So... you can't answer the question. That's what I thought.
I'm all for space, but let's be real - we hit a brick wall the instant we landed on the moon. The most significant thing to come after that would be GPS, and that was in the late 70s.
We have no solid plan for going to Mars, we have no intention of doing more lunar missions, and our best attempt at a colony / biodome is a tin can floating in the upper atmosphere. We're not mining comets, commercial space ventures are still fledglings at best, and NASA has been retooled to be the world's most expensive weather service in order to further a political position.
The public lost interest in space because we stopped doing interesting things. People don't give a shit if NASA's big news of the day is sending a tweet from the ISS or yet another repeat of watching how spiders spin webs in ultra low gravity. We don't have heavy lift, we don't have a shuttle, we don't have a crew-carrying ship worthy of getting to another planet (or even the moon), etc. We don't have anything that comes anywhere near as close to our crowning achievement from from 46 years ago.
If you want to argue about GPLv2 binaries requiring signing keys then you might as well argue that GPLv2 binaries require the OS, the firmware, the BIOS, the CPU microcode, and the fucking hardware to run everything on. It covers the recipe, not the logo of the restaurant that sells dishes made from the recipe.
Private signing keys are not code. The fact that clowns put them in code is another matter. Executables can be built signed or unsigned from the same source, with the only difference being whether or not the damned thing was signed by the private keys.
The reference to scripts is in there to prevent abuse where open source code produces unusable, jumbled shit and closed scripts make sense of it, effectively rendering the work as a whole closed. Code signing has absolutely nothing to do with that shit.
GPL does not require you to turn over your private keys and dipshits who insist that it does are spreading FUD. I'd go as far as to say that there is absolutely no interpretation to the contrary that any judge, lawyer, or layman would accept, but we all know how stupid and corrupt the first 2 groups can be.
There's an AC troll that goes around posting nothing but anti space shit, typically insulting anyone interested in anything about space by calling them a childish, pie-in-the-sky "space nutter".
In the financial world, we keep records for 7 years, 10 years, etc. depending on what they are. Auditing doesn't go back forever in the real world.
Should it for Bitcoin? It currently does, though that can be changed. Last I checked, people were discussing this issue because keeping a full copy of the block chain on a typical desktop was becoming burdensome.
It's security comes primarily from the distributed nature. To hijack the network and insert valid blocks, you'd have to be a majority player.
If secp256k1 is weakened by a few bits, everyone in the network can take advantage of that. The network would then adjust the complexity of mining automatically so blocks would still be mined at the same rate.
If secp256k1 is straight broken, then you can switch curves with a software update and a blockchain fork. Bitcoin has forked the blockchain before, it's really not a big deal unless you're on the losing branch in terms of popularity.
Further, there is no indication that secp256k1 is compromised. Please show us support for your claim that "It is barely secure today.".
If it were compromised, we'd be seeing the effects on the Bitcoin network, and we'd be talking about switching curves.
They do polls and look at results from the precincts.
There is no way their tiny polls would provide the coverage and update frequency they crave, or any semblance of accuracy (which they generally don't care about).
They also meta themselves into a hyper engorged state by watching what other networks report, then feeding that data into their own models and reporting on it. Other networks see that and do the same. It's like a closed loop human centipede.
I don't think Bob won that election legally. I can't believe a convicted felon would get so many votes and another convicted felon would get so few.
Here you go - the results of last month's mayor election. All 48,000 voters and who each one of them voted for. I thought this was a secret ballot. Ehh.
OK, Aaron A. Aaronson voted for...Bob. Aaron L. Aaronson voted for...Bob. Arthur B. Ablabab voted for...Bob...
if you have an automatic transmission, the "gas" pedal is merely a "suggestion" to the system that actually controls the throttle.
You're thinking of electronic fuel injection (at least I hope you are). If you want direct control over the flow of fuel to the flaming chambers of boom, you'll need to ditch EFI and bring back the ol' choke. It's fun for about 5 minutes.
