Slashdot Mirror
Firefox 65 Arrives With Content Blocking Controls, and Support for WebP and AV1 (venturebeat.com)
Firefox 65, the latest version of Mozilla's web browser, is now available for Windows, Mac, Linux, and Android platforms. The release brings simplified Content Blocking controls for Enhanced Tracking Protection, support for WebP image support with the Windows client getting an additional feature: support for AV1 format.
From a report: Across all platforms, Firefox can now handle Google's WebP image format. WebP supports both lossy and lossless compression and promises the same image quality as existing formats at smaller file sizes. Firefox 65 for desktop brings redesigned controls for the Content Blocking section to let users choose their desired level of privacy protection. You can access it by either clicking on the small "i" icon in the address bar and clicking on the gear on the right side under Content Blocking or by going to Preferences, Privacy & Security, and then Content Blocking.
Next, Firefox now supports AV1, the royalty-free video codec developed by the Alliance for Open Media. AV1 improves compression efficiency by more than 30 percent over the codec VP9, which it is meant to succeed. Lastly, Firefox's new Task Manager page (just navigate to about:performance or find it under "Other" in the main menu) is complete. Introduced in Firefox 64, Task Manager now reports memory usage for tabs and add-ons.
Next, Firefox now supports AV1, the royalty-free video codec developed by the Alliance for Open Media. AV1 improves compression efficiency by more than 30 percent over the codec VP9, which it is meant to succeed. Lastly, Firefox's new Task Manager page (just navigate to about:performance or find it under "Other" in the main menu) is complete. Introduced in Firefox 64, Task Manager now reports memory usage for tabs and add-ons.
Not sure how I feel about this. I tend to resist Firefox updates because I don't want the new crap! The problem is, I would like security updates! Wish we could get security updates separated from features I never asked for and don't really give a rats ass about.
;)
Just my 2 cents
A list that will, by definition, always contain only things that aren't used in the wild anymore.
Because the very first thing every malcontent creator will do, is check his content against this list, whenever a new version comes out. And if smart, he will just hot-swap in a new prepared version that cannot be on the list.
Just like with regular malware and anti-malware software.
Blacklisting shoung be considered harmful.
The problem is, how to use a form of smart whitelisting, so that it keeps the web usable without being too open.
You might need to explain how standing up to bullying has anything to do with browser features.
But then you're an anonymous troll....
In that order. NoScript handles a variety of things that uMatrix doesn't, but uMatrix does a much better job showing you an overview of the currently demanded subsites and permissions to determine what you should whitelist to get a page working right. Between the three of them you ALMOST have a private and secure browser. Add in HTTPS Anywhere, Greasemonkey and some others and you can get almost any minor features you need without being held at ransom by the shitty javascript on most websites, or accidentally whitelisting more than you need to view the content you want.
The only thing it's missing now is a decent web browser.
I'm an anonymous Firefox user, probably something you are not. Being anonymous, what is the problem? Ad hominem and such, rings a bell?
Mozilla as an organization is spending too much resources pursuing social justice while leaving the technical and usability aspects behind, both in Firefox and in Thunderbird. This release brings interesting technical features and I praise them for them.
We need alternatives to the NSA controlled software. We need to be able to stay anonymous, so we can be free to say the things people like you would gladly downvote us for, for disagreeing.
Beat them to AV1.
The original point of Phoenix over Mozilla(/Seamonkey) was that of a microkernel: 1. Include only what is absolutely necessary, and 2. make extending it as easy as possible.
But the idea was communicated badly. Very badly. (Although not knowingly.)
It was never meant to be used in its bare state, but adapted to your needs.
(Ok, it was never perfectly minimalist.)
But users installed it, and never got told that extending/adapting it is a necessary step to obtain a full browser. Nor were they interested in the hassle.
(A few good presets for add-on collections, chosen at installation, would have fixed that, but add-on collections did not even exist back then.)
So to compensate, more and more features crept into Firefox itself.
Even during Firefox 2.x times, jokes about adding a kitchen sink existed. (See: about:kitchensink)
Then, add-ons started to become so malicious, that some people started demanding a better add-on framework.
Which, sadly, culminated in copying Chrome's utterly crippled joke of extensibility interface.
And now many things have to go into the main browser, because they are starting to become impossible via add-ons.
Especially with the current anxiety-based obsessive-compulsive minimalism fad, where new versions often announce the removal of essential (e.g. add-on API) features. (Yes, at this point, it starts becoming a contradicting cognitive dissonance.)
IMHO, it's long time, to break apart the conept of a browser. Into a clean hypertext viewer, a virtual machine, a networking service, and for everything possible, falling back to already existing OS functionality, instead of indulging in the inner-platform effect.
Then add-ons merely become small tools and services again, distributed like any other program package that follows the Unix philosophy.
despite what Kenneth Auchenberg wants. /s
Or do you prefer to be called a drone entity or limb of the lifeform called Google?
Because that's what you are.
