|
The Gunslinger posted:Well I'm never using twitch again. God even just reading that drivel is annoying. "we're building a more seamless ad experience". Do you have Amazon Prime? Because the Twitch premium account you get from that should also block ads.
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 16:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 00:03 |
|
|
xamphear posted:I have some bad news for you. You might want to sit down.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 17:45
|
|
|
xamphear posted:YouTube is already pretty close to this on mobile. They serve the ad videos from the same domains as their content, so it's impossible to block them by normal means. You have to resort to third party clients, root/jailbreak tweaks (if possible), and all that stuff. I think they've got it partially working on desktop also. Only happens when fullscreen videos start autoplaying the next video though (e.g. as part of a playlist).
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 17:49
|
|
|
Captain Invictus posted:And it's not sustainable. A lot of people have switched to donation/subscription/patreon methods rather than ads because of that.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 18:44
|
|
|
xamphear posted:I have some bad news for you. You might want to sit down. And given the ability of that advertising to run code, the World Wide Web (or whatever we're calling the HTML+CSS+ECMA share of the Internet these days) is effectively built on a financial foundation of extortion.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 18:56
|
|
|
Can a streaming video deliver malware to your device? I'm under the impression such things are under much tighter control than just some website ad.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 22:33
|
|
|
If it's just in the container that YouTube/Vimeo/whoever delivers, then probably not, assuming Google/Vimeo/whoever does their job (but how many times have we had to report something on AdChoices for drive-by or social engineering attacks (if you needed a reminder that attacks on a computer system or user don't necessarily have to use the computer side)). Video codec APIs don't naturally inhibit malware. The part that turns the payload into moving pictures and overlays might be sanitized, but metadata or slack space GIF+MP3-style or some other thing I've overlooked can still be issues depending on codec design and implementation. And a bad-faith video provider, possibly if the advertiser is running their own video host or a 'totally not our own video host we swear', can always just hide it in the player like any other bit of JavaScript code. dont be mean to me fucked around with this message at 22:44 on Nov 17, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 22:40
|
|
|
biznatchio posted:My understanding is that it's basically unblockable, because they stream the ad right in the same video stream you were getting the streamer's content from. youtube had a few ads sneak through uBlock for me a few weeks ago, but it stopped so I assume the block list was updated at some point.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 23:27
|
|
|
I remember Stuxnet or some other such attack getting delivered through malicious shortcut files. Looking at the files in Explorer would break the icon processing code, causing the payload to execute without any interaction from the user or autorun. So yes, it's possible for malware to get embedded in a pure audio/video stream, but it's not very likely outside of a targeted attack. That said, if the provider allows scripting at all, or allows HTML and CSS without proper sanitation, or allows embedding external resources, then they're as dangerous (and as blockable) as any other ads.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 23:35
|
|
|
PirateBob posted:Any way to stop Firefox from bugging me about updating??  Don't fall for the scare mongering, it's not like going online with a 3-months old version makes your computer instantly blow up as you browse. It slightly, slightly increases the risk that if you run into a malicious site, you might get a problem, if and when certain criteria are met. Frankly I think software companies, including Mozilla and Google (Chrome), should start realizing how unfathomably annoying it is having to deal with constant application updates on the 4-6 devices some of us have between home and work, whether it's desktop and mobile. It's so insufferable that your reaction is natural; how to disable update nagging. Personally I just update FF maybe once a year when it starts behaving slow or weird for whatever reason.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2016 09:33
|
|
|
Pilsner posted:Sure: My firefox just install updates on startup whenever it crashes. It doesn't nag about them.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2016 16:13
|
|
|
Pilsner posted:Don't fall for the scare mongering, it's not like going online with a 3-months old version makes your computer instantly blow up as you browse.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2016 16:25
|
|
|
Pilsner posted:Sure: Please keep your stuff updated. Sincerely, the rest of the internet
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2016 18:38
|
|
|
Alereon posted:This is idiotic. It's common for normal websites to serve malicious ads that attempt to infect you with malware via browser exploits. Failing to update your poo poo is exactly how people get malware. Hell, it's common for this website (which is one of the reasons I have no-ads).
