Slashdot Mirror

What I'm really waiting for, is our new-found CSS capabilities used to allow user-selectable stylesheets. It can't be too hard; after all, they hacked the stylesheet for April 1 (when it went all pink).

You already can, just install the Stylish Firefox extension (assuming you use Firefox of course).

Unfortunately I don't think there are any compatible slashdot styles on userstyles.org yet (the ones there now are designed for the old slashdot code), but they'll come soon enough. I'm working on one myself.

The text ads are actually pretty easy to block, you just have to go about it a different way, such as editing the usercontent.css file with this

They're really easy to block if you use the right tool. Things like Adblock work for the old-school type of image ads, but that style is slowly being phased out.

For google specifically there is the CustomizeGoogle Fx extension which makes it very simple to remove all text ads across all the google sites.

A more general-purpose tool is the (seemingly little-known) Remove it Permanently (RIP). This lets you specify things to be removed with XPATH queries. If you don't know XPATH you can just right click on any element on the page and choose "Remove permanently" and it will construct an XPATH for that particular object. But the real fun starts when you start making your own XPATH rules. For example, if a page had their text ads in a DIV with ID "textads" you just specify

//div[@id='textads']

Or maybe you want to remove one of the skyscraper things:

//table[@width='700' and @height='80']

The one I use for the nytimes site is:

//div[@id='bColumn' or @id='adxCircBottom' or @id='adxSponLink' or @id='adxLeaderBoard']

These are still really trivial XPATH examples, you can really get extremely sophisticated with it. The point is that it is rather quick and easy to do this, especially when you combine this with the DOM inspector and the Inspect This extension (which allows you to right click on the undesired element and go right to it in the DOM inspector.)

Using these tools you can easily block any part of the page with surgical accuracy, without having to know javascript or search for a Greasemonkey script.

You might want to look at foXposé. Pretty much the same thing for Firefox. I've never actually used it, but if you like that feature and you use Firefox, you might like it.

yea... the expose plugin for firefox! https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/1457/

If you bother to limit the maximum amount of memory under Linux (anywhere in the range of "ulimit -Sv 41000" to "ulimit -Sv 350000" (41-350MB) [4]) and try visiting enough web sites you will crash Firefox [1]. I've filed a number of bug reports on this (search the talkback database for "ulimit") or try Mozilla Bug 336807. (If you have Bugzilla votes you might want to vote for it...).

The stack traces suggest that there are multiple problems involved with many different types of memory allocation failures. IMO, Firefox should never made it out of alpha testing with these kinds of bugs [2].

There is a separate problem in Firefox which in some cases shows up as the so-called "memory leak" but which I believe is in fact a "heap fragmentation" problem. This is due to poor use of malloc() & free() and non-explicitly freed memory which is subject to poorly managed garbage collection processes. This is aggravated under Linux because the swapping algorithms do *not* manage programs which continually scan fragmented memory exceeding the available memory (Firefox resident set (RSS) > ~350MB on a 512MB machine). Any minor leaks can aggravate the heap fragmentation problem but solving all of the leak problems will quite probably not solve the problem of heap fragmention leading to increased memory usage the longer the browser remains running. This requires better memory management strategies at higher levels.

The only way this will be resolved is if the Firefox user community make it clear to the developers that they should stop adding features and focus on making the browser reliable and efficient [3].

1. Under Linux, I made up a simple shell script to run Firefox in limited memory, e.g.

   # ulimit -Sc 200000 # uncomment if you want the core dumps...
   ulimit -Sv 100000 # why should any browser need more than 100MB?
   /usr/lib/mozilla-firefox/firefox-bin
   

   the more memory you give it the longer it will probably to crash but I've yet to see it continue running as long as the Energizer bunny... It should be noted that setting a lower virtual memory requirement is no different from say running out of swap space or creating memory bottlenecks which under recent versions of Linux 2.6 will trigger the oom-killer causing memory 'hogs' to be explicitly killed. [I've seen Firefox memory hogging result in the oom-killer kill azureus downloads (azureus (java) is also a memory pig but thats another discussion).]
2. I was the one of the first 10 programmers hired by Oracle and responsible for a significant fraction of *all* of the early Oracle releases under UNIX. I presumably know something about software being "ready" for release.
3. It is worth noting that I've tested Firefox running under Windows 98 on a system with 98MB of main memory. It *will* run, it just takes a rather long time to do some things (it will also crash the system from time to time, presumably due to the previously mentioned memory usage problems).
4. Getting it to load in 41-45MB is tricky (the Firefox code is only ~10 MB but the libraries require a lot of space, as do things like history data, bookmarks, etc.). You have to use a profile with no history, minimal bookmarks, preferences set to minimize memory usage (esp. no javascript & no java), about:blank home page, etc. The minimum usable memory seems to be in the 50-60MB size range. Even then you can crash it by opening too many tabs or windows.