Now go back to FacebookWhatsappInstagram on your Android phone with the full Google app set installed, to moo a bit with your fellow swarm herd.
I went back and checked out Palemoon. But it seemed Palemoon rejected NoScript so I rejected using Palemoon.
;)
And I hate Chrome, it can not even scroll/re fresh the screen properly and the ads, ads, ads and no NoScript. The whole experience just sucks. The only time I use it is to moderate Slashdot since Firefox does not work no matter what I do.
Just my 2 cents
Great. I just got done updating FF and had to update all my addons once again that they disappeared on me. If they disappear one more time I'm done with this crap.
Microsoft has embraced the bullshit according to recent slashdot submission.
Yes, I'm drunk. On a Tuesday.
based on their political bias.
Once Google starts stopping adblocking in Chromium, Firefox will be the last browser to allow the blocking of advertising and related malware. It is only a matter of time until Google, Microsoft, Apple, etc closes the adblock loophole.
You're right. ;)
I guess I wrote it that way, because in my head I thought about my own killer OS that would make everything else obsolete, unless you are "clueless".
"Until then" ... don't all of those you listed support POSIX?
Or what are those browsers built on? And why is that not a set of OS APIs?
I think since I said that everything but a plain hypertext viewer and (HTTP&co) networking should be part of a VM (a proper one), defining a standard interface for programmatic VM integration, that any arbitrary VM solution could implement, would likely solve the problem.
Yes, but I suspect barely any add-ons would qualify as being so universal, that it makes sense to download them straight away though.
I imagine a window on the first start, where you just click on 1. your preferred profile(s) [like "normal user", " developer", "high privacy needs"], and then see a list (not a gallery!) of the most popular and recommended add-ons, with the fitting ones already checked, to 2. optionally enable/disable individual ones, before proceeding to using the browser.
From what I can tell, I think that would be the easiest non-compromising solution.
Where is the line between a valid political belief, and just fear mongering, portraying falsehoods, trying to scam people out of the money and property?
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
Let me guess, they found new creative ways to make it even harder to build from source? https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
I think the issue is who determines if your political belief is valid and if it will be censored or blocked. Internet Explorer's new 'fake news' warning in Edge is a slippery slope to outright blocking of the content in a future release.
Conservatives want to be scammed, that's why they're against censoring pretty obvious con jobs like Mike "Juicebro" Cerenovich and dietary-supplement pushing Infowars.
Actually conservatives are against silencing anyone, they are in favor of freedom and liberty, unlike liberals.
Adware's companies and adware's software supporters must pay taxes from their revenues and VATs.
So the new tracker blocking options are (from TFA):
- Standard: The default, where Firefox blocks known trackers in Private Browsing Mode. In the future, this setting will also block Third Party tracking cookies.
- Strict: For people who want a bit more protection and don’t mind if some sites break. This setting means Firefox blocks known trackers in all windows.
How is that simpler than the current setting descriptions (from my Options->Privacy & Security Window in 64.0.2) with a separate setting for Cookies:
- Only in private windows
- Always
Because "standard/strict" doesn't really sound the same as "only in private windows/always" ...
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
Encoding content to AV1 is simply too slow to be feasible.
Firefox is awesome except that it consistently nukes my work macbook pro. The plugin container uses over 100% of a core even in add-ons disabled mode, and causes overheating related shutdowns. Don't get me started on Apple.
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
The problem with Randall is, that he both half-asses thinking the problems through that he criticises, and that he's really annoyingly narrow-minded in his views.
He also goes way outside of the field of his expertise.
But he's smart enough to look smart to not smart people.
E.g. in this case, obviously the purpose of the new standard, is to encompass all the old standards, and if sensible, provide maximum backwards compatibility, so that it is indiscutably superior in all cases. He deliberately ignores that to make a (invalid) point.
The problem is not "too many competing standards". It is that stupid people cling to old *bad* shit (like C++) too, just because they are used to it and pussies. "We use it, because we use it." Circular reasoning.
So the problem is actually people who think like him.
But some guy on INFOWARS is selling snake oil! Certainly the founders of our nation, in establishing it's ideals, could never have thought this day would come!
I ran a virgin firefox profile today, and I noted three "recommended stories" from Pocket, including a sponsored one from GoDaddy.
It sure would be nice if mozilla could learn to walk-the-walk...P>
I don't want my web browser to block any of that. It's not its job. Pop up a warning for sites on a list of known phishing/attack sites, that's fine as long as there's no sending my every URL to the mothership to do it. But that's browser security, not content blocking.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
See subject: (doesn't run in slow usermode like addons which = easily detected & blocked by webmasters but in kernelmode instead as part of the IP stack) 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 w/ security bugs (DNS/AntiVir) + overheads slowing u (messagepass 'souled-out' to advertisers easily detected & blocked addons + firewall filtering drivers) & their complexity leads to exploit!
APK
P.S.=> Protects vs. scripts/trackers/ads/DNS request tracking + redirect poisoned or downed DNS/botnets/malware download/malcript/email malicious payload
Best part's GOOGLE can't nuke it like addons (& hosts does FAR more for FAR LESS, faster) https://www.bleepingcomputer.c...
