This is partly because of mobile. The loss on the desktop wasn't as bad, some small decline was caused by iexplore.exe deserving the name "browser", and google doing a very agressive ad campaign for chrome. But for the mobile market, its just that the other browsers grew, and firefox didn't.
Firefox for Android is only at 0.04%!
That's thanks to Firefox for android being a third level priority for a long time, and the strong Google predominance on Android. Most people don't change their default browser, and on android which is targeted at making the user stupid even less so.
changing to Chrome's extension model at some point
This is a very risky descision and for some time I really hated them for it. However, the industry trend goes towards Chrome's extension model, edge plans it as well as safari. This can be the chance for firefox to use this in order to offer a more feature-full API on firefox than on any other browser.
I think that all they've managed to create is a language with an ugly syntax (even by C++'s standards!)
If you like python, and other "expressive" languages, you can't be healed. In fact you even have less stuff than in C++, for example type information gets filled in automatically, where it's possible, except for function declarations, because it should be understandable for the human reader at first glance.
an impractical ownership system
Types are impractical too if you have them, just use python or something even more script-y if you don't want your compiler to do anything.
(which itself is quite buggy despite being written in Rust, a language that's supposed to avoid this!)
Its a young language, and more effort was spent on having a nice API design and features than on speed or bug-freedom. Its best if both features and API design come in first, and optimisation and bug fixing later. Otherwise you spend lots of time on getting something bug free and optimal in speed and you realize that you want to add a feature, which you then patch somehow to the API, but its not proper at all.
a rather awful standard library
I've found it more cleanly organized than the C++ standard library, and by far more featureful.
and a questionable community that's highly focused on codes of conduct and censorship in the name of "tolerance" and "diversity".
They waste their time with this, I agree.
Servo, which is written in Rust, is abysmal in my experience. I tried it last week, and I think I'd get better results using IE 3 today. Hell, Servo wouldn't even render any page for me for more than a minute before it crashed! Despite all of the hype around it, it fails to deliver even a 1990s browser experience.
Its a WIP project, and they themselves say Servo is not ready yet. Its open source, not developed behind close walls. People criticise google for not doing this with android.
In my opinion, things are looking extraordinarily bleak for Mozilla
I really hope that Mozilla keeps relevant. Its just great to see a company so devoted to open source and user freedom.
Unless regulators require something else, they will make it possible to turn the self driving features off, if their customers demand it. But some people are lazy. I for example prefer to write posts on slashdot over having to focus on urban traffic. So a self driving car is something I look forward to. They just don't want to become foxconn if it turns out that most of the people are lazy, or if regulators suddenly require each car to include safety features that are so strict that only google and apple can provide them.
The US is at war with Terrorism. That's why it can invade afghanistan. America is not at war with Terrorism. That's why the geneva treaty doesn't apply for gitmo inmates.
In fact there is a difference that makes the PDF reader in Firefox more secure than the ones in Chrome or Edge: In chrome and edge, the PDF reader is a binary module, that's sandboxed some way from the other parts of the operating system, with that sandbox being the only protection mechanism.
In Firefox, the PDF reader is written 100% in javascript. Originally in fact it has been written by some guy who greatly improved the javascript JIT engine for firefox, and wanted to demonstrate how fast the javascript VM now has became, and that it can run "real" applications like PDF readers.
In fact, since the earliest days, the website for the firefox PDF reader featured his paper as example document: https://mozilla.github.io/pdf....
To get back to the topic: due to the fact that the firefox PDF reader only uses APIs and functionality that is already available in the web, viewing a PDF file isn't less secure than normally browsing the internet (without any addons that e.g. block javascript or something). So in theory the firefox PDF reader should be the most secure one, as there is no difference, and thus no additional attack surface.
However, there is a tiny part where the firefox PDF reader is different from normal js code, and it has been abused already once: https://blog.mozilla.org/secur... It was no remote code execution bug, but it allowed websites to read files on your disk, that's pretty bad.
So yes, in principle the PDF reader for firefox is the most secure one.
I don't know whether its legal, but I find all the debates I hear about in the news on youtube. In fact, I even can't subscribe to a cable plan, as I don't live in the USA.