Google does the same exact thing.

You're maybe right. Yet another reason to start looking for an alternative to Google and install NoScript FF extension.

Boycott Google spyware in FireFox 2.0 as well.

No, I tried it, and Minefield is MUCH better. Try it.

I first thought this was a sarcastic joke, but after some Googling I discovered that ‘Minefield’ is the trunk build of Firefox.

On Linux or Mac, start Firefox with the the -profilemanager switch, e.g. ./firefox -profilemanager (this assumes that you're in the firefox directory).

And I'm already tired of Mozilla team not addressing the most critical issue - memory hogging.

Actually, they've been whacking memory leaks in each of the ".forget-it releases," except for 1.5.0.3 which was just one security fix.

Firefox 1.5.0.1 Changelog
Firefox 1.5.0.2 Changelog
Bugzilla query: fixed in Gecko 1.8.0.4/Firefox 1.5.0.4 (remember, Bugzilla doesn't allow direct links from ./, so you'll have to copy that URL and paste it into your browser).

I believe more major work on memory fixes is going into 2.0, which can accept larger changes.

I second this with a link: http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/nig htly/latest-trunk/

Actually, I haven't tried Bon Echo, but it appears to be the beta for Firefox 2. I like bleeding on the edge, so I prefer to use Minefield (FF 3 alpha) even if it's occasionally a little unstable. I also like the fact that Minefield uses the new Cairo display system of GTK+, so that will undergo testing at the same time.

So complaining about not reading Microsoft's bug database when one cant read opensource's bug database fully is different?

http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=283580

http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=335249

Check out the Mozilla Downlaods page: http://www.mozilla.org/download.html

They even list Grendel (last released in 1999) but they don't list SeaMonkey. Asses.

Seamonkey, the new version of the old mozilla suite (Netscape-like) has also been updated. The release notes: http://www.mozilla.org/projects/seamonkey/releases /seamonkey1.0.2/.

Q: I have Mozilla 1.7.13. What am I supposed to upgrade to!?!?!
A: SeaMonkey!!!!

http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/mozilla/rel eases/mozilla1.5.1/
26-Nov-2003 02:54

Oh wait, you meant Mozilla FIREFOX 1.5.1...

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/createaccount.cgi OMG! I have to signup to have access! What to do, what to do...

Hate to break it to you, but he's right and the Grade A moron here is you. Mozilla does lock their security bugs so only the privledged few can see them:

Go here and click just try to click through to bugzilla from the issues:
http://www.mozilla.org/projects/security/known-vul nerabilities.html#firefox1.5.0.4

Read this one then ... https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33683 0

In addition, the definitions of "open source" and "free software" have nothing to do with anonymous bugzilla access, but rather with the availability of source code and the rights one has with regards to use and modification of said code. If you don't believe me, read the definitions yourself.

ftp://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/rele ases/1.5.0.2/source/

Is this what you were looking for? Have a nice day...

...a new release of FireFox which fixes 12 security flaws (5 of them rated "critical") is certainly slashdotworthy.

And actually, MFSA 2006-32 fixes *7* "potential memory corruption" vulnerabilities, so the count of critical flaws alone could be as high as 12.

When going to the bugzilla database for a bug ( https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33683 0 ) in the release notes on this build of firefox I get... Access Denied You are not authorized to access bug #336830. To see this bug, you must first log in to an account with the appropriate permissions. Opensource is FUD. Security bug? So what, its FIXED so SHOW ME THE DAMN BUG.

KrayzieKyd writes "God Bless Mozilla.

More like God damn Mozilla. Twelve crippling bugs (four of which are critical) are in this patch. Is this what open source promises? A dozen exploitable bugs per point release? How many more dozens of bugs are there in that bloated piece of shit? It kinda makes one wonder if IE is really the safest browser on the market. Shame on you Mozilla.org for touting FF as secure.

