Slashdot Mirror
New Firefox Suggests Ways To Get More Out of the Web (cnet.com)
Starting Tuesday, Firefox will nudge you to try out options designed to make the web more interesting, more useful or more productive. From a report: Mozilla's new Firefox 64 keeps an eye on what you're up to and prompts you to try extensions and features that could help you with that activity, the browser maker said. For example, if you open the same tab lots of times, it could suggest you pin it to your tab strip for easier future access. Other suggestions include installing the Facebook Container extension to curtail the social network's snooping, a Google Translate extension to tap into Google's service, and the Enhancer for YouTube extension to do things like block ads and control playback on Google's video site.
The feature could help you customize Firefox more to your liking -- something that could help you stick with the browser in the face of Google Chrome's dominance. And that, in turn, could help Mozilla pursue its push toward a privacy-respecting web that's not just effectively controlled by Chrome.
The feature could help you customize Firefox more to your liking -- something that could help you stick with the browser in the face of Google Chrome's dominance. And that, in turn, could help Mozilla pursue its push toward a privacy-respecting web that's not just effectively controlled by Chrome.
In today's age, the first and foremost priority should be to stop the surveillance. Everything else is secondary.
Why didn't that come out right?
They snoop on you in order to offer you advise to aid in not getting snooped on? Nice.
Politics; n. : A religion whereby man is god.
I guess it's not different than some of the tool tips in modern video games or Microsoft Office, but when it comes to a browser that's a bit much. It's like looking at the books I check out from the library only worse.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
If i dismiss enough of these stupid unsolicited popups, will it tell me how to turn the feature off in about:config?
Translation: Firefox now spams you with suggested extensions
I call it the Anti-Chrome.
Is it really "snooping" if neither the activity logs associated with this feature nor any information identifiably derived therefrom leaves the user's device? And if so, why should it be deemed objectionable?
I've given up on Firefox, so I shouldn't care, but please stop.
Last time I updated Firefox, it had "suggestions by pocket". To turn these off, it took ten minutes of googling to fix it, and then they still came back after another update.
Maybe I'm weird, but I thought the best browser is one that simply works, works fast, and then allows for extensions to do whatever extras that I want. This worked really well for firefox in the beginning, but now it is caught in the same trap of so many other programs. Power users want to be able to control things. Average users just want something that works. Do any of these features help either set of users?
This is the opposite of why I would use Firefox.
...Mozilla's new Firefox 64 keeps an eye on what you're up to and prompts you ...
Please do not do this. The last thing I need is yet another program trying to make "suggestions" to me.
This is the exact opposite of what I want.
I spend a lot of time these days preventing software from interrupting me or dealing with the interruptions that I cannot figure out how to prevent. It would appear, Neo, that we are now working for the machines.
Oh dear, some clown has reinvented Clippy:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
If there one useless annoyance that the WWW does *not* need, it's ****ing Clippy.
...Is it really "snooping"...
Yes. It is the collection of data, data that is not used for the primary reason I use the browser. I give Mozilla a foothold on my device, I do not expect Mozilla to collect data within that foothold for use outside the reason why I use Mozill'a product.
You mean extensions that Mozilla seems to regularly make not work once you get used to them?
Generally speaking computer geeks -- the kind of people who find themselves dragooned into giving other people technical support even when that's not their job -- tend to value customization-friendliness a lot more than normal people, who just want things to work in a predictable and stable way.
Really superficial things like wallpapers and ringtones aside, features intended to empower users to shape their user experience in functional ways tend not to have much market impact, although arguably they should have more.
Even computer geeks don't have an unlimited appetite for customization, or not all of them, at least. But we tend to act as if other people do.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
The data are still ON the device and therefore vulnerable to examination. This is similar to "undo close tab" is a security risk (in that the knowledge of previously opened tabs remains on the device/in-memory even after the tabs are closed). The feature works even when in private mode, which is supposed to never retain history.
Not a huge deal, but it's something you have to consider. If I lived in a country where videos of cats wearing pajamas was considered objectionable content, and Firefox kept a record of my visiting an obscure cats-in-pajamas web site AND a count of how many times I visited it, the government official pounding on my door to accuse me of a feline sleepware violation could use a tool to extract that information.
Entire argument above is obviously invalid if these new features respect private mode browsing.
WTF?? Then why did they spend the last years or ripping everything I liked out? (From the status bar to XUL extensions)
[citation needed]
It's right there in the TFA:
The suggestions are prompted by Firefox itself. Mozilla doesn't know what you're up to.
It will have a pre-existing list of recommendations, it won't query Mozilla "what recommendation(s) do you have for facebook.com" when/if you go there. They'll probably know if you install the extension, but not whether it's because you didn't want it or you don't use Facebook.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
It's hard to believe its been 16 years since Phoenix was first released, that promised to be just a browser. In these times of increasing chromization of browsers, we need a responsible Firefox, not a ad-infested one (suggestions = ads).
I donâ(TM)t see any release notes. Iâ(TM)ll have to wait until I can verify how this impacts my amazon prime account and maybe call that IT hotline and hear what they think. No rush I am assuming
Modern technology literally makes me want to kill myself.
I need a web browser that doesn't try and think for itself.
Curl, lynx, or custom coding it are looking more attractive all the time.
Suggestions?
There are so many ways to gather information on people without "gathering information on people." Depending on how they've implemented this, they can absolutely reconstruct what information generated certain recommendations.
If you go to "get addons" in Firefox, it will query the Firefox servers to get information about the addons and little thumbnails and logos for them. If these are not included with whatever data Firefox uses to generate the recommendations - congratulations, Mozilla now knows what addons Firefox is recommending to you, even if they never "sent that data" to Mozilla. Because they did send it, effectively, to pull the logos and addon data.
If the recommendations and set of addons are unique enough, you've effectively created a unique fingerprint. Depending on how the recommendations are generated, you can then figure out what set of sites a user used to generate them.
Firefox cannot possibly guarantee that Mozilla doesn't get this data, because addons are ultimately downloaded from Mozilla. Even if all they see are the addons people grab, based on the set of those addons, they can build a pretty good profile of the user getting them.
