. I get that it still works on Chrome, but it won't soon.
Well for ads I use DNS66. It works pretty well and even blocks ads in most apps and games. It basically makes some free apps feel like the premium version
Have you ever tried using a pihole? That works very well too.
Yea, I'll have to switch eventually. But let's hope the manifest v2 is not too difficult to put back in
Fuck google. Bring back infoseek
I’ll just say it.
People that continue to use chrome, and all of its little forks like Brave and Edge, are the reason why corpos are winning and making the internet worse off in the long run.
I’ve been using Firefox since I was a kid 20 FUCKING YEARS AGO. Not ONCE have I went to another browser for anything, and I look shit up constantly, pay my bills through Firefox, and everything between the two.
Stop making excuses, and just use ANYTHING other than fucking CHROME. I don’t care if it’s safari, ladybird, or fucking internet explorer. Just stop using a browser that is built by an ad company masquerading as a fucking tech company.
Jesus.
😎
The transition to the Manifest V3 framework means extensions like uBlock Origin can't use remotely hosted code. According to Google, it "presents security risks by allowing unreviewed code to be executed in extensions." The new policy changes will only allow an extension to execute JavaScript as part of its package.
Is this a badly worded paragraph, but is uBlock Origin really using remotely hosted code? I thought it was a different restriction in manifest V3 that stops as blockers being effective.
Is this a badly worded paragraph, but is uBlock Origin really using remotely hosted code? I thought it was a different restriction in manifest V3 that stops as blockers being effective.
I think it kinda is badly worded, and it refers to code/data that is dynamically loaded by an extension, after it's installed by the user, which uBlock Origin does use for filter lists. They can't be bundled with the extension, because they get out of date really quickly and often need to get updated, so uBlock Origin just downloads a new blocklist and saves it in its cache. MV3 wants to prohibit this, making adblockers almost useless. Updating the extension every time there is an update to one of uBlock's many blocklists just isn't feasible. I think they can also hold back updates to the extension in the Chrome Web Store, which they might to if a blocklist starts to include something Google doesn't like (e.g. YouTube ads). All of this is just a shitshow and people should switch to better browsers with actual API compatibility for purposes like adblocking. The best examples are Firefox and LibreWolf.
I think Google might just be calling block lists "externally hosted code". As I understand it, there are several restrictions: the severe limitation on the number of rules, the requirement to bundle rules with the addon (and the associated delay due to extension store review), and the loss of many advanced rule types that change blocking behavior based on different factors in order to avoid detection and otherwise be effective.
The ublock FAQ has some interesting details too: https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBOL-home/wiki/Frequently-asked-questions-(FAQ)#filtering-capabilities-which-cant-be-ported-to-mv3
I like it when the garbage identifies itself openly. We don't need Chrome, but Chrome needs us.