I don't want to spill my beverage or hurt my dog when my car decides I need to brake more quickly than I actually need to, nor do I want to be rear ended when I see a clown coming in hot behind me and needing another foot to stop while I've got 3 feet in front of me.
And what about when I WANT to hit something? Will this shit prevent me from pulling my car ALL the way into the garage? Will it prevent my from driving through light brush? I'll accept these if you can guarantee that it will be enabled permanently on police vehicles so the cops can't ram people in high speed pursuits.
Most of all, I don't want to fucking pay for this shit. And no, insurance premiums won't go down if you have it, they'll simply go up if you don't at some point. Once most cars have it, they'll go up again every time your car reports that it activated that "feature".
I'm all in favor of getting retards off the roads, but we should be doing it by licensing cyclists (the most dangerous things on the road) and registering their bikes. After that we can get to work on more stringent licensing requirements, including immediate revocation pending retesting for anyone at fault in a collision, driving under the influence, or over the age of 65.
And can we PLEASE get some sanity back with regards speed limits (i.e., throw them out)? There was NOTHING wrong when we had no speed limits and relied on cops to patrol for people who drove recklessly. Shitheads got punished, everyone else enjoyed the open road. Driving 80 MPH in the left lane is much safer than driving 65 and weaving in and out of traffic to get a few car lanes ahead, yet with current speed limits the person going 80 in a straight line is guilty of "felony speeding" in my state while the person dangerously assholeing their way through traffic gets a stern talking to, at best.
Oh, speeding tickets generate revenue? How about you get that revenue from your own fucking ass?
And another thing, who the FUCK thought it was a good idea to put roundabouts everywhere? I'm not going to call it a fucking "traffic circle" because it's a fucking roundabout. They made sense in Ye Olde' England when Lord Grantham was being driven around by his chauffeur and there were no controlled intersections - they forced you to consider traffic from the right and left (remember, those ninnies do everything backward) because you couldn't barrel straight through. But a controlled intersection is much safer, faster (if setup properly and not just a dumbass 4-way stop or poorly-timed light) AND you don't have the problem of not being able to fucking see because the city thinks they need to put a fucking arboretum on every patch of cement.
But no - the chauffeur fucked the Lord's daughter and knocker her up and she died so he left England and brought that shit over to the US. We fought a fucking war over this shit and won, and almost 250 years later we're just regressing to the point of "Chip, chip, cheerio I can't wait for King William to tax me for owning a TV!"?
Fun fact: That shit is till going in some form or another (I can't make sense of it), and they STILL haven't learned how to draw eyes that aren't a country mile apart:
It exists and it's called Torpase. It was used in a trial at Cheery Point.
I saw it in a recent documentary. Some people say it's a movie, but it was boring, none of those people had any acting skills, I was not entertained in the slightest, and nobody has heard of it. It had to be a documentary.
You don't know how to properly use the word "irony". That is not ironic. Irony has to do with the use of words for something other than their literal intention. It has absolutely nothing to do with things being unexpected.
Yup. This folder showed up for me over a week after I uninstalled and hid the "Get Windows 10 LOLOLOL" update. I nuked the folder and all of the other reported "telemetry" and "upgrade" updates. Then I turned automatic updates to fucking off. I will manually apply only the actual security updates. Fuck MS.
"Live Photos" are videos (or GIFs). Google "cinemagraph" (even though it should be cinemagram). It was a trend for a few months several years ago.
Samsung's S-Pen in the Note series allows for hovering over something to give a different action than tapping something or long pressing it. This has been extended to not require the stylus, and plenty of phones now let you hover your finger over the screen to do stuff, and there are various terms for it.
Samsung has had pressure sensitive styluses for a while as well, which makes sense since you're drawing or writing. Adding pressure sensitivity for finger touches seems absolutely retarded since users won't understand why one touch does something different from the previous touch, and we already have 4 distinct modes of touching shit on conventional capacitive screens - swiping over an area, tapping an area, double tapping an area, and tapping an area and holding.