Probably most people don't care, same as most people don't get influenced in their decision which jeans to buy by allegations that one brand destroys the environment, has insecure working standards with lots of accidents and exploits workers while the other (with a far higher price tag) doesn't have those allegations.
Still, it does not prevent the brand with the dubious image to improve it by adding some big self-designed labels that certify how great the company is at fighting all these things.
He is rich, insanely rich. Its all just the facebook brand, some servers, some code, some employees. Nothing much. Still he is #6. Why? Because he keeps his brand relevant. If it came out he cooperates with the authorities, who will use facebook?
Do you think he will ever cooperate with the state authorities again? It will hurt his image. It will lower the valuation of the company. He doesn't want that. So at least to the public he acts like he refuses to let the states spy on their people. What happens in the NDA covered parts is a different matter, but it doesn't affect facebook stock negatively. In fact perhaps even positively because it may allow him enter markets that were closed without cooperation with the authorities.
The FACT that Hitler's National Social German Workers Party was officially socialist, AND recognized world-over as fascist, and as racist, does not mean that racism is a characteristic of either fascism or socialism
The Nazi party was not socialist. They had common arguments, some of them even taken from socialists/marxists, but no way they were socialists. When they came to power, they still kept the capital in the hands of the rich, not making them state owned. Even the stuff they stole from the jews they killed mostly went to private hands (the flats that the jews owned were sold at a cheap price to families close to the regime, and the slave labor done in the concentration camps benefited privately owned companies). So the Nazis were very capitalist. Yes, they had many "social" programs, but they had no "socialist" ones.
And about the second part: Facist italy under mussolini, the regime that coined the term facism, was already racist. They thought the italian race was supreme and must colonize north africa. The only difference between racism by mussolini and by other facists was that the racism by other facists was biologically based, and the racism by mussolini was culturally based. Still, both had elements of each other, both were strongly convinced of their supremacy, and discriminated other races.
Demanding that we end ILLEGAL immigration is NOT "racist"
I never claimed that him saying that illegal immigration is illegal is something racist by itself. Yes, it will probably affect mostly people of a certain ethnic group, but demanding that the laws of a nation (which aren't discriminatory against people because of their race in any way) to be executed is nothing racist. Having and demanding a strong border is nothing racist.
But the reasons for why he is demanding such a strong border are very racist. Regarding the mexicans, he says stuff like "most of them are disgusting people" he clearly is racist by the definition. Yes, he mostly speaks about the crime, but the criminals are only few people. Most of the mexicans probably want to abide the law. What would you say if somebody said "most americans are disgusting, they favor killing innocents with drones, and torture muslims in guantanamo"?
Just think what somebody mexican has to endure by "trump supporters". Regardless of whether they actually do disrespect the US laws or not they are under the suspicion of having it broken.
Its not just racist that trump demands to close the border for all people who have a certain religion only because there is a radical form of it threatening to do terror attacks on the united states. Its also very counter productive. You are victimizing them, and by that you generate more internal support inside the muslim community for the terrorists. Just look at what happens in israel: every time the rules for all muslims get more strict, more people join and support the hesbollah. And even more terror attacks on israelis are performed. This way the extremist sides of both parties of the conflict fuel each other, and they ensure their own survival. Similar effects can be observed with right wing parties and muslim terrorists in europe: the terrorists need the right wing extremists, and the right wings need the terrorists in order to exist.
Same goes for Trump, if there were no attacks/rapes by mexican illegal immigrants or muslim terrorists at civilians, he couldn't be outraged because of it. And if people like trump wouldn't demand and excercise muslim discrimination the support inside the muslim community for terrorist groups wouldn't be as large. Basically this argument was made by hillary clinton in the last debate, while i hugely dislike her, I fully agree with her about what she said here.
Australia and New Zealand have VERY strong border controls. Even Americans cannot get in there to stay without proving they are wealthy enough to never become dependent upon the local taxpayers. Ar
Yes, marxism and facism, both words used in a historical context, have many things in common. They both favor a single party state that controls the people, and sees religion as a competition to their ideology. Yes the control includes the economy. After all, its a dictature. The system the chinese are running with having a liberal market connected to a dictature is new. And even there its contradictory, with the state influencing the economy heavily.
