Slashdot Mirror

There are ads here?

I use the VideoDownloader plugin for Firefox to download them, and then any of the various free FLV players to view them locally.

Yes: https://addons.mozilla.org/thunderbird/1339/

It's like gmail, but for Thunderbird.

Seems like an as-yet unsolved problem.

There have been proposals to have a centralized mozilla bounty system at mozilla.org, but they've been dismissed as WONTFIX in anticipation of human conflict becoming distracting to those with authority over the code base.

Some, like Mark Shuttleworth, once held hope for more support for bounties from Mozilla, such as a bugzilla feature to associate bounties with bugs. That hope seems to have disappeared.

Mozilla-related Wiki attempts have also disappeared, and the other websites out there seem to lack critical mass.

However, Mozilla has started a limited bounty program for security bugs, with help from long-time bounty advocate Mark Shuttlesworth.

As far as the mechanics of moving money around, http://fundable.org/ might be an option.

other sites
----------
http://bountycounty.org/
http://www.opensourcexperts.com/bountylist.html?bo untytype=1&cat=33
http://croczilla.com/zap/bounties/

Seems like an as-yet unsolved problem.

There have been proposals to have a centralized mozilla bounty system at mozilla.org, but they've been dismissed as WONTFIX in anticipation of human conflict becoming distracting to those with authority over the code base.

Some, like Mark Shuttleworth, once held hope for more support for bounties from Mozilla, such as a bugzilla feature to associate bounties with bugs. That hope seems to have disappeared.

Mozilla-related Wiki attempts have also disappeared, and the other websites out there seem to lack critical mass.

However, Mozilla has started a limited bounty program for security bugs, with help from long-time bounty advocate Mark Shuttlesworth.

As far as the mechanics of moving money around, http://fundable.org/ might be an option.

other sites
----------
http://bountycounty.org/
http://www.opensourcexperts.com/bountylist.html?bo untytype=1&cat=33
http://croczilla.com/zap/bounties/

Seems like an as-yet unsolved problem.

There have been proposals to have a centralized mozilla bounty system at mozilla.org, but they've been dismissed as WONTFIX in anticipation of human conflict becoming distracting to those with authority over the code base.

Some, like Mark Shuttleworth, once held hope for more support for bounties from Mozilla, such as a bugzilla feature to associate bounties with bugs. That hope seems to have disappeared.

Mozilla-related Wiki attempts have also disappeared, and the other websites out there seem to lack critical mass.

However, Mozilla has started a limited bounty program for security bugs, with help from long-time bounty advocate Mark Shuttlesworth.

As far as the mechanics of moving money around, http://fundable.org/ might be an option.

other sites
----------
http://bountycounty.org/
http://www.opensourcexperts.com/bountylist.html?bo untytype=1&cat=33
http://croczilla.com/zap/bounties/

Mozilla Developer Center: Extensions.

First of all, thanx for the explanation.

The web browser downloads the malicious JavaScript and executes it.

You mean there are still people who do not run NoScript?

I would love keychain integration on OS X but the mozilla dev team don't see any of these things as a priority. All someone needs to do, though, is port the stuff over from camino cause it's got all the cool OS X features but none of the stuff which makes firefox cool. Maybe the camino and firefox mac programs should merge...

This is not true.

Every single change in the Mozilla code base is proposed/discussed in a Bugzilla entry, usually called "a bug" no matter if it refers to a defect to be fixed, an enhancement or a new feature.

Patches are attached to those "bugs", and they always require peer review to be accepted and eventually committed, even if they come from Mozilla Corporation paid staff.

So, "they just commit" applies to nobody.

This is not true.

Every single change in the Mozilla code base is proposed/discussed in a Bugzilla entry, usually called "a bug" no matter if it refers to a defect to be fixed, an enhancement or a new feature.

Patches are attached to those "bugs", and they always require peer review to be accepted and eventually committed, even if they come from Mozilla Corporation paid staff.

So, "they just commit" applies to nobody.

Good. Maybe they can get some time to fix some embarrassing, long-standing bugs now.... (It's ridiculous how this hasn't been fixed yet. More than two years now and they can't get that list sorted (despite several tries). Something must be seriously wrong with Mozilla).

There's more to Mozilla than coding - volunteers also do quality assurance, documentation, and other things that aren't reflected in these numbers, but are just as important to the finished product.