An Apple "article" is posted and SuperKendall shows up and posts fifteen fucking times to champion his favorite corporation, what a fucking shock.
You can easily break the iPhone screen with your fingers, especially the larger models. The glass used is very scratch resistant and somewhat impact resistant. It does not handle any sustained stress nearly as well. If you want to break it, firmly grip phone in off hand. Using your main hand, firmly press center of phone with finger or thumb. Lookup ifixit repair guide.
It won't break unless you're in need of anger management or you're trying to break it, but you said:
That is laughable, on my existing iPhone 6 Plus there is no way you could press hard enough to break anything with just a finger. You finger would break well before the device.
If you want to go with a strictly literal interpretation of "just a finger", you could have the iPhone floating in space and you could hit it with your second knuckle.
The plugin system changed constantly because of how it was implemented.
It's been pretty much the same for over a decade, actually. The least stable it ever was was during the switch from the sane release schedule to the rapid release schedule, where developers had to constantly update plugins for Firefox to accept them as working for newer versions. End users were able to open and edit the plugins quite easily and do this themselves if the plugins were no longer in development. (Of course, when Mozilla requires signing users will be unable to help themselves in any similar situations in the future.) Mozilla finally got it set up so that you didn't need to update a plugin and say it works with Firefox 57 , 58, 59, etc.
They're finally stabilizing that API making it easier for plugin authors.
They're not stabilizing anything. They're throwing it out entirely and adopting Chrome's. Then they're going to ask the developers of the popular plugins (noscript and adblock and no one fucking else) to tell them what else they need to do in order to make those specific plugins work. There will be less functionality. Whether anything is easier or not remains to be seen, though it should be easier if a developer is maintaining both a Chrome and a Firefox plugin. Firefox plugins aren't exactly hard to begin with anyway.
They're not "removing the core functionality" at all -- they're enhancing it.
A major challenge we face is that many Firefox add-ons cannot possibly be built using either WebExtensions or the SDK as they currently exist.
Try again.
Only in your paranoid fantasy does improving plugin support someone mean they're going make that feature less useful and refuse any and all feedback from plugin authors.
Over the coming year, we will seek feedback from the development community, and will continue to develop and extend the WebExtension API to support as much of the functionality needed by the most popular Firefox extensions as possible.
As stated by Mozilla, they're going to solicit feedback and listen to the big boys (NoScript, AdBlock). Only the "most popular" count. No one else will have any say.
On second thought, don't try again. You're useless.
This is like saying MATLAB/Mathematica does everything Photoshop does and more, or that AVISynth and MeGUI do everything that After Effects and Premier do and more.
Yes, you can absolutely get these tools to do everything. I use GIMP and AVISynth for everything, never touching Adobe's trash. But I know that the more complicated my shit gets, the easier it would be to do a decent job of it using Adobe's tools. My use cases involve needing to do frame-perfect or pixel-perfect complex jobs (meaning I CAN'T use Adobe's tools) or needing to do simple jobs (meaning I have no reason to use Adobe's tools).
As for the UI, GIMP's UI is trash. The UI introduced in 2.0 was even worse (and extremely buggy) but I got used to it (mostly). That said, Adobe's interfaces are utter fucking shit across the board and make GIMP's UI look like the magnificent stone hard (yet flaccid) cock on Michaelangelo's David. Like the marble penis, it is both beautiful and utilitarian, at least compared to Adobe's Picasso renditions.
We have decided on an approximate timeline for the deprecation of XPCOM- and XUL-based add-ons.
