From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8110F1396D0 for ; Mon, 11 Sep 2017 02:21:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id AA8981FC0A2; Mon, 11 Sep 2017 02:21:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-pf0-x230.google.com (mail-pf0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c00::230]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4C2AE1FC017 for ; Mon, 11 Sep 2017 02:21:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pf0-x230.google.com with SMTP id e199so11947938pfh.3 for ; Sun, 10 Sep 2017 19:21:05 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=references:user-agent:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:date:message-id :mime-version; bh=ni+PVTCaKyrZTPHKPijA+rBZB3Yng0JSA/8iJYMNGKA=; b=G6JAehXus2mBubyQwFI7IgIgCDtucNx0Htpk328oHSf5vvPCsoLy0PnJoAWFobMm6f BVyCvUXYhD932/AfiHNDmXzpLXLCRkKRetel1iS+dKyDZOiqr2LjK7g8PwWH57sanEoG Nd23Bi1kZ0ebgDQ1ZVYrXqOeMbbDgkhQUS+5yXjNKh3w0jX4lQbZXF6AgVXvhrE9jwYI vmx4bVm9UdH20LI8aFVzBsu774+/1vZuGIvWWHmJErWjNkTqlQLDpo8LDFK2Z+12as2m kn3Otz34BMkC2oVN+YGg3A7ad1lQNPaZ+EXGalkD8sLy1pM8uCExeO45yxjPU2mxMUc9 uTQg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:references:user-agent:from:to:subject :in-reply-to:date:message-id:mime-version; bh=ni+PVTCaKyrZTPHKPijA+rBZB3Yng0JSA/8iJYMNGKA=; b=OWotFeglgRJ+Dh1aH6a40u6spgXOD71VBaG4vYWYGrrmd3RGAjEZyCM/C2MkCY6fLM sphs0pXhU8tya0n9IFOY9r0xy/9AYI7fF+ImAXzboURufnmCzLrwG52UpGUO9zPTPTB4 692yOKdxAQqDvnRkZnSVjiDDgk+SOOg6vYCxT+vJvt2VsoZAZm2cRdlsDJvvtylTkFoX wmdVNntddqydkMkP8y0C6trlphq78F9Fkd+ZgGmPK+0VIBw/ODtj1zFZfKwTQfq3/q44 GiqjnjKfrKo99KcLGPmQ5SR2w6BbDTtY4HubabvZgpPTnV1Eyl9AzPHwrL71f1rN8Z3b 0JWA== X-Gm-Message-State: AHPjjUgZFq28y8eaFxawI0iiPvHKba5OgYUI5tRYLA9LDLmI1T1S/hvV UBX1dQc9OGPTpaUHmxo= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADKCNb4zwqkz06lAyBmQ2pVmTWHxaxBgXkV7pt2XWhB8k5hoCLxdbVBLHIPOh0cErbWlxsADYi2XBg== X-Received: by 10.98.60.71 with SMTP id j68mr10543833pfa.264.1505096463811; Sun, 10 Sep 2017 19:21:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (23.83.238.120.16clouds.com. [23.83.238.120]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id x189sm12790624pfx.188.2017.09.10.19.21.00 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 10 Sep 2017 19:21:02 -0700 (PDT) References: <87a8264rvb.fsf@gmail.com> User-agent: mu4e 0.9.18; emacs 25.2.1 From: Danny YUE To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] What do you think about Firefox 57? In-reply-to: Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2017 10:20:55 +0800 Message-ID: <87poayynzs.fsf@gmail.com> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Archives-Salt: 988748e8-49c4-477b-9b22-03dc951eb541 X-Archives-Hash: 10e292ecbaecec857ff147537d2d632f On 2017-09-11 01:19, Daniel Campbell wrote: > On 09/07/2017 05:26 AM, Danny YUE wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> I have been using FoxyProxy in Firefox for a really long time, until >> today I found its new version really sucks. >> >> Then I read the comment from author who declared that the old version >> can *only* be used before (roughly) end of 2017 before Firefox 57 and in >> new version some features must perish. >> >> Afterwards I found that it seems Firefox 57 will use a new ecosystem for >> extensions and be more strict for plugin developers. >> >> So Firefox gurus, what do you think about it? >> >> >> Danny >> > > I switched to Pale Moon a while ago, though I suspect fewer and fewer > mainstream sites will work with it as devs will begin requiring features > enabled in newer Firefox and Chrome (e.g. WebRTC, EME, localStorage, > etc). GitHub has already dropped support for Pale Moon, despite PM > supporting just about everything GitHub makes use of. > > Losing XUL may be great from a security standpoint, but the feature-set > is lacking, it negatively impacts performance (no cache sharing, > blockers can't block correctly without a full render prior) and it all > reeks of a code merge. Why else would Mozilla be putting all this work > into looking *and* acting like Chrome? This behavior is that of a > company that is looking to get out of the market. They've already > abandoned their phone OS and their e-mail/calendar client. Firefox is > just the final nail in the coffin. Servo isn't up to snuff yet, and the > power users that gave Firefox its popularity are (like me) disinterested > in what passes for "modern Web". Many websites are flat-out malicious, > and more are insecure in general, largely due to feature creep in the > browser. Without the ability to protect yourself, it becomes a risky > decision to continue browsing a space filled with surveillance and > malware. In short, it's a dumpster fire. Like all grim scenarios, > however, there are sites out there that don't abuse people. But that > number is dwindling every day. > > Aside from that, the hard requirement on PulseAudio is another strike > against it, and their culture wrt diversity is off-putting. Mozilla > isn't the Web leader it once was. To its credit, I don't think any > organization is "leading" the Web well. With the W3C approving DRM as a > standard in HTTP, it indicates a corporate acquisition of the standards > body, and it's no longer fit for purpose. We need a browser that is > opinionated and sticks to the standards that make sense, and hands > control of media to other programs. That would severely simplify the > browser, and leverage software that's generally already on a computer. > Web browsers as they are are fine for netbooks, which have little in the > way of system software. But for desktop machines, at least, most things > can be handed to a media player, PDF viewer, etc. The code's already > there: there are handlers for different protocols like irc:, mailto:, > torrent:, etc. Adding handlers via MIME-type would be fine. > > As it is, I already don't read much on the Web. The experience has > become crap, even with blocking extensions. More trouble than it's > worth, most of the time. I have better things to do than endlessly tweak > my privacy just so sites don't slurp up all the metadata they can on my > connection. uBO, Privacy Badger, uMatrix, and others are great -- huge > jumps in quality compared to their predecessors -- but the rampant > misuse of the medium leaves me disinterested in the Web. > > So few websites these days are designed with graceful degradation in > mind, let alone accessibility. It's all ECMAscript bells and whistles, > web "apps", etc. to the point where you have two systems: your Gentoo > system and your Web browser. I try to reduce complexity where possible, > balanced against safety. That leads me to an upstream who won't screw > with my interface and disrupt the add-on ecosystem because "this is > better for you". > > Based on what I've read so far, Moonchild is up front about any > breakage, and warns about unsupported compilers or settings. One of our > regulars (Walter Dnes) helps maintain PM for us, too, so that's even > better. :) > > But to be fair, I'll try it out when 57 is released so I have a stronger > opinion. I suspect I will be let down. > Such a long response, thank you Daniel. I don't know if adding DRM into HTTP protocol is a good idea. Maybe it does help reduce spreading of pirate, but HTTP then somehow works beyond "transfer". Personally speaking, I prefer to be able to pick software in a grand market, instead of integrate everything into one big monster with security/privacy holes. I would like to try 57 also (with old Firefox profile backup). Danny