One recommended extension for reducing bandwidth usage: Adblock

OpenDownload fixes that.

And so are IE View and IE Tab. What computer with Microsoft Windows OS runs Firefox and isn't capable of running IE just for Walmart.com and Windows Update?

For Firefox users who need to pretend they're using IE to get into the site: User Agent Switcher extension ...this may also be a good time for you Safari users to try out Firefox :) btw, I know that the site may throw all kinds of errors if you're browsing in Firefox, seeing as how they don't test for anything but IE.

And furthermore, depending on how they detect "non-ie" you could probably greasemonkey https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/748/ it away (maybe), use the ie tab https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/1419/ in firefox, or just change the user-agent.

And furthermore, depending on how they detect "non-ie" you could probably greasemonkey https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/748/ it away (maybe), use the ie tab https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/1419/ in firefox, or just change the user-agent.

Why even use an extension with Firefox? Why not just use Smart Keywords

That way you can just enter "wiki searchsubject" or "imdb moviename" (for example) in the address bar. Personally, I love this feature.

Why don't you save yourself some time and just get a Wikipedia search bar for your browser? I used to do the same thing, but got tired of going through a Google search just to wind up clicking on the Wikipedia entry link anyway. Might as well spare yourself the extra steps and have a direct Wikipedia search in the corner of your browser window.

For Firefox:
https://addons.mozilla.org/search-engines.php

For Opera:
http://widgets.opera.com/search/?search=wikipedia& x=0&y=0&scope=all

For Internet Explorer:
http://www.google.com/search?q=help+me+i'm+still+u sing+internet+explorer&btnG=Google+Search

Mod parent up. Given two application stacks of equal feature/functionality merit, choose the one with the least TCO. The more software dependencies, the more likely that there will be problems with the client side install, the higher the TCO.

I am not a big fan of Java Script and would prefer to code Java applets. However, the prototype library and the debugger mitigates most of my complaints.

So if (as the sensationalist headline proclaims) "the idea of an open source SSL toolkit didn't sit right with proprietary vendors of similar products." They've had 5 years to get over it.

I have only one url for you, https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/722/ - Surf with NoScript!

There is (and always will be) an inverse relationship between security and usability

Speculation at best. UI design is hard just as security is hard. In fact, the difficulties of both are directly related IMO. The question is, "how can the user convey their intent to the system?", because surely the user doesn't intend to loose a virus which destroys their computer. The flip side is, "how can the system translate those intents into enforceable security properties?" In other words, it's a matter of proper user-system communication via a trusted path, ie. good UI design and a good security architecture are both necessary to achieve the desired effects. There has been some good research on secure user interfaces, the most successful of which are based on capability security principles [1],[2],[3],[4].

Compartmentalising the applications in such a draconian fashion would appear to be heavily leaning towards the security side, and not the usability side of the argument [...] The article talks about the picture-viewer not being able to access the web.

Only because you have a monolithic view of "the application". Let me make the distinction clearer by rephrasing the usefulness of the security property we're interested in: why should the image rendering component of the application have access to the web? Really, only a small portion of the application would need net access if it needs it at all, but surely not the component that accepts a PNG file and renders it into a bitmap for display to the screen. And yet, in all systems widely in use today, the image rendering library has exactly this authority, and more (authority to delete your personal files for instance). It'd be amusing if it weren't so sad.

Most of the apps I use daily require web/internet access. I think that's only going to increase over time.

I agree, but isolating components from wielding permissions they don't need is simply necessary for good security. Fortunately, it's also good software design. :-)

[1] http://www.ischool.berkeley.edu/~ping/sid/design.h tml
[2] http://www.ischool.berkeley.edu/~ping/sid/ideus.ht ml
[3] https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/957/
[4] http://cups.cs.cmu.edu/soups/2005/2005posters/23-y ee.pdf

Already fixed: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=36942 7

http://wiki.mozilla.org/Major_Update_1.5.0.x_to_2. 0.0.x

I wonder what is wrong with Mozilla "Seamonkey"? Isn't it the exact same function/UI/Type of program just happens to have newer, better core parts?

http://www.mozilla.org/projects/seamonkey/

I'd say you have Netscape.net mail account but it is not the deal anymore, Netscape.net merged to AIM mail and AIM is open as IMAP server now. For AIM client, AOL official clients are far more better I think.