Consequently, we have decided to deprecate add-ons that depend on XUL, XPCOM, and XBL. We don’t have a specific timeline for deprecation, but most likely it will take place within 12 to 18 months from now. We are announcing the change now so that developers can prepare and offer feedback. Add-ons that are built using the new WebExtension API will continue to work. We will also continue supporting SDK add-ons as long as they don’t use require(‘chrome’) or some of the low-level APIs that provide access to XUL elements.
A major challenge we face is that many Firefox add-ons cannot possibly be built using either WebExtensions or the SDK as they currently exist. Over the coming year, we will seek feedback from the development community, and will continue to develop and extend the WebExtension API to support as much of the functionality needed by the most popular Firefox extensions as possible.
A major challenge we face is that many Firefox add-ons cannot possibly be built using either WebExtensions or the SDK as they currently exist. Over the coming year, we will seek feedback from the development community, and will continue to develop and extend the WebExtension API to support as much of the functionality needed by the most popular Firefox extensions as possible.
Further, it's going to be a walled garden:
Starting in Firefox 42, add-on developers will be required to submit extensions for review and signing by Mozilla prior to deployment, and unsigned add-ons cannot be installed or used with Firefox.
You can disable the signing requirement, but only on the Developer or Nightly builds based on version 42.whatever.
Slashdot Mirror
So... you can't answer the question. That's what I thought.
I'm all for space, but let's be real - we hit a brick wall the instant we landed on the moon.
The most significant thing to come after that would be GPS, and that was in the late 70s.
We have no solid plan for going to Mars, we have no intention of doing more lunar missions, and our best attempt at a colony / biodome is a tin can floating in the upper atmosphere. We're not mining comets, commercial space ventures are still fledglings at best, and NASA has been retooled to be the world's most expensive weather service in order to further a political position.
The public lost interest in space because we stopped doing interesting things. People don't give a shit if NASA's big news of the day is sending a tweet from the ISS or yet another repeat of watching how spiders spin webs in ultra low gravity. We don't have heavy lift, we don't have a shuttle, we don't have a crew-carrying ship worthy of getting to another planet (or even the moon), etc. We don't have anything that comes anywhere near as close to our crowning achievement from from 46 years ago.
If you want to argue about GPLv2 binaries requiring signing keys then you might as well argue that GPLv2 binaries require the OS, the firmware, the BIOS, the CPU microcode, and the fucking hardware to run everything on. It covers the recipe, not the logo of the restaurant that sells dishes made from the recipe.
Private signing keys are not code. The fact that clowns put them in code is another matter.
Executables can be built signed or unsigned from the same source, with the only difference being whether or not the damned thing was signed by the private keys.
The reference to scripts is in there to prevent abuse where open source code produces unusable, jumbled shit and closed scripts make sense of it, effectively rendering the work as a whole closed. Code signing has absolutely nothing to do with that shit.
GPL does not require you to turn over your private keys and dipshits who insist that it does are spreading FUD.
I'd go as far as to say that there is absolutely no interpretation to the contrary that any judge, lawyer, or layman would accept, but we all know how stupid and corrupt the first 2 groups can be.
What meaningful astronaut or advancement has there been in the last 25 years?
There's an AC troll that goes around posting nothing but anti space shit, typically insulting anyone interested in anything about space by calling them a childish, pie-in-the-sky "space nutter".
He means that the top clown's statement "Surely the GPL requires all the source code required to build the supplied binary." is fucking ridiculous.
There is no "supplied binary" requirement.
There is no requirement that code be correct, functional, or compilable.
You don't need to supply the fucking keys.
Your software can't prevent players from colluding with each other to cheat.
Or I could go to radio shack and buy a small actuator to do it for me.
The only things you can buy at Radio Shack are batteries and third-world cell phones.
In the financial world, we keep records for 7 years, 10 years, etc. depending on what they are.
Auditing doesn't go back forever in the real world.
Should it for Bitcoin? It currently does, though that can be changed. Last I checked, people were discussing this issue because keeping a full copy of the block chain on a typical desktop was becoming burdensome.
Try googling "bitcoin".
