this post was submitted on 06 Oct 2024
845 points (99.0% liked)

Technology

59602 readers
3369 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] calabast@lemm.ee 265 points 1 month ago (32 children)
[–] ramble81@lemm.ee 108 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Careful, there are some edgy people out there who don’t want to use more than one browser because Firefox doesn’t work with their cameras /s

Meanwhile, I’ll still be using Firefox too

[–] Donut@leminal.space 62 points 1 month ago (7 children)

Who needs to give their browser access to their camera?

[–] ramble81@lemm.ee 58 points 1 month ago (1 children)

May be bad phrasing, but Firefox doesn’t support h.265 so there’s limitations with streaming video on some camera platforms and other sites.

[–] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee 41 points 1 month ago (4 children)

TIL Firefox doesn't support HEVC. Hadn't really noticed that before, I guess it's why some Jellyfin streams started transcoding for me.

[–] omarfw@lemmy.world 42 points 1 month ago

It is supported in the nightly build and full support is in the works currently.

https://connect.mozilla.org/t5/ideas/hevc-support/idc-p/63424/highlight/true#M36557

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] thejml@lemm.ee 34 points 1 month ago (5 children)

People who have to use their browser for telehealth and virtual teller banking access.

Sadly these are also things that require better security.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] QuarterSwede@lemmy.world 19 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

People who use Webex, zoom, etc for one use in try browser and don’t normally use those links. Happens at work when an outside vendor doesn’t use what we do.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (31 replies)
[–] fluckx@lemmy.world 125 points 1 month ago (3 children)

What could go wrong when you let an ad company dictate the browser standards/rules.

I know we have Firefox and some forks like librewolf, but percentage wise it feels like a lost battle ( even if I am on Firefox ).

If only people switched en masse to Firefox for the ad blocker. Wouldn't that be something... One big collective FU to Google.

Oh well. One can dream I guess.

[–] SoGrumpy@lemmy.ml 30 points 1 month ago (9 children)

The average Joe or Jane have no idea about ad blocking possibilities. They think ads are just the normal price you pay for surfing the web.

I have even shown people the difference between their browsing experience and mine, and still they can't be arsed to install an ad-blocker.

But then again, they use tiktok and Instagram and all the other brain-numbing shit out there.

load more comments (9 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] nyan@lemmy.cafe 99 points 1 month ago (2 children)

We've known this was coming for a while now . . . but I suppose not everyone reads tech news.

[–] ohwhatfollyisman@lemmy.world 15 points 1 month ago

one might say that this piece of news is the... canary... in the coal mine?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] rickdg@lemmy.world 81 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I used to recommend uBlock as a no-brainer, now folks really need to change towards a better browser.

[–] QuarterSwede@lemmy.world 33 points 1 month ago (7 children)

Or get network wide blocking. Doesn’t prevent everything but it does prevent most ads. Makes the internet tolerable at least.

[–] qprimed@lemmy.ml 61 points 1 month ago (1 children)

nah, lets get them switched away from chromium based spy machines.

[–] QuarterSwede@lemmy.world 16 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Not everyone can. Work machines for instance.

[–] qprimed@lemmy.ml 15 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

sadly, agreed. mindshare leads to adoption, tho - so putting Firefox in front of more faces is always a positive. after all, its how google dominates.

[–] ShepherdPie@midwest.social 15 points 1 month ago (4 children)

Can't install extensions on a work machine but you can add a network wide blocker?

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[–] kokesh@lemmy.world 63 points 1 month ago (15 children)

And what? If someone can live with ads, they can stay. Otherwise anyone can install Firefox. I was all-in Google since the beginning of Gmail. And switching to Firefox was completely painless. Everything works the same, times of website incompatibility are long gone.

[–] pearsaltchocolatebar@discuss.online 81 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Because Google is trying to turn the internet into a walled garden where only people with Chrome can visit the majority of websites.