Seamonkey, the new version of the old mozilla suite (Netscape-like) has also been updated. The release notes: http://www.mozilla.org/projects/seamonkey/releases /seamonkey1.0.2/.

"Roses are red, violets are pretty somethings going down in this fair city Cryptanalysts in love? how cute. Im intrigued by this shortwave numbers station though, very cool."

Or use a firefox extention Leet Key 1.3.1

A large majority of people don't understand what a Cert is, what it does and why it's necessary. Most still just click through without checking the credentials of the cert in fact for those who use Hotmail, many times you will note that - that site's cert has expired. Mozilla seems to have halted things as of 2003 so I wonder if only financial companies and companies making financial transactions are the only ones constantly pursuing certs. Who knows... I used to use a cert for a security/political site I had as a means of encrypting content on the wire. I don't think many are altogether concerned with who signed what...

Whether Vista is buggy or irritating or downright crap - People are writing about it, reviewing it, and EVERYONE is interested in finding out more about the next OS that is going to adorn their PC. People are going to use Windows Vista - for 2 basic reasons:
1) Its going to be the de-facto OS that goes into retail desktops and laptops. So, you wont have a choice (yes there are those Linux laptops available, but I know they dont have a fan following). Microsoft has the monopoly here, remember?
2) People are (more often than not) n00bs. They'll use whatever is offered to them over the plate - whether its Internet Explorer 7 or Windows Media Player 11. There are tons of better alternates available, but most stick with defaults.

Proof of this fact is right here on Slashdot. It seems that everyone is a n00b these days!

Slashdotter, a Firefox extention, automatically adds CoralCache, Google Cache and/or Mirrordot links directly into any story posted on Slashdot. It has some amazing other features too. I'm surprised that people are desperately seeking mirror links as sites get /.ed, and just for posting links, others are being modded up as informative! Aargh!

(If all that is jargon: click here for the mirror :D Your points are much appreciated, thank you)

Try the Slashdotter extention for Firefox.

At 100 comments per page, flat, -1, (instead of 50, nested, -1), the results are similar. comments 100.199, and probably others, are gone.

They're still there, it's just Slashdot has a broken form of nesting large discussions (over about 300 comments). The best way to read this is just to keep it in threaded mode and open new tabs for each of the interesting threads. Maybe the Slashdotter Firefox extension might help. Haven't used it myself, but it apparently allows quick toggling of all children comments of a parent.

Jeez, get with da program already, get LeetKey

NoScript is your friend

Actually, didn't Rhino, the Java classes for the Javascript library in Mozilla come with a JavaScript-to-Java compiler?

Ah-ha! Bingo..
http://www.mozilla.org/rhino/jsc.html

C'mon guys, surely you have heard of this extension by now. Never click those tiny page numbers again. This is indispensable these days when all the information on the web seems to be buried in "forums" of this and that.

Sheesh has everyone forgotten newsgroups? Thats what they are there for.

That plugin doesn't seem to work on tomshardware. This one does though: https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/2099/

It does take quite a while to download all 29 pages though. Definitely far longer than it should. I'm still waiting for it to finish loading, but I can see it's been downloading stuff, unlike the first one.

get antipagination https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/1539/

The antipagination plugin does help somewhat https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/1539/

29 Pages?!?

An article like this calls for Anti-Pagination!

We use Urchin - now "Google Analytics". Unless you want to delete cookies every page hit, and use the Web Developer Firefox plugin to remove hidden fields for every form submission, we pretty much have you tracked.

Funny that you mention this... I use Firefox with the Adblock extension, and here are some rules found in my preferences:

*.google-analytics.com
*urchin.js

This works quite well for me. I added these rules several months ago, when urchin started appearing on some web pages and making them load slower. These rules block the "urchin.js" from Google but also from other sites using their local copy of that script. The pages load faster and this makes me feel better.

The only minor issue is when I activate the FireBug extension and view Slashdot, it reports a Javascript error saying that "urchinTracker" is not defined. But this is to be expected, since the corresponding script is not loaded.

We use Urchin - now "Google Analytics". Unless you want to delete cookies every page hit, and use the Web Developer Firefox plugin to remove hidden fields for every form submission, we pretty much have you tracked.