Lucky for you, we have modern technology to help you do that!
JFC.
Are you sure the data isn't being collected anyway? Web browsers need to store this information anyway to ensure browser history (your back button, and purple links) and the cache works. It sounds to me as if Mozilla is just finding a new use for the data Firefox is storing anyway.
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
"Hi! It looks like you are just trying to browse in peace. Would you like me to just randomly pop up like the ads you are probably using Firefox to avoid?"
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Stalking & Harassment
Harassment is when you can't use the web because of do many "distractions".
Stalking is when they are watching your every move, waiting to pounce on you.
Next Steps:
"Hey we noticed you used this credit card on X site. We're going to charge you $50 automatically. Because we can."
And then when they get away with it because EULA.
"You just donated $500 to the Mozilla CEO "Slush" Fund!"
And i'm sure the screen will have cute animated cartoon animals on it when they do that.
See: How Microsoft does business.
And right around then, everyone comes to the realization, Google is just one big advertising engine with no content as is 90% of the web. So...Why are we using the web?
about:preferences
Scroll down to Browsing section.
Uncheck "Recommend extensions as you browse"
There! I made it even better!
Chrome is more popular because Google hired some great engineers and they worked out the minutia of making the rendering engine faster and how to make javascsript run faster. Period. Yes, it helped to have a lot of marketing and money behind it, but bottom line is that it works faster.
then make just a browser!
If people want to customize their browser experience then they will go looking for the information to do so.
Also they plan on making my browser experience more efficient while interrupting me so they can prompt me for changes?
Will anyone get fired when more people switch to chrome because of this? How is this any sort of competitive advantage over chrome?
Can I have a browser that, you know, JUST BROWSES THE DAMN INTERNET.
This is one of the few ideas that Microsoft actually came up with first ... Clippy! He was always so fun and helpful that now Firefox wants to do that ?!? I guess not everyone learns from history...
Yet another stupid feature being put into Firefox that I'm going to have to try to figure out how to completely disable.
No, Mozilla, we don't want a fucking Clippy clone in our web browser.
When will people realize we don't want these little 'helpful' things which pop up and try to figure out what we want? The only thing it does is annoy the hell out of the user.
FF lost me when the dropped support for the FireFTP plug-in. Jumped over to Waterfox (a FF branch before it went evil) and haven't looked back. Sadly I'm still forced to use FF (over IE) at work... but that's another battle for another day.
This version kills Live Bookmarks. Some of us FF old-timers are hopelessly reliant on these things, and it's, as far as I have found, the fastest way to quickly scan lists of headlines from all your favorite sites at once. Seriously, one click and you can quickly mouse over the sites on your bookmarks toolbar to consume hundreds of headlines.
I really, REALLY hate that they're killing this feature, but this addon promises to restore it: https://www.ghacks.net/2018/07...
Here's the official GitHub: https://github.com/nt1m/livema...
I opened it today, and it popped up a little piece about new "content blocking" for privacy.
I clicked to the second page, and it demanded that I turn on javascript to see the content . . . .
noscript notes "trackertest.org" as having been blocked . . .
hawk
they want to suggest new ones?
Are the new ones from sources that donated money to Mozilla?
There will be a scandal with these retards at some point.
And if so, why should it be deemed objectionable?
Isn't this sort of like, if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to worry about?
I don't think you were coming from that point of view, but it's that way of thinking that can put a person who simply cares about their privacy, on the defensive.
I never get why is everyone in the tech industry trying to suggest me something else, when I am cable on knowing what i want!
time to fork it and dump mozilla.
That's the first thing I thought of.
It *could* actually be nice, though. I see *way* too many people browsing with vanilla Firefox, not realizing that the entire damn point is, that the vanilla is supposed to be the de-facto useless minimalist minimum, and you are expected to add what suits you, to form a full browser!
(Maybe because Firefox stopped being that, a long time ago. But it's still valid. Since the features added are mostly useless crap that doesn't count against it not being minimalist from a actually-using-the-damn-thing standpoint.)
(On that same note: Hey Apple/Android users! That paragraph is true for you too! Not putting stuff on there misses the entire point, and you're crippling yourself because you haven't understood that you are supposed to think for yourself! So stop being a useless passive-thinking blob, and start being an individual! ... Then again, Apple certainly doesn't support that, so who am I to blame the users.)
Someone please congratulate the $800k+ CEO for this feature. It's far more important than fixing the other issues. Yes it's a cool feature, but it's definitely not a priority. Management has gotten so out of touch.
Don't be surprised if people can advertise on the extension store soon and start selling extensions. I fear given the way it's being governed at the moment that profiting from extensions is the end game
Unlike addons That Include whitelisting, hosts are totally useless against unknown threats. You have cited that most newly registered domains are used for malicious purposes, so this seems to be a big problem for hosts.
As for that you feel the need to post several spam comments, including misleading and dishonest use of quotes from other users, you have serious mental problems.
Seek professional help.
China did not copy you, no matter how much you wish they did.
Seek professional help.
Hosts = blasters
Addons = light sabers
Addons like NoScript and uMatrix allow for much more fine-grained control of the filtering than hosts do.
Seek professional help.
From a software developer standpoint, I must tell you:
A tool of such extreme complexity as a million-line piece of code has a huge amount of ways things can be implemented and configured.
Every one of those configurations can be set in many different ways.
But everyone wants something different!
They all just expect the program to magically read their thoughts and be like they want it to be.
Without them ever telling it! Aka configuring the damn thing!
Sorry. That is not ever possible.
What developers did instead, is that they picked the dumbest common denominator. The "simpletard"/K.I.S.S. version.
Mainly because thanks to the Dunning-Kruger-Effect, the dumbest people are also the loudest and most confident and hence the most demanding. (And also, when software got simpler, they could be even lazier, shifting the distribution curve even more down, resulting in even dumber people. A vicious cycle that gave us MS Clippy, ShowView, Google’s search, Apple, Windows 8, Gnome 3 / Unity, etc)
To please everyone.
The problem is, that that pleased nobody. As now, everybody was missing most of the things being the way he wanted them.