> You can try arguing about it on bugzilla but from my experience it's usually pointless. Somebody states that this is the way it > should work now and the bug is closed as WONTFIX/INVALID or ignored. Btw here is the bug (with a lot of duplicates): https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=34968 0 And the bug that removed the option: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=34968 0

> You can try arguing about it on bugzilla but from my experience it's usually pointless. Somebody states that this is the way it > should work now and the bug is closed as WONTFIX/INVALID or ignored. Btw here is the bug (with a lot of duplicates): https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=34968 0 And the bug that removed the option: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=34968 0

Off Topic part:

You know, people mope about not being able to code in an environment that resembles the simple / effective style of Ataris and C64s from our childhood...

But they forget that they have a complete and flexible language interpreter staring them in the face.

Install Firebug. It has a nice REPL console. Combine it with a simple text editor[1] and you have a complete programming environment in two windows that is :

      a) Familiar (every kid doing this will be using a web browser anyway)
      b) Relevant and Flashy (being able to do the cool web stuff that's apparently cool now)
      c) Good - Javascript is actually a really nice language (it's been described as Scheme with C/C++ syntax), which is very easy to work with, and nothing other than the web page in the way.
      d) Did I mention Familiar? Web pages are not perceived as complex or threating.

On Topic part:

The reason you thought the circle was cool was that a) you came up with it when you were a kid, and b) you understood the math behind it.

Given that, the goal would be to get your kids interested in the math -- Computer Science is really just a form of math, so if you had been doing math problems, and showed him that if you graphed ( x, y ) = ( r cos t, r sin t ) made a circle, then he might find it interesting. Or he may not, and that's fine too. But I've been doing math with my son in one form or another for two years now, and he's still only 5.

But really, unless you care, a circle is just boring.

[1] or Aptana, if you're brave...

I do so like the Firefox Nuke Anything Enhanced extension. I don't use it often, but for web sites like TFA it is nice to have its "remove this object" choice on the right click menu.

That said, you didn't miss much by not RTFA. I waded through the first few paragraphs, but stopped when I realized that author was in love with the english language but not in a healthy way...

Forget writing How about first giving a grammar for formulae? How about just a list of available operators or functions?

This has nothing to do with the ODF file format.

Since you can't give me a complete syntax or list of valid functions just by looking at the ODF spec, how are you going to write a spreadsheet that works with anything else?

By downloading the openformula spec?

If you want to know what a formula looks like you need to download another 200+ page spec (http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php? wg_abbrev=office-formula).

Have yourself a nice big cookie

If you want to know how to draw mathematical text you have to download the 541 page MathML spec (http://www.w3.org/TR/MathML2/). If you want to be able to want to be able to have drawings on your spreadsheet you need to get the 719 page SVG spec (which is 13 pages LONGER than the original ODFv1.0 spec)!

For an SC clone? Let's not ignore the reality of the situation, Mozilla tri-license and existence of XULRunner either.

Then Firefox should have a volume control. There is a FF enhancement request about it:

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33320 8

But noone is working on it.

One of the comments says it needs to be done at the plugin level, but I know (at least on Linux) that it is possible to launch apps with various wrappers that do things with their sound output (e.g. to record it), which might provide a workaround.

Of course it is a shortcoming in the plugins as well.

The firefox plugin Noscript (direct install here) lets you block almost all unwanted web "features", including sounds. Very handy!

The firefox plugin Noscript (direct install here) lets you block almost all unwanted web "features", including sounds. Very handy!

Also, having to open address book in a new window is annoying.

I think it'd be great if Firefox had one of those "Did you know" boxes on startup that you could easily disable once you're up with the play, and teach you all these tidbits until then.

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=25868 2 (I think Bugzilla still disallows links from Slashdot, so copy, paste and remove the lame space Slashdot sticks in the link)

It's my bug, and while the actual summary is more limited in scope, I actually mean it to be exactly what you describe. Too bad no one has time to work on something like this.

With konqueror, you can get a wikipedia search with wp, google with gg, debian package, with deb, etc.

Or after typing "yahoo" you just hit control+enter to append www. and .com

That works in all major browsers, but firefox will also append .net (shift+enter) and .org (control+shift+enter).