But, marxism and facism have some few notable differences:
* Facists didn't really like jews. for the nazis, marx was a jew (he wasn't, only son of a jew, but did they care?), and therefore all jews were socialists. So sanders (he is a jew) wouldn't really have hung out with nazis. At least not after the nazis had found out he was a jew. * Facists killed socialists, and socialists killed facists. Yes, facists repressed almost every political movement that wasn't facist, but especially socialists. * Facists adopted ideas of racism. Socialists did not. * Marxism is only an economic model. Facism includes many more things. * In many european states Facists were supported by the rich (and mostly noble) establishment. Socialists, well, they really didn't like anybody with money.
Trump wants a strong border. Facists want this too. Socialists don't care, want an open border in order to unite workers of the world.
Trump made very racist comments. Facists did too!
When I said "facist" above, I meant his racist statements. Arguing for a strong border alone doesnt make you a facist.
He says stuff like "mexicans bring crime into america" or "close the border for muslims". That clearly is racist. Yes he then says that "I like the mexican people" stuff and "I have thousands and thousands of mexicans working for me", but from my standards that sentence alone is racist.
The reason why so many mexicans are criminals is not an ethnic or cultural problem, its a social problem. Its about missing oppurtunity for a legal job and a weak mexican state.
* He is not stupid. Its almost impossible to be stupid and a successful business owner the same time. * Trump wants to get an ordered immigration system. America had this before the war, when most immigrants came from europe (either because of their religion or because of poverty), you were really privileged with having the atlantic in between. Now the immigrants come from mexico, and mexico is a country which is in a very bad shape. Building a wall is not a solution, but it can be part of a good concept to get order into the immigration process. A nation should have the right to require its immigrants to be registered. * I don't care about somebody's hairdo
I think Trump makes lots of facist noise in order to appeal for the republican voters so that he gets the candidacy. Once he is candidate he will talk more about his other topics, which are mostly left from popular republican positions. Think of obamacare, he does want a system like that (with small adjustments, which probably even make sense), while rubio and cruz don't.
But the danger in voting for Trump is that it would promote and introduce more facist talk into the political business.
Hillary is establishment. Bernie says that evil evil word "socialism" but he also calls europe socialist, and as an european I pretty much like the systems we have, so I'd probably vote for Bernie if I were american and must chose between all candidates in the race.
Its partly due to how terror attacks are covered by the media. For suicides, newspapers often don't report about them because they fear imitators. And smaller accidents which, in the sum, kill far more people aren't reported about either. Perhaps in the local press, but even there it doesn't get on the front page.
Until now the Cyanogenmod developers were really cool. Even as they released their premium Cyanogen OS ROM for devices with proprietary extensions, the CyanogenMod ROM still stayed 100% open source. I think the new apps (or mods or whatever) from microsoft are only available on Cyanogen OS as well, not "harming" CyanogenMod. If this is what they need
I just hope that Microsoft doesn't aquire Cyanogen Inc. too soon (that's the next logical step and seems pretty obvious that it happens), as probably then they stop being nice.
Newtonian mechanics made lots of preditions too, and applied to a small enough frame newtonian mechanics hold as well. Probably its similar for general relativity. Otherwise we'd have found the "theory that explains it all". And that'd be quite cool on one hand, but quite un-cool at the other hand, because now there is nothing anymore we can discover.
Just with the slight difference, that when you smoke you only kill yourself, and perhaps damage the baby in your belly if you are pregnant, but guns are tools to kill other people.
I say that it is a young language that still has to get maturity and trustability. Right now its a perfectly fine base to build something upon, but with less than one year of stability, I _do_ admit that probably you shouldn't invest millions of dollars into writing programs with it.
Slashdot Mirror
Firefox is likely under 8% of the browser market
This is partly because of mobile. The loss on the desktop wasn't as bad, some small decline was caused by iexplore.exe deserving the name "browser", and google doing a very agressive ad campaign for chrome. But for the mobile market, its just that the other browsers grew, and firefox didn't.
Firefox for Android is only at 0.04%!