Just like people pleasers, that end up pleasing nobody.
The only ones who thought they were happy, were the ones who had no independent thought, and whose way of life, was to not participate in their own life, and just flow with whatever they were told to want.
Which now has become a mainstream way of life. So much, that everyone who isn't like that, is hampered and limited at nearly everything he does. You just can't buy anything else anymore. Or vote. Or use.
What you say you want, cannot exist.
Please learn to be... no offense... an individual, and make some damn decisions for you.
At least where and while you still can...
BronsCon withdrew his endorsement of your software because he no longer trusts it to be clean and not behave maliciously. It's dishonest that you continue to quote him as if he still recommends your software.
You could release the source code or have a trusted third party both audit the source code and verify that building the code produces identical binaries to what you're distributing. Steven Burn hasn't verified that your binaries are safe, only the code you've provided to him, which may or may not be what you use to build the software.
If you have nothing to hide, release the source code. Your allegation that trolls have threatened you with releasing a malicious version of your software is unproven and may well be completely false.
Seek professional help.
YES! APK! You are the greatest. Thank you for your software!
People need to show some RESPECT to you around here. And this is totally where we need to hear from you!
Keep the fight alive. Don't give up!
Funny how some of these quotes lack years or even lack dates altogether, making them extremely difficult to verify and see the context. That makes them suspect, at best.
Seek professional help.
I wish I read: New Firefox Suggests Ways To Get Out of the Web More.
That would have been news for nerds ;)
Funny how all of these reference the Windows version of your software, despite you spamming the Linux version for years. Is it that Linux users don't want your poorly-written GUI program and prefer something that's faster and can be cronned or run as a service? Or is the Linux version just generally bad?
Seek professional help.
THERE WILL BE CONSEQUENCES FOR YOUR LIES NAZI FAGGOT PROPAGANDIST KEN DOLL
Filter error: Don't use so many caps. It's like YELLING. Filter error: Don't use so many caps. It's like YELLING.
I acknowledge there exist a minority of WWW users who browse all incognito all the time, with no browser history, no password manager, no back button, and never logging into any website. But there's a continuum between that and the present sitaution of surveillance capitalism.
Can we be sure that information actually never leaves the user's device though?
It won't be long I'm sure before malware finds a way to tap into this shit, or before modzilla determines it can better help suggest things to you if it takes a periodic look at all the shit you've done.
They spin it as "improving their ability to serve you" or something similar.
So no, I'd rather they not do that to begin with.
feature nor any information identifiably derived therefrom leaves the user's device? And if so, why should it be deemed objectionable? https://8ballpool.onl/ https://discord.software/ https://omegle.onl/
A hosts file that's 144,247 lines long? How long does it take your software to process it? A few years ago, your software was found to require about four million CPU cycles to per a single line, which is an absurd amount of resource usage for what you claim it does. That means it's poorly written, and you've dodged comments about its slow performance and the quality of the code. Users are better off choosing other tools like Steven Black's hosts file software, which, unlike yours, will run on a Mac (despite you spamming for nearly a year that a Mac version was imminent).
Seek professional help.
I examined quite a few of these quotes and found them to be taken out of context. Many were saying something good about your software to try to calm you down while otherwise criticizing your software or your behavior. Many of these come from articles where you spammed dozens or hundreds of posts and severely disrupted the discussion. Funny how you don't include links, even though some have been dug up and posted for you. The context would, no doubt, be damaging to your credibility.
Seek professional help.
Hosts are effective against some known threats, yet you greatly exaggerate the security provided. They're also prone to false positives. You've posted recommendations to blacklist all of Github because of a small amount of malware there. You can't provide any more fine-grained protection with hosts because they were never intended for this purpose.
Seek professional help.
Just to be clear, this doesn't have a thing to do with Firefox. You're just spamming your program.
While hosts can provide a quick fix to some threats, they weren't designed as a security tool, and are actually very limited in this respect.
It's also important to note that the recommendation of hosts is a generic one and, in all but one of your links, is not an endorsement of your software. There are many good reasons to avoid your software, even if a user wishes to use hosts to provide security.
Seek professional help.
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
You were correctly moderated to -1 for posting this off-topic spam already. Stop spamming this article. Your post has nothing to do with Firefox, yet you're too much of a narcissist to accept your moderation, and instead will spam this repeatedly.
Seek professional help.
block Mozilla from non-consensually installing unwanted extensions in my browser? Or perhaps it's so advanced it can function as an RSS reader?
Mozilla likes to hold themselves up as the last defender of the free web, but I guess they don't realize it's impossible to take them seriously when they're barely even the "least worst" choice anymore. They do the same user-hostile stuff, only with a stupid hipster facade.
You wrote a spambot to circumvent well-deserved negative moderation and automatically repost your spam when it's at -1. Your software is trash and your presence here is not desired.
Seek professional help.
I'm fairly sure I've been coding longer than you've been alive... and there's been zero cause in endless pieces of software to constantly suggest things, with annoying little screen blocking popups, endlessly, ever.
It's all about marketing. It's all about selling. It's all about you, the end user, as the revenue stream.
They have become masterful trolls. They do this just to make us give up all hope.
All joking aside, there is a single brain worth of ideas in silicon valley amongst everyone combined. The culture is so toxic and homogeneous we'd all just be better off pretending they don't exist. #buildthewall
APK Hosts File Engine sucks and is horribly slow. Do not use. by Anonymous Coward, posting AC to avoid being stalked December 11, 2018
The author won't release his source code and is too mentally unstable to be trusted. by Anonymous Coward, posting AC to avoid being stalked December 11, 2018
The author is dishonestly pretending that other users are endorsing his work. His software should be avoided at all costs. by Anonymous Coward, posting AC to avoid being stalked December 11, 2018
Hosts are not particularly effective at blocking threats, and don't block yet-unknown threats because they rely on blacklists where, in fact, a whitelist is necessary. by Anonymous Coward, posting AC to avoid being stalked December 11, 2018
... why should it be deemed objectionable?
I guess you don't remember "Clippy".
It looks like you miss me. Should I return?