[–] abbadon420@lemm.ee 20 points 1 month ago (15 children)

I've been been a full time Firefox user for three years now. Haven't experience a single problem like that. Haven't really experienced any problem at all to be honest

[–] TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world 30 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Unfortunately that has not been the case for me. Some sites for buying concert tickets don't seem to like Firefox.

I've had problems with several Microsoft sites we use internally for work ever since Edge went to Chrome.

It's not Firefox's fault. Mozilla is abiding by web standards.

[–] Ghoelian@lemmy.dbzer0.com 28 points 1 month ago

If you find any websites that don't work with firefox, you should report them to Mozilla. Firefox has a list of known bad websites, and has fixes for them, usually just a user agent override.

load more comments (14 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Integrate777@discuss.online 19 points 1 month ago (6 children)

What if websites decide that chrome users earn much more ad revenue and start forcing users to switch with those "This website only supports Chrome" error messages? What if this practice gets popular? I'm sure there are ways to get around it, but the average users who bothered switching to Firefox at all, will just conclude that anything except chrome has a bad browsing experience.

[–] Rekorse@sh.itjust.works 17 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (5 children)

Can't you have your Firefox browser just report itself as chrome?

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] ikidd@lemmy.world 14 points 1 month ago

times of website incompatibility are long gone

I wish I could agree with that. Hell, I have to use Chrome to download my phone bill from Virgin, and a couple of others don't work.

And don't get me wrong, I'm not blaming FF. It's these lazy web developers that only target Chrome. I'm sure Safari users get the same shit experience.

load more comments (12 replies)
[–] linearchaos@lemmy.world 61 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Maybe we're thinking about this wrong. Maybe we should all start running plugins that just load whatever ads that show up in the background hundreds of times without showing them to us. Every viewer is thousands upon thousands of impressions and click through rates become absolutely miserable. We can make the ads worthless or maybe even make them cost a significant amount of money to host.

[–] washbasin@sh.itjust.works 32 points 1 month ago (2 children)

AdNauseam does this to a lesser degree. I'm not sure how effective it is.

https://github.com/dhowe/AdNauseam

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] muntedcrocodile@lemm.ee 51 points 1 month ago (6 children)

I suspect this will soon be followed by a renewed effort by google to kill firefox compatability.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] mannycalavera 42 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Didn't see this coming. Thanks for reporting it 😁

[–] ThePantser@lemmy.world 43 points 1 month ago (3 children)

It did its job then. Gave warning.

🐥⛏️

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Brown_dude69@lemmy.world 37 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Looks like time to find a new browser!

[–] avieshek@lemmy.world 40 points 1 month ago (1 children)

May I interest you in browsers based on FireFox?

[–] cordlesslamp@lemmy.today 21 points 1 month ago (5 children)
[–] stinerman@midwest.social 15 points 1 month ago (5 children)

Someone who repackages/patches free software has different incentives than upstream. So generally speaking, derivative browsers are more privacy friendly, have better features, etc.

That's not to say that upstream isn't important. It absolutely is! It's just that derivatives are generally better.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Cataphract@lemmy.ml 24 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Hopefully wikipedia recognizes this as the official Canary in the Chrome mine. I was first impressed with chrome book because of seeing them used for education, getting my own laptop during school would've been mindblowing to kid me. I was unimpressed with the strangulation process of the OS but again shocked when they added a linux boot mode. There needs to be better alternatives by now, I would be ok with an OS developed by the department of education in conjunction with higher educational institutions. Could have a decent non-profit approach to a browser and ad blockers could legitimately be built in as a "protect the children" aim of approach.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Brown_dude69@lemmy.world 21 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Been using Firefox for quite a time now! What are the other alternatives?

[–] ziggurat@lemmy.world 14 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Ladybird is working really hard to become good enough for daily drive. Will they succeed? Idk. How long will it take? Idk.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] nl4real@lemmy.world 16 points 1 month ago (2 children)

How many times has this been announced already?

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] ipkpjersi@lemmy.ml 15 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I thought they already killed it? They keep killing it multiple times.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] cupcakezealot@lemmy.blahaj.zone 14 points 1 month ago
load more comments
view more: next ›