That's thanks to Firefox for android being a third level priority for a long time, and the strong Google predominance on Android. Most people don't change their default browser, and on android which is targeted at making the user stupid even less so.
changing to Chrome's extension model at some point
This is a very risky descision and for some time I really hated them for it. However, the industry trend goes towards Chrome's extension model, edge plans it as well as safari. This can be the chance for firefox to use this in order to offer a more feature-full API on firefox than on any other browser.
I think that all they've managed to create is a language with an ugly syntax (even by C++'s standards!)
If you like python, and other "expressive" languages, you can't be healed. In fact you even have less stuff than in C++, for example type information gets filled in automatically, where it's possible, except for function declarations, because it should be understandable for the human reader at first glance.
an impractical ownership system
Types are impractical too if you have them, just use python or something even more script-y if you don't want your compiler to do anything.
(which itself is quite buggy despite being written in Rust, a language that's supposed to avoid this!)
Its a young language, and more effort was spent on having a nice API design and features than on speed or bug-freedom. Its best if both features and API design come in first, and optimisation and bug fixing later. Otherwise you spend lots of time on getting something bug free and optimal in speed and you realize that you want to add a feature, which you then patch somehow to the API, but its not proper at all.
a rather awful standard library
I've found it more cleanly organized than the C++ standard library, and by far more featureful.
and a questionable community that's highly focused on codes of conduct and censorship in the name of "tolerance" and "diversity".
They waste their time with this, I agree.
Servo, which is written in Rust, is abysmal in my experience. I tried it last week, and I think I'd get better results using IE 3 today. Hell, Servo wouldn't even render any page for me for more than a minute before it crashed! Despite all of the hype around it, it fails to deliver even a 1990s browser experience.
Its a WIP project, and they themselves say Servo is not ready yet. Its open source, not developed behind close walls. People criticise google for not doing this with android.
In my opinion, things are looking extraordinarily bleak for Mozilla
I really hope that Mozilla keeps relevant. Its just great to see a company so devoted to open source and user freedom.
but it runs angular.js, ruby on rails and nim!
I never ran into any bigger hardware support issues with Linux, except printers. Yes, gfx cards have shitty drivers, that probably counts too.
Unless regulators require something else, they will make it possible to turn the self driving features off, if their customers demand it. But some people are lazy. I for example prefer to write posts on slashdot over having to focus on urban traffic. So a self driving car is something I look forward to. They just don't want to become foxconn if it turns out that most of the people are lazy, or if regulators suddenly require each car to include safety features that are so strict that only google and apple can provide them.
The US is at war with Terrorism. That's why it can invade afghanistan. America is not at war with Terrorism. That's why the geneva treaty doesn't apply for gitmo inmates.
Horrible from a human perspective. He is transcendent, we are just too dumb to understand the inner beauty.
There is a list on github: https://github.com/mozilla/pdf...
In fact there is a difference that makes the PDF reader in Firefox more secure than the ones in Chrome or Edge: In chrome and edge, the PDF reader is a binary module, that's sandboxed some way from the other parts of the operating system, with that sandbox being the only protection mechanism.
In Firefox, the PDF reader is written 100% in javascript. Originally in fact it has been written by some guy who greatly improved the javascript JIT engine for firefox, and wanted to demonstrate how fast the javascript VM now has became, and that it can run "real" applications like PDF readers.
In fact, since the earliest days, the website for the firefox PDF reader featured his paper as example document: https://mozilla.github.io/pdf....
To get back to the topic: due to the fact that the firefox PDF reader only uses APIs and functionality that is already available in the web, viewing a PDF file isn't less secure than normally browsing the internet (without any addons that e.g. block javascript or something). So in theory the firefox PDF reader should be the most secure one, as there is no difference, and thus no additional attack surface.
However, there is a tiny part where the firefox PDF reader is different from normal js code, and it has been abused already once: https://blog.mozilla.org/secur...
It was no remote code execution bug, but it allowed websites to read files on your disk, that's pretty bad.
So yes, in principle the PDF reader for firefox is the most secure one.
I don't know whether its legal, but I find all the debates I hear about in the news on youtube. In fact, I even can't subscribe to a cable plan, as I don't live in the USA.