Apk has the answer for that - really... kill automatic updates by adding a hosts file entry setting updates.steam.com or whatever to 127.0.0.1. You have to find the right hostname for each software you want to block updates on by raymorris (2726007) on Friday July 06, 2018
APK your posts on this and the hosts file posts, and more, have never been in error and/or bad advice by BlueStrat (756137) on Wednesday June 21, 2017
I support APK's stand on the hosts file and can't see why it's not used more than it is. My hosts file is 144247 lines long (4,332 Kb) it & a firewall serves me very well - by Trax3001BBS (2368736)
ABP is insufficient as a solid hosts file does everything APK reminds us about fast turtle September 17 2013
You need APK's hosts file - by Teun (17872) on Wednesday August 06, 2014
* For the Win32/64 model.
APK
P.S.=> Linux model's faster/more efficient + BETTER merge feature - More coming... apk
APK is totally right on this count. Adblock Plus on Firefox mobile is a dog on older, or lower end, phones. A hostfile based adblocker makes for a much better experience in this context. Of course, your phone has to be rooted, which isn't the case with Firefox + adblock." - by chihowa on Saturday May 16, 2015
APK solution STILL relevant Thud457 June 11 2015
In a footnote, I would like to note that I find your hosts file admirable - by vel-ex-tech (4337079) on Tuesday November 24, 2015
APK's monolithic hosts file is looking pretty good at the moment - by Culture20 on Thursday November 17
you're right about hosts files - by drinkypoo (153816) on Thursday May 26
APK, I know people give you a lot of shit regarding hosts, but please don't ever stop - by nasredin (958927) on Friday June 12, 2015 @03:34PM
* For the Win32/64 model.
APK
P.S.=> Linux model's faster/more efficient + BETTER merge feature - More coming... apk
APK is kinda right... I've given up on JS based adblocking and gone to blackholing in /etc/hosts, just like it was back in the 90s. The computational load has gotten intolerable for any ad-blocking using JS. I've tried his hosts file generating software. It works. - by bmo (77928) on Thursday October 15, 2015
get around to 'installing' a hosts file list, not sure which one, likely the one from someonewhocares.org. If it works as well as what I used for a while about ten years ago, I'll be happy. And grateful to APK for the lesson and the reminder. - by kermidge (2221646) on Wednesday March 27
I actually went and downloaded a 16k line hosts file and started using that after seeing that post, you know just for trying it out. some sites load up faster. - by gl4ss (559668) on Thursday November 17
dammit MS, you proved APK right about something by lgw
* For the Win32/64 model.
APK
P.S.=> Linux model's faster/more efficient + BETTER merge feature - More coming... apk
(APK) is still right a hosts file really does work. It even blocked a some of the video ads that were inserted into a stream OrangeTide February 10 2016
the Host File Engine performs exactly as promised - by mmell (832646) on Thursday February 16, 2017
I do use APK's host file on all my systems at home by OrangeTide December 01 2017
I've never tried to belittle (APK's work), I've flat out said it's good - by BronsCon (927697) on Thursday February 11, 2016 @06:48PM (#51491263)
(Toss on 100,000++ users worldwide too!)
* For the Win32/64 model.
APK
P.S.=> Linux model's faster/more efficient + BETTER merge feature... apk
Who did it 1st: China or me? I did - dates are my proof https://theregister.co.uk/2017... w/ the FACT China rampantly STEALS U.S. Intellectual properties & military secrets!
* IMITATION truly IS the SINCEREST FORM of FLATTERY!!!
(... & proves hosts work vs. DNS faults in tracking you via dns request logs (since you avoid it & resolve FASTER locally using hosts) + DNS being downed OR Kaminsky REDIRECT security flaw misdirected poisoned (or vs. DNSChanger))
APK
P.S.=> Let me tell you ALL 1 thing: It's NOT EASY being "World-Class" like me (lol - 100,000++ users prove it for me) - enjoy the fruits of my labors for FREE + going FASTER/SAFER/MORE RELIABLY online (w/ more anonymity too via my program)... apk
"Not as clumsy/random as a blaster - An elegant weapon 4 a more civilized age" https://news.slashdot.org/comm...
* "For over a 1,000 generations Jedi Knights were guardians of peace & justice in the old Republic. Before the dark times. Before the EMPIRE"
(Hosts = light sabres & wildcard tools = blasters above)
APK
P.S.=> Many here know https://linux.slashdot.org/com... & enjoy greater speed/security/reliability & anonymity hosts yield natively speeding you up 2 ways (adblocks & hardcodes that protect vs. DNS security issues in redirect poisoning + request tracking logs & RESOLVE FASTER locally from RAM driven by KERNELMODE speed vs. slow usermode in "solutions" packed w/ security issues (DNS/Antivirus) OR not working fully by default (adblock) in usermode addons easily detected by webmasters & blocked doing less but using more)... apk
See subject: YOU admit doing it & my program BLEW YOURS AWAY & you punked out lol https://science.slashdot.org/c... - to quote Sarah Connor from TERMINATOR 1? "Yer TERMINATED phucker!" as she kills it in the end... you SELF-TERMINATED, lol!
* :)
APK
P.S.=> No small wonder you HIDE behind UNIDENTIFIABLE anonymous posts LYING about me - facts I post BLOW YOUR STUPID ASS AWAY, lol - you blew yourself away (ya played yerself)... apk
Hahahaha, and you believe them?! You sweet, naive child.
They specifically address that. Firefox does not send your data to Mozilla. Your own copy of Firefox makes the recommendations based on your usage.
https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/...
I'm just a guy who can help what is a HUGE problem out there - malware in general. That's all. My hosts engine's for that, for free. Less people can "spread the contagion" etc. too!
NOW, if the "powers that be" REALLY wanted to help that?
They'd STALL GoDaddy type hosting providers doing $1 unlimited domains!
WHY? Security pros KNOW the same thing I do on that note & say it:
"95% of all newly registered domains are associated with malware or spam. And they are very short-lived. For those who register hundreds of these domains, however, this is not a problem. For example, if a spam domain remains online for longer than 15 minutes, the players have already made a profit during this time. After that, a domain is usually either blocked, deleted or blacklisted" https://www.gdatasoftware.com/...