Sure they could, then you just print out the contents of the following:

http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.txt

Along with:

http://www.mozilla.org/MPL/MPL-1.1.html

And:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BSD_license

Then inform them that the "audit" is complete, unless they wish to discuss PDAs, which are purely commodity goods containing firmware which is not easily/readily pirated or counterfeited.

File and authentication Servers? Choose Samba over Windows.
Email/Groupware? Choose Scalix, Zimbra, Qmail, or even sendmail or postfix
Databases? Postgresql, Mysql, etc.

It has been possible to punt Microsoft for a long time now, and it has even become downright convenient in recent years.

So that raises a few questions:
1) Can reverse-engineering the file format give enough information to make a fully-featured flash decoder/player?
2) Will Adobe try to stop such reverse-engineering efforts?
3) Is it worth it to continue along the Flash route, or should supporters of Open Standards promote an alternate vector-based animation/movie format?

1) What is it you're missing? Google SWF spec and the first hit will be the specs without the restriction. It seems to be a copy of the original specs, though, so better stick with Alexis' reference. You could also read the sources of various tools, or the existing OS player. For the opcodes of the new VM, you could read the sources of a compiler or the VM itself.

2) Apparently they didn't. Neither did they try to stop the OS streaming server.

3) Both would make sense, depending on how you plan to use it. For the web, SWF will stay the king, IMHO. Users don't like installing additional plugins, but that wouldn't be a problem for standalone apps.
The bigger problem is content creation, both for a new format and for SWF. There are very good OS tools for making SWFs already, but they are focussed on programmers. If you want to write code and maybe include some assets like graphics and fonts that you then use with it, I'd say you're better off with the OS tools. But for graphical work like animations or layout, there isn't really a way around Adobe products for professional work (just that you can do animations and layout without them doesn't mean your designer will consider it an efficient, comfortable workflow, and he's right). This is where work needs to be done. Better SVG import for the tools, or direct SWF output for Inkspace or even a specialized app.

http://www.mozilla.org/projects/tamarin/

Please forgive my ignorance on the matter. I do recall reading the article earlier on how Adobe has released the code on the scripting portion of Flash to Mozilla, and how it created the Tamarin project.

Is the scripting portion alone enough for Mozilla to have their own embedded fully-functional Flash player?

Can we compile from source a 64-bit Flash player some day through this project?

The Tamarin Project mentions Firefox 2, and as far as I can tell from reading the Firefox 2 features, it never made a new impact in the 2 release. Will this impact Firefox 3? When will it be implemented, and what exactly does it mean?

Flash's absolute hugest problem though is its potential for abuse. Well, I suppose it's not really 'potential' any more. It's REAL. Flashblock for Firefox is an absolute must-have, unless you like being surprised by buzzing mosquitoes and crazy frogs in flash ads. And am I right in thinking that Last Measure used some flash?

Unfortunately, this necessity means that sites that depend heavily on flash look like crap until the user enables all the flash on them.

Try DownloadHelper. There's a few other extensions like it too. I really like DownloadHelper. I use it with a Windows build of ffmpeg along with a batch file so I can drag and drop .flv files I download from YouTube to convert them to play on my iPod. It's not as simple as if they let you just download it in an iPod format (that's one feature Google Video has that I wish YouTube could pick up soon... I think it would make YouTube's already explosive popularity even bigger), but it works pretty well, and is easy enough.

There's also iTube (standalone program, not a Firefox extension) which does the downloading and the conversion, then automaticallly imports the video to iTunes. It's easy and very convenient, but sometimes it can't download the videos correctly... (could be my network connection?) I think there's a newer version of it now, so I'll have to try that out to see if it works better for me.

You can get the video downloader add-on to firefox https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/2390/ to download the videos, then watch them on something like VLC. It won't make the quality better, but I find that the playback is smoother and you can make it true full screen (no browser window).

If you use the videodownloader extension to firefox you can download the flash videos. They can be played with VLC. You can use downThemAll! to do the downloads, so they can be managed better than with firefox's crap-ass download window.

Sounds to me like you ned VideoDownloader which will let you use firefox to download the avi or flv (depending on what formats are permitted.) VLC plays FLVs.

Handier hint: Searchbar Autosizer