By the way he is from Argentina. Same continent, different country, different language.
Probably most people don't care, same as most people don't get influenced in their decision which jeans to buy by allegations that one brand destroys the environment, has insecure working standards with lots of accidents and exploits workers while the other (with a far higher price tag) doesn't have those allegations.
Still, it does not prevent the brand with the dubious image to improve it by adding some big self-designed labels that certify how great the company is at fighting all these things.
He is rich, insanely rich. Its all just the facebook brand, some servers, some code, some employees. Nothing much. Still he is #6. Why? Because he keeps his brand relevant. If it came out he cooperates with the authorities, who will use facebook?
Do you think he will ever cooperate with the state authorities again? It will hurt his image. It will lower the valuation of the company. He doesn't want that. So at least to the public he acts like he refuses to let the states spy on their people. What happens in the NDA covered parts is a different matter, but it doesn't affect facebook stock negatively. In fact perhaps even positively because it may allow him enter markets that were closed without cooperation with the authorities.
What about Smelly Slashdotter?
The FACT that Hitler's National Social German Workers Party was officially socialist, AND recognized world-over as fascist, and as racist, does not mean that racism is a characteristic of either fascism or socialism
The Nazi party was not socialist. They had common arguments, some of them even taken from socialists/marxists, but no way they were socialists. When they came to power, they still kept the capital in the hands of the rich, not making them state owned. Even the stuff they stole from the jews they killed mostly went to private hands (the flats that the jews owned were sold at a cheap price to families close to the regime, and the slave labor done in the concentration camps benefited privately owned companies). So the Nazis were very capitalist. Yes, they had many "social" programs, but they had no "socialist" ones.
And about the second part: Facist italy under mussolini, the regime that coined the term facism, was already racist. They thought the italian race was supreme and must colonize north africa. The only difference between racism by mussolini and by other facists was that the racism by other facists was biologically based, and the racism by mussolini was culturally based. Still, both had elements of each other, both were strongly convinced of their supremacy, and discriminated other races.
Demanding that we end ILLEGAL immigration is NOT "racist"
I never claimed that him saying that illegal immigration is illegal is something racist by itself. Yes, it will probably affect mostly people of a certain ethnic group, but demanding that the laws of a nation (which aren't discriminatory against people because of their race in any way) to be executed is nothing racist. Having and demanding a strong border is nothing racist.
But the reasons for why he is demanding such a strong border are very racist. Regarding the mexicans, he says stuff like "most of them are disgusting people" he clearly is racist by the definition. Yes, he mostly speaks about the crime, but the criminals are only few people. Most of the mexicans probably want to abide the law.
What would you say if somebody said "most americans are disgusting, they favor killing innocents with drones, and torture muslims in guantanamo"?
Just think what somebody mexican has to endure by "trump supporters". Regardless of whether they actually do disrespect the US laws or not they are under the suspicion of having it broken.
Its not just racist that trump demands to close the border for all people who have a certain religion only because there is a radical form of it threatening to do terror attacks on the united states. Its also very counter productive. You are victimizing them, and by that you generate more internal support inside the muslim community for the terrorists. Just look at what happens in israel: every time the rules for all muslims get more strict, more people join and support the hesbollah. And even more terror attacks on israelis are performed. This way the extremist sides of both parties of the conflict fuel each other, and they ensure their own survival. Similar effects can be observed with right wing parties and muslim terrorists in europe: the terrorists need the right wing extremists, and the right wings need the terrorists in order to exist.
Same goes for Trump, if there were no attacks/rapes by mexican illegal immigrants or muslim terrorists at civilians, he couldn't be outraged because of it. And if people like trump wouldn't demand and excercise muslim discrimination the support inside the muslim community for terrorist groups wouldn't be as large. Basically this argument was made by hillary clinton in the last debate, while i hugely dislike her, I fully agree with her about what she said here.
Australia and New Zealand have VERY strong border controls. Even Americans cannot get in there to stay without proving they are wealthy enough to never become dependent upon the local taxpayers. Ar
Yes, marxism and facism, both words used in a historical context, have many things in common. They both favor a single party state that controls the people, and sees religion as a competition to their ideology. Yes the control includes the economy. After all, its a dictature. The system the chinese are running with having a liberal market connected to a dictature is new. And even there its contradictory, with the state influencing the economy heavily.