Those hosting providers ARE the BIGGEST part of the "CANCER".
I also STRONGLY suspect many "techies" wouldn't LIKE that as a GOOD 90% of many of their days ARE removing malware (& the more skilled of them imo? CREATE the malware to perpetuate all that + their income (greed & "$" IS the root of all evil imo))
APK
P.S.=> Lastly on trolls: They're PAPER TIGERS (@ best) vs. me, a Cyberian Tiger https://tech.slashdot.org/comm... ... apk
See subject: Are you saying BronsCon verbatim didn't say my program's good? FACT: He literally said my work's GOOD (not your non-existent "ne'er-do-well" NOTWARE, lol).
* He doesn't like me personally - I don't care - I'm not here campaigning for political office OR to win a highschool popularity contest - I'm here to WIN & it's CLEAR I am!
I do as I please & I will NOT release my code: EFast was JEWgle's opening Chrome code up & it was turned to a malicious doppleganger - can't happen to me.
Why do you repeat your bullshit time & again ONLY to make ME look GOOD & yourself STUPID?
APK
P.S.=> You've done better? Who says that about your "hotairware" that "ain't there" (lmao)?? Nobody. I have it by the DOZENS, you NEVER will loser... apk
Quote the Rolling Stones: "Time is on MY side" (YES IT IS by decades no less as I've been doing that in my program @ least 10 yrs. PRIOR to CHINA outright copying MY methods).
* YOU LOSE fool... as always vs. "yours truly"!
APK
P.S.=> You need more than PROFESSIONAL HELP as it FAILED YOU BEFORE nutboy druggie (known LOON that you are Zontar the Mindless admitted drug-addict & loony bin patient (shall I post PROOF of that you admit?)) - you need a MIRACLE vs. "The LORD of hosts" (so to speak & me)... apk
Why don't they stop new features and make the ones they have work? I'd like to not have to restart Firefox every week.
But I realized I'm barking up a fucking tree.
NoScript has to parse HTML script src tags (takes time, hosts don't have to & operate LONG BEFORE it). Addons = easily detected/blocked by webmasters via native browser methods dumbo!
NO ADDON does as much as hosts does (especially @ DNS/name resolution levels for more speed & security ABOVE adblocking in FASTER more EFFICIENT kernelmode hosts operate @ as part of the IP stack itself (yes, even in Linux, all calls boil down to sys/sockets.h, amateur idiot)).
* NO single addon does as much, for less resources & CPU cycles either & in SLOWER usermode, adding on messagepassing overheads in browsers (it's a FACT stacking addons SLOWS you too stupid) & for less too.
APK
P.S.=> Whitelisting produces false positives LIKE MAD (random Blaster vs. HOSTS SPECIFICS elegance like a lightsaber) & wildcarding does too, lol - man, are you EASY to blow away, lol... apk
What's your solution? Have all extensions automatically installed with Firefox?
See subject UNIDENTIFIABLE anon do-NOTHING zero of a "ne'er-do-well" - security pros disagreed w/ you on hosts efficacy on a PLETHORA of levels (& all missed the DNS benefits inherent regarding avoiding DNS tracking via requestlogs + avoiding DNS security issues like the Kaminsky redirect poisoning flaw & DNSChanger malwares).
I also NEVER said "hosts cure all" (BarbaraHudson/TomHudson & HAIRYFEET both failed there trying that bullshit). NOTHING does but hosts do FAR MORE for FAR LESS more efficiently than any SINGLE other solution natively & in fast kernelmode + less moving parts for exploit.
APK
P.S.=> "They weren't designed for that" BUT I prove they DO & so do those sec. pros etc. I quoted & THEY WORK great for more security & speed MORE EFFICIENTLY in kernelmode doing MORE for LESS vs. ANY other security-issue riddled (DNS/Antivirus) or CRIPPLED addon (like almost ALL Ads Blocked, lol - bought out by ADVERTISERS foxes running the henhouse)
See subject: Hosts SPECIFICS truly are a lightsaber vs. whitelist or wildcarded false positives RANDOM BLASTER wasteful cpu killers & MAINTENANCE nightmares (whitelists SURELY are, I've seen it on the job, users complain like mad - with hosts users CONTROL THE DATA THEMSELVES easily (like phonebook entries) & I supply the BEST tool out there for it MULTIPLATFORM!)
* No problem @ all as you can see - I get them as they ARE CURRENT THREATS DUMBO & no false positives https://news.slashdot.org/comm...
APK
P.S.=> The ONLY dishonest thing here is YOU stalking me HIDING from me by UNIDENTIFIABLE anonymous & I thank you for being SO EASY TO BLOW AWAY by facts & quotes I use + results (see link above, lol)... apk
See subject & ask & ye shall receive (so you can EAT your words again) & would you like even MORE of them? I've got 'em, lol!
* Thanks for making ME look GOOD & yourself to be nothing more than a SLIMY WORM running out of 'downmodpoints' AGAIN I see too - I love exhausting you of them. I just repost & POOF - you're completely effete as always.
APK
P.S.=> FUNNY though how NOBODY will EVER say ANYTHING GOOD about a no good "ne'er-do-well" DO-NOTHING like YOU or work you DON'T do but they do for ME not you, lol, too (not, you're a waste of life)... apk
How are concrete examples I post exaggerated? FP?? Stupid, my program has a false positives list a user can tune themself in Linux (Windows has one but built in) too & users can EASILY edit & understand hosts files (like phonebook entries)... man, you are STUPID & repeat the same shit over & over MAKING ME LOOK GOOD blowing you away, every single time (thanks).
FINE GRAINED? Stupid, hosts use SPECIFIC targets, not randomblaster wildcarding that costs TONS to process (even users using my work say so dumbass), lol!
Users having COMPLETE control of hosts is as fine grained as it gets & easy to work with. Try that w/ regexp for non-pros in computing, lol - they'll think it's chinese.