It's security comes primarily from the distributed nature. To hijack the network and insert valid blocks, you'd have to be a majority player.
If secp256k1 is weakened by a few bits, everyone in the network can take advantage of that. The network would then adjust the complexity of mining automatically so blocks would still be mined at the same rate.
If secp256k1 is straight broken, then you can switch curves with a software update and a blockchain fork. Bitcoin has forked the blockchain before, it's really not a big deal unless you're on the losing branch in terms of popularity.
Further, there is no indication that secp256k1 is compromised. Please show us support for your claim that "It is barely secure today.".
If it were compromised, we'd be seeing the effects on the Bitcoin network, and we'd be talking about switching curves.
They do polls and look at results from the precincts.
There is no way their tiny polls would provide the coverage and update frequency they crave, or any semblance of accuracy (which they generally don't care about).
They also meta themselves into a hyper engorged state by watching what other networks report, then feeding that data into their own models and reporting on it. Other networks see that and do the same. It's like a closed loop human centipede.
I don't think Bob won that election legally. I can't believe a convicted felon would get so many votes and another convicted felon would get so few.
Here you go - the results of last month's mayor election. All 48,000 voters and who each one of them voted for.
I thought this was a secret ballot.
Ehh.
OK, Aaron A. Aaronson voted for...Bob. Aaron L. Aaronson voted for...Bob. Arthur B. Ablabab voted for...Bob...
I would gamble many Slashdotters might actually want to read.
Try not to lose your shirt. RTFA was replaced with RTFS a few years ago.
Or, as any newspaper editor will tell you (if you can manage to dig one of them up in this century), people only read the headlines.
My last 2 accidents came from being rear ended by jackoff distracted drivers. One of them was quite serious.
I'd be serious too if you started demanding my insurance information in the middle of my masturbation session.
(I'm assuming you forgot a hyphen.)
if you have an automatic transmission, the "gas" pedal is merely a "suggestion" to the system that actually controls the throttle.
You're thinking of electronic fuel injection (at least I hope you are).
If you want direct control over the flow of fuel to the flaming chambers of boom, you'll need to ditch EFI and bring back the ol' choke. It's fun for about 5 minutes.
I don't want to spill my beverage or hurt my dog when my car decides I need to brake more quickly than I actually need to, nor do I want to be rear ended when I see a clown coming in hot behind me and needing another foot to stop while I've got 3 feet in front of me.
And what about when I WANT to hit something? Will this shit prevent me from pulling my car ALL the way into the garage? Will it prevent my from driving through light brush? I'll accept these if you can guarantee that it will be enabled permanently on police vehicles so the cops can't ram people in high speed pursuits.
Most of all, I don't want to fucking pay for this shit. And no, insurance premiums won't go down if you have it, they'll simply go up if you don't at some point. Once most cars have it, they'll go up again every time your car reports that it activated that "feature".
I'm all in favor of getting retards off the roads, but we should be doing it by licensing cyclists (the most dangerous things on the road) and registering their bikes. After that we can get to work on more stringent licensing requirements, including immediate revocation pending retesting for anyone at fault in a collision, driving under the influence, or over the age of 65.
And can we PLEASE get some sanity back with regards speed limits (i.e., throw them out)? There was NOTHING wrong when we had no speed limits and relied on cops to patrol for people who drove recklessly. Shitheads got punished, everyone else enjoyed the open road. Driving 80 MPH in the left lane is much safer than driving 65 and weaving in and out of traffic to get a few car lanes ahead, yet with current speed limits the person going 80 in a straight line is guilty of "felony speeding" in my state while the person dangerously assholeing their way through traffic gets a stern talking to, at best.
Oh, speeding tickets generate revenue? How about you get that revenue from your own fucking ass?