But, marxism and facism have some few notable differences:
* Facists didn't really like jews. for the nazis, marx was a jew (he wasn't, only son of a jew, but did they care?), and therefore all jews were socialists. So sanders (he is a jew) wouldn't really have hung out with nazis. At least not after the nazis had found out he was a jew.
* Facists killed socialists, and socialists killed facists. Yes, facists repressed almost every political movement that wasn't facist, but especially socialists.
* Facists adopted ideas of racism. Socialists did not.
* Marxism is only an economic model. Facism includes many more things.
* In many european states Facists were supported by the rich (and mostly noble) establishment. Socialists, well, they really didn't like anybody with money.
Trump wants a strong border. Facists want this too. Socialists don't care, want an open border in order to unite workers of the world.
Trump made very racist comments. Facists did too!
When I said "facist" above, I meant his racist statements. Arguing for a strong border alone doesnt make you a facist.
He says stuff like "mexicans bring crime into america" or "close the border for muslims". That clearly is racist. Yes he then says that "I like the mexican people" stuff and "I have thousands and thousands of mexicans working for me", but from my standards that sentence alone is racist.
The reason why so many mexicans are criminals is not an ethnic or cultural problem, its a social problem. Its about missing oppurtunity for a legal job and a weak mexican state.
Not every business he ran ended in bankruptcy. He at least had some successes.
And he does want an ordered immigration system. He wants people to "go through a process". He does not want to close the border completely.
I don't want to defend him (he's racist), but:
* He is not stupid. Its almost impossible to be stupid and a successful business owner the same time.
* Trump wants to get an ordered immigration system. America had this before the war, when most immigrants came from europe (either because of their religion or because of poverty), you were really privileged with having the atlantic in between. Now the immigrants come from mexico, and mexico is a country which is in a very bad shape. Building a wall is not a solution, but it can be part of a good concept to get order into the immigration process. A nation should have the right to require its immigrants to be registered.
* I don't care about somebody's hairdo
I think Trump makes lots of facist noise in order to appeal for the republican voters so that he gets the candidacy. Once he is candidate he will talk more about his other topics, which are mostly left from popular republican positions. Think of obamacare, he does want a system like that (with small adjustments, which probably even make sense), while rubio and cruz don't.
But the danger in voting for Trump is that it would promote and introduce more facist talk into the political business.
Hillary is establishment. Bernie says that evil evil word "socialism" but he also calls europe socialist, and as an european I pretty much like the systems we have, so I'd probably vote for Bernie if I were american and must chose between all candidates in the race.
From reading TFA, they say its the equivalent of a half million cars for a whole year.
Its partly due to how terror attacks are covered by the media. For suicides, newspapers often don't report about them because they fear imitators. And smaller accidents which, in the sum, kill far more people aren't reported about either. Perhaps in the local press, but even there it doesn't get on the front page.
The sad thing is, this is helping terrorism.
Until now the Cyanogenmod developers were really cool. Even as they released their premium Cyanogen OS ROM for devices with proprietary extensions, the CyanogenMod ROM still stayed 100% open source. I think the new apps (or mods or whatever) from microsoft are only available on Cyanogen OS as well, not "harming" CyanogenMod. If this is what they need
I just hope that Microsoft doesn't aquire Cyanogen Inc. too soon (that's the next logical step and seems pretty obvious that it happens), as probably then they stop being nice.
Newtonian mechanics made lots of preditions too, and applied to a small enough frame newtonian mechanics hold as well. Probably its similar for general relativity. Otherwise we'd have found the "theory that explains it all". And that'd be quite cool on one hand, but quite un-cool at the other hand, because now there is nothing anymore we can discover.
Just with the slight difference, that when you smoke you only kill yourself, and perhaps damage the baby in your belly if you are pregnant, but guns are tools to kill other people.
I say that it is a young language that still has to get maturity and trustability. Right now its a perfectly fine base to build something upon, but with less than one year of stability, I _do_ admit that probably you shouldn't invest millions of dollars into writing programs with it.