APK
P.S.=> Ah, you ADMIT github hosts malware BUT I DIDN'T SAY IT - ESET/NOD32 did & I agree (it's fact) https://www.welivesecurity.com... & as usual? You look STUPID & LOSE again dumbo, lol... apk
See subject (all about YOU, lmao): Are you saying what I quoted VERBATIM from those I quote didn't SAY what I quoted from them?
APK
P.S.=> Jerkoff, lol - listen, get THIS thru your stupid head: I'm not here to win a 'popularity contest' OR campaign for politics - I'm here to WIN & if that crap's the "Best ya Got" (zero)? I don't have to TRY to win - you DEFEAT YOURSELF for me - now answer that question I open with (this will be a great laugh seeing you 'flail' little 'context boy' hahaha)... apk
Try it yourself & see (cpu speed dependent & varies) but the Linux model is better written (improved over Win32/64 original)!
* My software's good - many agree, & security pros etc. say hosts are good security & more speed for users... your 'notware' hotairware NOT THERE WARE (lmao) by comparison perhaps??
ROTFLMAO - that puny PRIMITIVE crude set of scripts Black did? Non-GUI, crude, don't to hardcoded favorites OR tld/gtld validity checks & doesn't HOLD A CANDLE to my elegant GUI work (what users want IS that or did you surf here in lynx? I rest my case).
APK
P.S.=> I will say 1 GOOD THING (lol) about your 'not there @ all ware' - it has NO BUGS (does nothing, like YOU so it figures hahaha) but at least you have NO BUGS hohohoho... apk
1st: My ware's better vs. YOUR "notthereware" lol & it took me 2++ yrs. iirc for good review of my work by DOZENS on /. (100k users worldwide too) to appear... yours? NEVER WILL, lol!
* Ah, the PRICE of STALKING me UNIDENTIFIABLE anonymous IS that - I can toss your PURE FAIL & do-NOTHING zero "ne'er-do-wellness" @ you, hahaha!
& you know it.
APK
P.S.=> Not even a 'nice try' goof, lol... apk
LMAO - do-nothing limp noodle gives orders: I'll do as I please you OFF-TOPIC little UNIDENTIFIABLE effete goof & you can't stop me!
* NOW, your "TaNtrUmZ" may sway your MOMMY boy, but give up on them w/ me - you only make me LAUGH @ you at your expense, publicly!
APK
P.S.=> It has EVERYTHING to do with browsers period by making them FASTER & SAFER for less doing more than ANY other method (especially easily detected & blocked INEFFICIENT overhead & messagepass stacked addon slowup doing less OR DNS/Antivirus LOADED w/complexity & security issues goof) NATIVELY too - not "Bolt-on-'MoAr'" ILLOGIC-LOGIC they are - ah finally (lol the CRY/HOWL of the INFERIOR "ne'er-do-well" DO-NOTHING - like you vs. my kind - DOERS & ACHIEVERS vs. "SiDeWaLk-ShRiNk" of /. LOSERS like you that have been in the NUTHOUSE (right Zontar the Mindless? Shall I post you ADMITTING it drugboy? Ask))... apk
This is similar to "undo close tab" is a security risk (in that the knowledge of previously opened tabs remains on the device/in-memory even after the tabs are closed)
Never really thought of it that way. The fix is simple. When I accidentally close a tab I know within an awshitasecond I messed up (thank you websites that 9 times out of 10 you open a new tab for links, but that 1 in 10 always has me closing the parent tab).
The fix is 2 fold:
1) Only save one closed tab
2) After 5 minutes forget about the closed tab.
No, just let the meat bag decide what it wants.
I was wondering, do you think Netscape does that?
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
When I accidentally close a tab I know within an awshitasecond I messed up
We do use Ctrl+Alt+Tab for that, don't we?
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
CyberianTiger made a PUSSY of your bot you admittedly wrote 1st & I overrode downmod hiding my posts https://science.slashdot.org/c... you do w/ it easily & that you used to LIBEL me punk - why?
You = INFERIOR (or lol, rather DEFICIENT as gweihir says of "your kind", lol). Damaged good & LAZY do-nothing "ne'er-do-wellism" is you to a tee.
APK
P.S.=> Seems TONS of REGISTERED /.ers like/use/praise my work & others here now disagree w/ you FOOL https://news.slashdot.org/comm... too.
Going to call me "narcissist" again ex-nuthouse patient Zontar the Mindless (yes I know it's you loser - the wannabe "SiDeWaLk-ShRiNk of /." TIRED bs gives you away projecting YOU ARE A NUT indeed w/ DELUSIONS of grandeur you're actually QUALIFIED to issue your "prognosis" LIBEL Dr. Quack WHACKO you are)... apk
I just installed it and once again I have to go looking for, and re-installing all of my extensions. Why can't Firefox see what extensions I have and upgrade them at the same time? I get them from the Mozillia website.
Real embarassing that (for you with zero lol): I know what got you all "hot" vs. me today too ("his 100th career touchdown") https://yro.slashdot.org/comme...
* TOTALLY TRUE & APPROPRIATE vs. "your kind" what gweihir calls "THE DEFICIENTS" or as I call you "not-men" mere "ne're-do-well" DO-NOTHINGS, rotflmao...
(HOWEVER: I thank you for making ME look GOOD & yourself like the UNIDENTIFIABLE anonymous DO-NOTHING loser slinking around STALKING ME out of JEALOUS "Lil' Jowie" frustration @ yourself WISHING you were me, lol)
APK
P.S.=> Come on now - call me "narcissist" again, PLEASE - that "CRY OF THE DO-NOTHING INFERIOR "ne'er-do-well" vs. YOUR BETTERS like me, lol... apk
I am going to hate that. Can't they just let me browse the web without interfering? Clippy went there before.
See subject: Via APK Hosts File Engine 2.0++ 64-bit for Linux/BSD h t t p : / / a p k . i t - m a t e . c o . u k / A P K H o s t s F i l e E n g i n e F o r L i n u x . z i p
Yields more security/speed/reliability/anonymity vs. any 1 solution (99% of threats use hostnames vs. IP address most firewalls use) more efficiently/FASTER + NATIVELY 4 less!