And another thing, who the FUCK thought it was a good idea to put roundabouts everywhere? I'm not going to call it a fucking "traffic circle" because it's a fucking roundabout. They made sense in Ye Olde' England when Lord Grantham was being driven around by his chauffeur and there were no controlled intersections - they forced you to consider traffic from the right and left (remember, those ninnies do everything backward) because you couldn't barrel straight through. But a controlled intersection is much safer, faster (if setup properly and not just a dumbass 4-way stop or poorly-timed light) AND you don't have the problem of not being able to fucking see because the city thinks they need to put a fucking arboretum on every patch of cement.
But no - the chauffeur fucked the Lord's daughter and knocker her up and she died so he left England and brought that shit over to the US. We fought a fucking war over this shit and won, and almost 250 years later we're just regressing to the point of "Chip, chip, cheerio I can't wait for King William to tax me for owning a TV!"?
WAKE UP!
That Mega Tokyo reference takes me back.
Fun fact: That shit is till going in some form or another (I can't make sense of it), and they STILL haven't learned how to draw eyes that aren't a country mile apart:
http://megatokyo.com/strip/143...
http://megatokyo.com/strip/142...
http://megatokyo.com/strip/142...
http://megatokyo.com/strip/142...
http://megatokyo.com/strip/142...
http://megatokyo.com/strip/142...
http://megatokyo.com/strip/142...
http://megatokyo.com/strip/142...
http://megatokyo.com/strip/142...
http://megatokyo.com/strip/142...
As terrible as ever.
It exists and it's called Torpase. It was used in a trial at Cheery Point.
I saw it in a recent documentary. Some people say it's a movie, but it was boring, none of those people had any acting skills, I was not entertained in the slightest, and nobody has heard of it. It had to be a documentary.
You don't know how to properly use the word "irony". That is not ironic.
Irony has to do with the use of words for something other than their literal intention.
It has absolutely nothing to do with things being unexpected.
It's "password", for those wondering.
Yup.
This folder showed up for me over a week after I uninstalled and hid the "Get Windows 10 LOLOLOL" update.
I nuked the folder and all of the other reported "telemetry" and "upgrade" updates. Then I turned automatic updates to fucking off. I will manually apply only the actual security updates. Fuck MS.
"Live Photos" are videos (or GIFs). Google "cinemagraph" (even though it should be cinemagram). It was a trend for a few months several years ago.
Samsung's S-Pen in the Note series allows for hovering over something to give a different action than tapping something or long pressing it.
This has been extended to not require the stylus, and plenty of phones now let you hover your finger over the screen to do stuff, and there are various terms for it.
Samsung has had pressure sensitive styluses for a while as well, which makes sense since you're drawing or writing. Adding pressure sensitivity for finger touches seems absolutely retarded since users won't understand why one touch does something different from the previous touch, and we already have 4 distinct modes of touching shit on conventional capacitive screens - swiping over an area, tapping an area, double tapping an area, and tapping an area and holding.
An Apple "article" is posted and SuperKendall shows up and posts fifteen fucking times to champion his favorite corporation, what a fucking shock.
You can easily break the iPhone screen with your fingers, especially the larger models.
The glass used is very scratch resistant and somewhat impact resistant. It does not handle any sustained stress nearly as well. If you want to break it, firmly grip phone in off hand. Using your main hand, firmly press center of phone with finger or thumb. Lookup ifixit repair guide.
It won't break unless you're in need of anger management or you're trying to break it, but you said:
That is laughable, on my existing iPhone 6 Plus there is no way you could press hard enough to break anything with just a finger. You finger would break well before the device.
If you want to go with a strictly literal interpretation of "just a finger", you could have the iPhone floating in space and you could hit it with your second knuckle.
The plugin system changed constantly because of how it was implemented.
It's been pretty much the same for over a decade, actually. The least stable it ever was was during the switch from the sane release schedule to the rapid release schedule, where developers had to constantly update plugins for Firefox to accept them as working for newer versions. End users were able to open and edit the plugins quite easily and do this themselves if the plugins were no longer in development. (Of course, when Mozilla requires signing users will be unable to help themselves in any similar situations in the future.)