Funny that you mention this... I use Firefox with the Adblock extension, and here are some rules found in my preferences:

*.google-analytics.com
*urchin.js

This works quite well for me. I added these rules several months ago, when urchin started appearing on some web pages and making them load slower. These rules block the "urchin.js" from Google but also from other sites using their local copy of that script. The pages load faster and this makes me feel better.

The only minor issue is when I activate the FireBug extension and view Slashdot, it reports a Javascript error saying that "urchinTracker" is not defined. But this is to be expected, since the corresponding script is not loaded.

or try anti-pagination for firefox

There's a Firefox plugin that takes care of that.

You mean like these?

What an incredibly incorrect mess.

Microsoft realized this and tried to fix Java.

They put the delegate functionality in the source code comments. If you think that's a good design, you need your head checked.

Delegates can be easily replicated in Java via Reflection, but Microsoft didn't use that solution, now did they? In any case, it's a heavily discouraged solution. Objects can do everything that delegates can do without the need for special facilities. (Not to mention that they don't fail silently when the signature is wrong. Blech.)

Good GUI frameworks are event-based, meaning that you provide a function to be called when some event (like mouse click) happens. The way around this in Java is a mess of inner classes and listeners.

Listener classes are the natural solution to the problem. There's no "mess in inner-classes" except those done by lazy or bad programmers. But then again, I've seen some pretty crappy C/C++/ObjC implementations too, so don't get too high and mighty here. Especially with delegates, which tend to make just as much of a mess as inner classes do in Java.

Why is Java bad for generating code?

All langauges are bad at generated code, preprocessor or no. Modern Java IDEs use special comments to lock out the areas that are generated. This works just about as well as generated C code. (i.e. Not very well.) The "correct" solution is to use a resource file. In GNOME this is done in GLADE, in Mozilla it's XUL, and in Java you can take your pick. In the past I've built my own, but JAXX looks very nice. It looks like it's based heavily on XUL. (Which I happen to like.)

It is also impossible to debug generated code (like a .jsp) because the generator can't indicate to the compiler what the original line number of the source code was in the corresponding generated code.

You don't know what the hell you're talking about. JSP is actually easier to debug thanks to the fact that the page is inverted into a Java Class file. You can simply take a look at the generated source to find the problem. Most modern servlet containers also insert the line numbers of the JSP file as debugging information. This allows you to look directly in the JSP for the problem. This is made possible by the flexible nature of the Class file format. Something that other languages don't share. (At least, not while maintaining the performance advantages of fully compiled code.)

Why is Java bad for interoperating with other languages? The JVM was designed to run the Java language as specified 10 years ago, and nothing more.

Java is great at interoperating with other languages!

Okay, snarky comment aside, JNI is intended to maintain the integrity of the Java environment. It's not particularly convenient, but it works. Considering how *little* code needs to be written in JNI, this isn't a big deal. Most JNI code these days is autogenerated. (e.g. The JOGL project.) If you find yourself writing more than a VERY small percentage of your app using JNI, then you're doing something wrong. Java has all the libraries you need. You should be using those, and then a few small bindings to handle anything that needs to be native for compatibility.

An example of such a binding would be XPCOM.

Since it's C++, it has to be recompiled for every platform you want to distribute your code on.

Let me get this straight. You're complaining about having to recompile C++ bindings to native code? Is the native code you're interfacing with somehow magically cross-platform or something?

Java is already fragmented. The result of open sourcing Java will actually be consolidation, i.e. killing of competing VMs. And a huge open source test suite will greatly benefit all surviving JVMs, which is a good thing.

How can you not see this?

Javas problem is not that it might get fragmented, the problem is that it IS fragmented. Do something about it! Let Java free!

Divide et impera (Divide & Konquer)
Or you can strip the latin off, if you want :P
For IE there's a load of options, ranging from "Never use IE" to "Switch to Firefox or Opera".

Years ago I hated such AV programs as Norton, etc because of the heavy toll they had on my system. I use clamav at home now. I also use firefox which has led me to a great extension
"ClamWin Antivirus Glue for Firefox" https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/771/
Seems to work well. Basically all it does is scan downloads with clamwin. But at least it doesn't eat a ton of memory resources all day long. Another option for people anyway.

Hmm. that one does not work for me because i have scripts disabled... with Noscript. Do you have a version of that program that does not need scripts (like telling in words what it does?).