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2016 19:13
|
|
|
Pilsner posted:Sure: This is bad advice, please no one follow this and Pilsner please reconsider turning auto updates back on.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2016 19:33
|
|
|
You're right that it's slightly safer to update, but I contest the notion that it's insecure to be online just because you don't have the latest version of a program. For example, Chrome has a simple dumb logic where it calculates the number of days since you last updated, and if the menu icon is red, "you are at risk!". Anyone who knows about software development will agree that this is simply scare mongering to make people update. You are not guaranteed to get infected with anything just because your version is X number of months old, that's not how software works. Also, one reason I am always extremely tentative about installing updates for applications, whether they're for desktop or mobile, is the fact that many updates bring unwanted change or remove features from the program, or introduce new bugs. Particularly the latter is the biggest issue, and it's so demoralizing to update an application and see something broken that worked fine before. It happens over and over again, in games and regular programs. If the program works fine, I like sticking with it for a good while until I'm convinced (by reading online) that a new version is better in every aspect. Posts in this thread are a testament to the fact that new versions of Firefox often have annoying bugs. If you don't mind updating your work computer, your home computer, your home laptop, your smartphone, your wife's smartphone, your tablet and your kids' two tablets every week when new browser updates come out, feel free, I'm not saying you're doing anything wrong.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2016 22:04
|
|
|
Pilsner posted:You're right that it's slightly safer to update, but I contest the notion that it's insecure to be online just because you don't have the latest version of a program. For example, Chrome has a simple dumb logic where it calculates the number of days since you last updated, and if the menu icon is red, "you are at risk!". Anyone who knows about software development will agree that this is simply scare mongering to make people update. You are not guaranteed to get infected with anything just because your version is X number of months old, that's not how software works. The problem is browsers are large programs with huge install bases that make them a big target, every single update for any browser comes with at least one if not many CVE fixes. If you don't like feature changes that is a valid argument to make, but not valid enough to disable updates, go use the LTS version of Firefox.
|
|
#
?
Nov 18, 2016 22:50
|
|
|
I think it's worse to go without updating your browser than it is for any other piece of software, including your OS. Your browser is the program making the new outgoing connections to unknown hosts. Most people's home computers aren't running anything that accepts incoming connections and other programs that make outgoing connections (games, software looking for updates, etc) are much more predictable and easy to secure (not that they always do, application update processes are often terribly unsecure). Browsers and anything made by Adobe if you're unlucky enough to run into PDFs that use all their special snowflake features. I keep adobe acrobat reader installed but at least it's not my default PDF program. At least Flash is dead now. Something is misconfigured if Firefox is nagging you though. It should just update automatically on the next launch. I hate the new misfeatures more than most, it's more than enough to keep me away from Chrome. At least with Firefox addons have enough power to fix the lowest-common-denominator features. When the Chrome dev team decides something is unpopular it's gone for all users forever. This reminds me that it's been too long since I let Windows 10 update itself. The last time I left Windows to its own devices it did its level best to take my device away from me by rendering itself unbootable. Say what you want about Firefox updates but they're tested a lot more than Windows updates are now and much less likely to break something.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2016 12:38
|
|
|
I'm on the Beta channel and the latest update has changed how Ctrl-F works slightly. I can't just immediately start typing to find the word, I have to click the word box first which is incredibly annoying. Is this just me or is anyone else having this problem? EDIT - and, as always, it was an extension*. Because I have auto updates turned off due to Snap Links Plus, they haven't updated for a while. * but mainly my terrible memory. Megillah Gorilla fucked around with this message at 12:53 on Nov 19, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2016 12:50
|
|
|
I had to turn Findbar Tweak off after the update to 50, because it would consistently open a search bar every time I changed tabs.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2016 16:00
|
|
|
Gorilla Salad posted:I'm on the Beta channel and the latest update has changed how Ctrl-F works slightly. I can't just immediately start typing to find the word, I have to click the word box first which is incredibly annoying. You can set individual, misbehaving extensions like that to not update instead of all of them.
|
|
#
?