* IN ADDITION TO FINE /. EDITORS DELETING THE POST I REPLIED TO MYSELF ON REPOST (original was here https://news.slashdot.org/comm... & they deleted it... lol, losers).
APK
P.S.=> I nullify their BOGUS bs & "but, But, BUT /. doesn't delete posts" = BULLSHIT - not that it matters, I dust that crap too, easily, lol... apk
Can't tell if sarcasm...
Ugh, the new update breaks my user-chrome CSS settings that changed tabs to bottom. Now they are on top again. :(
I am APK the great "LORD of HOSTS", a.k.a. AlecStaar from ArsTechnica or Alexander Peter Kowalski.
See subject & APK Hosts File Engine 2.0++ 64-bit for Linux h t t p : / / I . a m . a . f u c k i n g / a s s h o l e . r e t a r d . z i p (remove spaces between characters & download).
I am the godlike creator of various GUI front-ends for other people's configuration files.
Mistaking mockery and parody for impersonation is how I think people flatter me because I can't possibly understand that they detest me.
You must be conspiring with the Jews and Soros if you disagree with me.
When presented with facts I rebut them with wild speculations, false support, and out of context quotes
Bask in my debilitating mental illness
I just don't understand why every site I post on everyone makes fun of me, it can't be because I am a shit stick but instead because they are all Ne'er-do-well SOYboy Jealous JOWIEs.
Witness my descent into madness
APK
See subject & again - was a PLEASURE nuking you STALKING me by UNIDENTIFIABLE anon here https://yro.slashdot.org/comme... & now you're IMPERSONATING me too?? Please - that proves 1 thing: YOU WISH YOU WERE ME!
* Your POOR IMITATION is the SINCEREST FORM OF FLATTERY, period!
APK
P.S.=> Instead of STALKING me like the PSYCHO LOON you OBVIOUSLY ARE or IMPERSONATING ME, why not Make a Wheel (multiplatform, as I have that 100's of 1,000's use daily) https://isc.sans.edu/forums/di... instead? Oh, that's right - an UNEDUCATED "ne'er-do-well" like YOU can't manage good things like I DO, lol... apk
What extensions do you want to use that still aren't updated and have no alternatives?
Keybinder does not work with Firefox 57 or later, and the feature that it relied on (XUL keymaps) has no counterpart in WebExtensions because of bug 1325692.
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
Actually conservatives censor all the time. If they didn't the FCC would allow TV stations to show boobs and you wouldn't see people fired for speaking in favor of unions.
Ess Pee Aitch
This update broke my tabs-on-bottom userChrome.css settings.
What was only about 6 lines of code now seems to require a lot more effort - see this github for example code.
Apparently you want the Firefox developers to do all of the programming and research work for you so you can have this. I'm guessing you'd also like all of this to happen gratis. It seems to me that you would be well served to look into hiring someone to deliver this to you. You want things one could theoretically pay for since Firefox is free (as in freedom) software. I suggest that you ask developers to repackage a Firefox derivative that meets your needs.
The most telling thing about this is so few other browsers offer this as a possibility; the other popular browsers are proprietary so this simply isn't an option and you get "the new crap" "foisted upon you" (as an anonymous poster wrongly said).
You should be sure about how you feel about this: possibilities are better than a proprietary blob and giving thanks is better than not giving thanks. It's a shame that Firefox developers can't get the credit and thanks they deserve for delivering such a fine browser to us while simultaneously respecting our software freedom. Thanks Firefox hackers for distributing a useful, powerful, feature-filled browser to me that respects my software freedom.
Digital Citizen
> But some guy on INFOWARS is selling snake oil! Certainly the founders of our
> nation, in establishing it's ideals, could never have thought this day would come!
Not to mention that Buzzfeed is pushing a line of kitchenware at Walmart, I kid you not https://www.recode.net/2018/3/...
I'm not repeating myself
I'm an X window user; I'm an ex-Windows user
Look it is retarded bitch Alexander Peter Kowalski's pretend friend to try and make it looks like someone supports him. If you actually aren't APK then you are an even bigger retard than he is as he isn't even defending himself because he knows that every criticism of him is true. All that dumb shit can do is keep repeating his previously disproved statements because he lost and has nothing.
So sarcastic it wrapped around.
...the bug on MacOS, that the right clicking in the desk bar is screwed after clicking the "about firefox" until restart.
Conservatives are AGAINST banning fraud? Really?
That's literally what you're claiming, I'm not even taking you out of context, you're directly arguing, in response to someone pointing out two scammers is that conservatives are against silencing them.
Surely there's a software decoder, so why can it not be used on macOS or Linux? It makes no sense.
"Anonynmous" ? The APK infection boldly claimed it knew exactly who the SPH author is two years ago. And...?
Their blocking lists are from the disconnect.me. Draw your conclusions, as desired. As someone from outside the US, I wonder about their international coverage.