https://www.pcmag.com/news/brave-browser-caught-redirecting-users-through-affiliate-links
I’m not going to defend Mozilla by any means, but if you care about privacy, you wouldn’t use a browser based on Chrome anyway.
https://www.pcmag.com/news/brave-browser-caught-redirecting-users-through-affiliate-links
I’m not going to defend Mozilla by any means, but if you care about privacy, you wouldn’t use a browser based on Chrome anyway.
You could replace “Brave Browser” with Firefox and the statement would still be true.
At least Firefox wasn’t caught hijacking affiliate links.
If you want to fully wipe the disks of any data to start with, you can use a tool like dd
to zero the disks. First you need to figure out what your dive is enumerated as, then you wipe it like so:
sudo dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sdX
From there, you need to decide if you’re going to use them individually or as a pool.
!< s
I’m not disagreeing with anything you’ve said?
I’m saying that just adding Mozilla’s PPA to your sources won’t change apt’s behavior when installing Firefox unless you tell apt to prefer the package offered by the Mozilla PPA.
As someone who uses Kubuntu as a daily driver, I’m well aware of the snap drama and have worked around it using the method I pasted above.
Even though it’s an underhanded move by Cannonical, I’m still glad the OS is open source since it makes the workaround so trivial.
It takes a little more than just adding a different repository to your package manager, you have to tell apt which to prefer:
echo ’
Package: *
Pin: origin packages.mozilla.org
Pin-Priority: 1000
Package: firefox*
Pin: release o=Ubuntu
Pin-Priority: -1’ | sudo tee /etc/apt/preferences.d/mozilla
But that’s how dogwhistles work: they can hide behind a veil of plausible deniability.
And his refusal in the leadup to the 2020 election to denounce the Proud Boys.
“Stand Back and Stand By” isn’t the kind of thing you say to a group you want nothing at all to do with.
As someone who took the plunge years ago, you just have to accept that some programs will just be unusable. There are likely alternatives, though very few will be ‘drop in’ replacements so to speak. So there will be a learning curve.
It’s the price you pay to have full control of your system. As time goes on, it gets easier.
On one hand, I get it. You’re used to Windows and want to use an environment you’re used to and apps you’re comfortable with.
On the other, you need to be aware that you’re going to be constantly fighting an uphill battle. Microsoft doesn’t care that you don’t want those programs using resources, they’re going to install them because it’s in the best interest of their shareholders. The programs might be able to be removed using third party tools, but then you’re relying on random tools found on the internet to remove bits of your operating system without hurting anything or doing anything malicious.
The data these programs gather is more valuable to Microsoft than the blowback because this is the exact stance people will take: sure it sucks that this is being forced upon me, but it’s still better than leaving. So I’ll either deal with it (99% if users are here) or ill find a random program and cross my fingers it does only what’s on the label.
The only solution I see is to swap to something else, causing Microsoft to lose market share and thereby convincing shareholders not to force this on users.
The choice is yours.
I don’t think anyone is advocating for turning a blind eye to Mozilla. I think the argument being made is that a monoculture for browsers is a concern that can outweigh some blunders Mozilla makes.
I’m old enough to remember what a shit show ActiveX was for web security.
I can’t help but see it as the foot in the door.
I understand that Mozilla needs money, but I can’t make everyone who uses Firefox commit to donating money to keep them from having to do things like this to stay afloat. But them going down this path makes me not want to donate at all.
I never said I was, just that I wanted to support the browser that respects my privacy, and this move is making me reconsider it.
As long as it’s open source someone will be able to find a way to turn it off, either by an addon or by patching and compiling the source code.
IMO, that’s splitting a hair.
For a browser that supposedly respects user privacy, the fact that this is opt-out rather than opt-in really leaves a bad taste in my mouth.
I’m going to reconsider my monthly recurring donation to Mozilla, especially if they keep this up.
Windows is way more documented. Not necessarily by Microsoft but by the absolute waste community.
If I had a nickle for every BSOD error code I researched only to find “have you tried running sfc /scannow
? What about a refresh? You tried both and nothing worked? Just reinstall!”
More documented my ass. Linux at least tells me what’s wrong. “No space left on device” or “missing dependency” is way better than “Error code 0x0000007e”
So often just swapping the user agent from Firefox to Chrome makes these sites work flawlessly. So they’re putting in extra code to detect Firefox and serve a “we don’t support your browser” page when they could just… not. And if a user complains about X, they could say we don’t test on Firefox, try on Chrome.
Looks pretty neat.
Is there a way to have it run like a ram statistics monitor? I’d love to have this running in a terminal window to monitor my ram statistics.