Nov 19, 2016 18:06
|
|
|
Desuwa posted:This reminds me that it's been too long since I let Windows 10 update itself. The last time I left Windows to its own devices it did its level best to take my device away from me by rendering itself unbootable. Say what you want about Firefox updates but they're tested a lot more than Windows updates are now and much less likely to break something. I have set my Windows 10 active hours to something like 8am - 8pm (because 12 hours is the maximum at the moment) and for at least a week it had the "I'm going to restart your computer to install updates! I swear I'm going to loving do it!" and it never did. Then suddenly, while I was using it, it popped up a notification that the computer will restart in 10 minutes  I haven't had automatic updates break anything on my desktop, but on my laptop the start menu broke at one point and I had to do a refresh.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2016 08:52
|
|
|
Oh poo poo this is really good: Firefox 51: blocks automatic audio playback in non-active tabs http://www.ghacks.net/2016/11/14/firefox-51-blocks-automatic-audio-playback-in-non-active-tabs/ I just noticed it on Youtube. It owns owns owns.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2016 21:12
|
|
|
Wheany posted:Oh poo poo this is really good: Does it stop the YouTube video from playing? That's mainly why I use YouTube Center, since it allows me to open up many YouTube tabs and not have every single one play at once.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2016 21:40
|
|
|
Nalin posted:Does it stop the YouTube video from playing? That's mainly why I use YouTube Center, since it allows me to open up many YouTube tabs and not have every single one play at once. It does actually, the problem off having too many YouTube tabs open is mentioned pretty early in the article. While this release let you block audio playback until you tell the tab not to, the next one will let you block the entire source of the audio from playing until you tell it to. zetamind2000 fucked around with this message at 23:46 on Nov 22, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2016 23:14
|
|
|
Well, I was going to give them one last chance, but the Pale Moon team not only failed, they somehow made their lovely knock-off browser even worse: Pale Moon 27 is completely incompatible with all HTML5 videos now. Even Youtube and Twitch halfway worked before, but now even those are FUBAR. To say nothing of their increasing disdain for modern add-on standards. Their forums, which used to be dead as hell, are now overflowing with bug reports. And of course, none of this is their fault, it's the evil cabal of Google and Mozilla keeping down the little browsers. If I have to use Chrome or some other alternative for half my browsing time to make up for incompatibilities, the browser has failed. gently caress Pale Moon, gently caress these devs, I'm crawling back to Firefox. lovely it may also be, but at least I'll be able to watch some drat videos and install up-to-date add-ons again. Maybe with Classic Theme add-on it won't be so bad.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2016 08:59
|
|
|
I like having one tab on Youtube to play some background music while browsing other tabs, will I not be able to do that anymore? What I'd really prefer is all Youtube instances to stop if I start playing another e.g. I have a tab playing music while I browse SA - if I play an embedded video on SA I'd like the music video to stop and then resume when I stop playing the embedded video. At the moment I have to switch tabs > pause music > switch to SA > play video > switch back to music to resume it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2016 14:00
|
|
|
nexus6 posted:I like having one tab on Youtube to play some background music while browsing other tabs, will I not be able to do that anymore? quote:Basically, what it does is block any audio playback until the tab is activated by the user.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2016 14:10
|
|
|
Kerning Chameleon posted:Well, I was going to give them one last chance, but the Pale Moon team not only failed, they somehow made their lovely knock-off browser even worse: Pale Moon 27 is completely incompatible with all HTML5 videos now. Even Youtube and Twitch halfway worked before, but now even those are FUBAR. To say nothing of their increasing disdain for modern add-on standards. Their forums, which used to be dead as hell, are now overflowing with bug reports. And of course, none of this is their fault, it's the evil cabal of Google and Mozilla keeping down the little browsers. I want to like Pale Moon but I have to agree with this sentiment. Anyway Firefox 50 isn't so bad if you have CTR installed. The main annoyance is every time it updates you have to google "firefox disable ____________" whatever lovely misfeature they added this week.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2016 04:48
|
|
|
~Coxy posted:I want to like Pale Moon but I have to agree with this sentiment. Have you considered ESR +CCK2?
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2016 19:30
|
|
|
Is it firefox's new things to open up two instances in the process tab in windows
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2016 10:36
|
|
|
Relin posted:Is it firefox's new things to open up two instances in the process tab in windows Yes, Firefox has a separate content process now. Expect to see even more in the future.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2016 15:05
|
|
|
FYI there are new patches out for Firefox 50, 51 beta and 45 ESR which fix a critical security vulnerability which allows arbitrary remote code execution (i.e. an attacker can take over your machine just by you visiting an infected page) so  update your poo poo ASAP . Also, this just goes to show why Pilsner's advice regarding security updates on this very page is horrible and nobody should follow it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 06:26
|
|
|
I would like to underscore the fact that this vulnerability is actively being exploited.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 06:51
|
|
|
Mr.Radar posted:FYI there are new patches out for Firefox 50, 51 beta and 45 ESR which fix a critical security vulnerability which allows arbitrary remote code execution (i.e. an attacker can take over your machine just by you visiting an infected page) so All it needs is Javascript too. So yeah, please, please update.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 08:37
|
|
|
Probably a false flag operation by the pro-browser-patching left coast elitists.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 18:24
|
|
|
well firefox's webpage says i'm up to date, so..yay?
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 19:58
|
|
|
Mr.Radar posted:FYI there are new patches out for Firefox 50, 51 beta and 45 ESR which fix a critical security vulnerability which allows arbitrary remote code execution (i.e. an attacker can take over your machine just by you visiting an infected page) so Anyone happen to know if Pale Moon is affected by the same vulnerability?
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 20:10
|
|
|
Powered Descent posted:Anyone happen to know if Pale Moon is affected by the same vulnerability? It would be surprising if it wasn't, the bug goes back a couple years in the codebase at least.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 20:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 00:03 |
|
|
spit on my clit posted:well firefox's webpage says i'm up to date, so..yay? If you want to verify, open About Firefox from the question mark in the hamburger menu and make sure it says you're on 50.0.2 God, I wish they still used normal drat words for menus so I don't have to say things like "the question mark in the hamburger menu"
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2016 21:05
|
|