Vs. "Bolt on 'MoAr' illogic-logic" slowing u hosts speed u up 2 ways: Adblocks + Hardcode fav. sites u spend most time @ vs. competition loaded w/ securitybugs (DNS/AntiVir) + overheads slowing u (messagepass 'souled-out' to advertisers easily detected & blocked addons + firewall filtering drivers) & their complexity leads to exploit!
* ONLY 1 of its kind in GUI 4 Linux/BSD.
(Better vs. Windows model)
APK
P.S.=> Protects vs. scripts/trackers (kernelmode faster vs. usermode slower NoScript vs. 3rd party script)/ads/DNS request tracking + redirect poisoned or downed DNS/botnets/malware downloads/malcript/email malicious payloads ... apk
See subject & results https://linux.slashdot.org/com... https://news.slashdot.org/comm... https://apple.slashdot.org/com... https://it.slashdot.org/commen... https://it.slashdot.org/commen... https://it.slashdot.org/commen... https://it.slashdot.org/commen... https://it.slashdot.org/commen... https://it.slashdot.org/commen... https://search.slashdot.org/co... https://it.slashdot.org/commen... https://it.slashdot.org/commen...
* That's only recently while I've been on Linux (July 2018) & 100's of times vs. MANY other botnets/malwares etc. in the past circa 2006-early 2018 while I was on Windows: CONCRETE VISIBLE UNDENIABLE REALITY (see those links as proof). ... & that's ONLY what /. reported (there were FAR more)
APK
P.S.=> "It's working: Neville... it's working!" - "I AM LEGEND"... apk
"classic Windows hosts trick to block the Coinhive or Crypto-Loot domains" - https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/a-new-player-joins-coinhive-on-the-browser-cryptojacking-scene/ - BLEEPING COMPUTER
ZD NET http://www.zdnet.com/article/how-to-use-a-hosts-file-to-improve-your-internet-experience/ "Hosts files really shine by letting you block ads, spyware sites, malware sites, & tracking sites"
SANS ("A related approach to the DNS issue is to create a hosts file on each system that sends requests for spyware to some place else" hosts by myself & RAMU right @ START of "malware explosion" mid 2005 on) https://isc.sans.edu/forums/di...
Aryeh Goretsky/ESET/NOD32: hosts = good security https://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=7442373&.cid=49747129/
Oliver Day (SYMANTEC/SECURITYFOCUS) http://www.securityfocus.com/columnists/491/
Spybot S&D uses hosts!!!
APK
P.S.=> Malwarebytes' hpHosts hosts & RECOMMENDS my program forum.hosts-file.net/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=4290
Your software is just fine - well written, functional... I'm going to continue using the Host File Engine by mmell February 17, 2017
Your premise that hostfiles are a good way to deal with advertising and malvertising is quite valid - by JazzLad April 20, 2016
his hosts program is actually pretty good by xenotransplant August 10 2015
his hosts tool is actually useful for those cases in which one does indeed want to locally block stuff outright while consuming minimum system resources by alexgieg September 25 2015
I like your host file system by Karmashock September 09 2015
that APK guy, I use his host file by rogoshen1 Tuesday March 03, 2015
I personally use a HOSTS file blocker produced from a genius called APK by 110010001000 October 27 2017
* For the Win32/64 model
APK
P.S.=> Linux model's faster/more efficient/better MERGE feature too - More coming... apk
Apk has the answer for that - really... kill automatic updates by adding a hosts file entry setting updates.steam.com or whatever to 127.0.0.1. You have to find the right hostname for each software you want to block updates on by raymorris (2726007) on Friday July 06, 2018
APK your posts on this and the hosts file posts, and more, have never been in error and/or bad advice by BlueStrat (756137) on Wednesday June 21, 2017
I support APK's stand on the hosts file and can't see why it's not used more than it is. My hosts file is 144247 lines long (4,332 Kb) it & a firewall serves me very well - by Trax3001BBS (2368736)
ABP is insufficient as a solid hosts file does everything APK reminds us about fast turtle September 17 2013
You need APK's hosts file - by Teun (17872) on Wednesday August 06, 2014
* For the Win32/64 model
APK
P.S.=> Linux model's faster/more efficient + BETTER merge feature - More coming... apk
APK is totally right on this count. Adblock Plus on Firefox mobile is a dog on older, or lower end, phones. A hostfile based adblocker makes for a much better experience in this context. Of course, your phone has to be rooted, which isn't the case with Firefox + adblock." - by chihowa on Saturday May 16, 2015
APK solution STILL relevant Thud457 June 11 2015
In a footnote, I would like to note that I find your hosts file admirable - by vel-ex-tech (4337079) on Tuesday November 24, 2015
APK's monolithic hosts file is looking pretty good at the moment - by Culture20 on Thursday November 17
you're right about hosts files - by drinkypoo (153816) on Thursday May 26
APK, I know people give you a lot of shit regarding hosts, but please don't ever stop - by nasredin (958927) on Friday June 12, 2015 @03:34PM
* For the Win32/64 model
APK
P.S.=> Linux model's faster/more efficient + BETTER merge feature - More coming... apk
APK is kinda right... I've given up on JS based adblocking and gone to blackholing in /etc/hosts, just like it was back in the 90s. The computational load has gotten intolerable for any ad-blocking using JS. I've tried his hosts file generating software. It works. - by bmo (77928) on Thursday October 15, 2015
get around to 'installing' a hosts file list, not sure which one, likely the one from someonewhocares.org. If it works as well as what I used for a while about ten years ago, I'll be happy. And grateful to APK for the lesson and the reminder. - by kermidge (2221646) on Wednesday March 27
I actually went and downloaded a 16k line hosts file and started using that after seeing that post, you know just for trying it out. some sites load up faster. - by gl4ss (559668) on Thursday November 17
dammit MS, you proved APK right about something by lgw
* For the Win32/64 model
APK
P.S.=> Linux model's faster/more efficient + BETTER merge feature - More coming... apk
(APK) is still right a hosts file really does work. It even blocked a some of the video ads that were inserted into a stream OrangeTide February 10 2016
the Host File Engine performs exactly as promised - by mmell (832646) on Thursday February 16, 2017
I do use APK's host file on all my systems at home by OrangeTide December 01 2017
I've never tried to belittle (APK's work), I've flat out said it's good - by BronsCon (927697) on Thursday February 11, 2016 @06:48PM (#51491263)
(Toss on 100,000++ users worldwide too!)