Mozilla finally got it set up so that you didn't need to update a plugin and say it works with Firefox 57 , 58, 59, etc.
They're finally stabilizing that API making it easier for plugin authors.
They're not stabilizing anything. They're throwing it out entirely and adopting Chrome's. Then they're going to ask the developers of the popular plugins (noscript and adblock and no one fucking else) to tell them what else they need to do in order to make those specific plugins work. There will be less functionality. Whether anything is easier or not remains to be seen, though it should be easier if a developer is maintaining both a Chrome and a Firefox plugin. Firefox plugins aren't exactly hard to begin with anyway.
They're not "removing the core functionality" at all -- they're enhancing it.
A major challenge we face is that many Firefox add-ons cannot possibly be built using either WebExtensions or the SDK as they currently exist.
Try again.
Only in your paranoid fantasy does improving plugin support someone mean they're going make that feature less useful and refuse any and all feedback from plugin authors.
Over the coming year, we will seek feedback from the development community, and will continue to develop and extend the WebExtension API to support as much of the functionality needed by the most popular Firefox extensions as possible.
As stated by Mozilla, they're going to solicit feedback and listen to the big boys (NoScript, AdBlock). Only the "most popular" count. No one else will have any say.
On second thought, don't try again. You're useless.
This is like saying MATLAB/Mathematica does everything Photoshop does and more, or that AVISynth and MeGUI do everything that After Effects and Premier do and more.
Yes, you can absolutely get these tools to do everything. I use GIMP and AVISynth for everything, never touching Adobe's trash. But I know that the more complicated my shit gets, the easier it would be to do a decent job of it using Adobe's tools. My use cases involve needing to do frame-perfect or pixel-perfect complex jobs (meaning I CAN'T use Adobe's tools) or needing to do simple jobs (meaning I have no reason to use Adobe's tools).
As for the UI, GIMP's UI is trash. The UI introduced in 2.0 was even worse (and extremely buggy) but I got used to it (mostly). That said, Adobe's interfaces are utter fucking shit across the board and make GIMP's UI look like the magnificent stone hard (yet flaccid) cock on Michaelangelo's David. Like the marble penis, it is both beautiful and utilitarian, at least compared to Adobe's Picasso renditions.
It's very obviously true.
http://news.slashdot.org/story...
https://blog.mozilla.org/addon...
We have decided on an approximate timeline for the deprecation of XPCOM- and XUL-based add-ons.
Consequently, we have decided to deprecate add-ons that depend on XUL, XPCOM, and XBL. We don’t have a specific timeline for deprecation, but most likely it will take place within 12 to 18 months from now. We are announcing the change now so that developers can prepare and offer feedback. Add-ons that are built using the new WebExtension API will continue to work. We will also continue supporting SDK add-ons as long as they don’t use require(‘chrome’) or some of the low-level APIs that provide access to XUL elements.
A major challenge we face is that many Firefox add-ons cannot possibly be built using either WebExtensions or the SDK as they currently exist. Over the coming year, we will seek feedback from the development community, and will continue to develop and extend the WebExtension API to support as much of the functionality needed by the most popular Firefox extensions as possible.
A major challenge we face is that many Firefox add-ons cannot possibly be built using either WebExtensions or the SDK as they currently exist. Over the coming year, we will seek feedback from the development community, and will continue to develop and extend the WebExtension API to support as much of the functionality needed by the most popular Firefox extensions as possible.
Further, it's going to be a walled garden:
Starting in Firefox 42, add-on developers will be required to submit extensions for review and signing by Mozilla prior to deployment, and unsigned add-ons cannot be installed or used with Firefox.
You can disable the signing requirement, but only on the Developer or Nightly builds based on version 42.whatever.
Firefox is FUCKING DEAD and Mozilla killed it.