* For the Win32/64 model
APK
P.S.=> Linux model's faster/more efficient + BETTER merge feature... apk
Who did it 1st: China or me? I did - dates are my proof https://theregister.co.uk/2017... w/ the FACT China rampantly STEALS U.S. Intellectual properties & military secrets!
* IMITATION truly IS the SINCEREST FORM of FLATTERY!
(... & proves hosts work vs. DNS faults in tracking you via dns request logs (since you avoid it & resolve FASTER locally using hosts) + DNS being downed OR Kaminsky REDIRECT security flaw misdirected poisoned (or vs. DNSChanger))
APK
P.S.=> Let me tell you ALL 1 thing: It's NOT EASY being "World-Class" like me (lol - 100,000++ users prove it for me) - enjoy the fruits of my labors for FREE + going FASTER/SAFER/MORE RELIABLY online (w/ more anonymity too via my program)... apk
How does the meat bag come to know what exists and what is even wantable in the first place?
You appear to claim that only a "naive child" would believe that extension suggestion in Firefox, which is distributed as free software, does not exfiltrate your habits. Of the following scenarios, which are you claiming is the case?
A. That the published source code of Firefox contains code to exfiltrates your habits
B. That the executable contains code to exfiltrate your habits not present in the published source code
"Not as clumsy/random as a blaster - An elegant weapon 4 a more civilized age" https://news.slashdot.org/comm...
* "For over a 1,000 generations Jedi Knights were guardians of peace & justice in the old Republic. Before the dark times. Before the EMPIRE"
(Hosts = lightsabres & wildcard tools = blasters above)
APK
P.S.=> Many here know https://linux.slashdot.org/com... & enjoy greater speed/security/reliability & anonymity hosts yield natively speeding you up 2 ways (adblocks & hardcodes that protect vs. DNS security issues in redirect poisoning + request tracking logs & RESOLVE FASTER locally from RAM driven by KERNELMODE speed vs. slow usermode in "solutions" packed w/ security issues (DNS/Antivirus) OR not working fully by default (adblock) in usermode addons easily detected by webmasters & blocked doing less but using more) ... apk
Historically, anonymized data turns out to be not as anonymous as it was claimed to be. Put differently, de-anonymization is more possible than people try to lead others to believe it is. One example is the 2006 AOL search data which AOL anonymized and purposefully published with high-minded goals—to help researchers. It turned out that the query data was sufficient to let the New York Times determine that user #4417749 was Thelma Arnold, a 62-year-old widow from Lilburn, Georgia, thus objectively proving that AOL's anonymization was inadequate. AOL's then-Chief Technical Officer, Maureen Govern, resigned from AOL, and two AOL employees were fired as a result of the proven de-anonymization.
Another problem is the principle behind your question: if the user has no opportunity to stop this from happening then what you're describing is indistinguishable from snooping on the user. This means that no matter how this is implemented or how undesirable this feature might be, Firefox's saving grace is that it is free software—free to all users to run, inspect, share, and modify. Multiple Firefox derivatives are objective proof that people use their software freedom. This software freedom also raises the bar for raising security and privacy issues in discussions like these: anyone raising the issue should be expected to make a more compelling case to back their claim by identifying the lines of Firefox source code that implement sending any data to Mozilla (and/or third parties involved in this). Mozilla says they don't send data anywhere to implement this feature; they say Firefox picks from canned recommendations and thus this isn't a privacy issue. It's possible that the recommendation ends up looking up something that itself could indirectly reveal something about the user's browsing the user would not want revealed.
I'd prefer not to have the browser analyze browsing habits at all, nor bother me with such suggestions. So I'm not enthusiastic about this alleged feature no matter how it is implemented. I prefer that the browser get on with doing what I consider to be the primary job of a web browser, regardless of how easy it was to implement, how little CPU time is involved, or any other technocratic detail of its implementation. I'll manually research which add-ons to install and use if and when I want such assistance.
Digital Citizen
“Mozilla's new Firefox 64 keeps an eye on what you're up to and prompts you to .. help you with that activity”
Does it also report such activity back to the Mozilla?
I'm 40, and have been coding since puberty. Now go ahead, make up an age for yourself.
And if you want ad hominems: You may have coded for 30 years, but it seems you have learned nothing.
You can’t have coded for that long though. Otherwise you would remember the time before software even was considered a product. When it was just something that somebody you know wrote, or came with the actual machine, and was passed around freely. ... I mean "screen blocking popups"... In those times, that didn't even make any sense, unless you had access to an Alto or something.
You sound like somebody who thinks he’s old because he used Windows 3.11.
Also, WTF kind of shit are you using? The vast majority of e.g. Linux software, has none of those things, and nobody cares about any "revenue stream". Mozilla is an exception in the open-source world, because they came from a commercial "culture", and in big organizations, it's almost impossible to get rid of such cultural cancers.
There. Next time, learn from me, and at least back up your ad hominems with something. ;)
One of the only reasons I was holding onto Firefox instead of going to Chrome like the rest of the world was Live Bookmarks. Now I had to install an extension to get that functionality back. Who made the extension, what will they do with my data? Who knows now! Do I trust Mozilla or Google more than a 3rd party developer? Umm yes actually. RIP Live Bookmarks. :/
So if Mozilla doesn't tell me what I want, how will I ever know?
Does your computer always wag you, or just when you browse the internet?
unless you turn off the in-built reporting, data like this is probably transmitted to mozilla along with the other metrics.
As a webmaster I hate how they block http web sites by default without making you add exceptions. This could potentially scare noobs. No I wont pay for a https certificate for my small hobbiest website! Not a browser I recommend any more.
Hey, it works great. It just suggested I try Chrome.
'Nuf sed.
For example, if you open the same tab lots of times, it could suggest you pin it to your tab strip for easier future access.
Or, you know, suggest a nice RSS feed add-on?