It's over, isn't it?

>>61867331
>He Still uses sjwfox when better alternatives like Pale Moon exist.

>Current NIGHTLY standards
>Implying these issues won't be fixed by the time stable rolls around

>>61867331
>using a nightly build which warned it will drop addons which aren't webext
>surprised
>doesn't even know you can download a chrome addon and add it to Firefox
Genius

File: 1498143125751.png (196KB, 936x1878px) Image search: [Google]

196KB, 936x1878px

>>61867331
yes

>>61867492
Love the red squiggles for us low iq pol bros helps us understand articles a lot better

>>61867331
For now you can set

extensions.legacy.enabled

to true in about:config. But it's best to search for alternatives.

HTTPS Everywhere and uBlock Origin already have WebExtension versions available for them. For Decentraleyes the developer is at least looking into it. No idea about NoScript and RequestPolicy, but I'm using uMatrix which is available as WebExtension as well.
Self-Destructing Cookies will not be developed further. But there is a different plugin based off it which basically works the same. Though you cannot easily keep your Whitelist. It's called Cookie AutoDelete.

About the other Add-ons you're using I have no clue because I ain't using them. (RefControl and User-Agent Switcher are somewhat available in uMatrix).

File: misinfo.png (93KB, 842x971px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 842x971px

>>61867492
Your red text is not what the article says at all. Nice to see that you're spreading misinformation about an article that talks about the dangers of misinformation.

Disregard the red underlines because I originally made this picture for a different discussion. But you can see that Mozilla doesn't want to censor or control anything.

>>61867449
>>61867469

What are you talking about? Firefox has had this problem for quite a while.

You can either not have multi-process windows or disable a bunch of addons. It's been a while since I disabled a bunch of mine after having tried a clean firefox profile and compared that to the current one I was using. The most annoying part of this was that in 52 or whatever version I used at the time it didn't tell you which plugins actually disabled multiprocess so I had to disable them all and enable one by one and restart it again and again to figure out which plugins where the problem.

>>61867624
This probably makes the browser extremely slow compared to just not using those plugins.

>>61867666
>This probably makes the browser extremely slow compared to just not using those plugins.
This is not about multi-process compatible add-ons. Nightly just by default disabled any add-ons that aren't WebExtensions. That setting will no re-enable add-ons that are not multi-process compatible.

>>61867666
Works for me on nightly. I never lost compatibility with uBlock Origin and VideoDownloadHelper, the only 2 addons I use.

File: 1473476814083.png (22KB, 250x238px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 250x238px

>>61867661
>>Disregard the red underlines because I originally made this picture for a different discussion. But you can see that Mozilla doesn't want to censor or control anything.
... yet they want to combat "hate" and "misinformation".
Nice try, shill.

Wait until it's stable, why are you using nightly.

>>61867661
>tolerance, not hate
>misinformation

Yeah, I can't think of anyone I'd rather NOT be in charge of determining what constitutes "hate" and/or "misinformation" than a bunch of mentally ill social justice freakshows.

>>61867725
>hate
Where does it say that?

And they want to combat misinformation first and foremost by education. Enabling people to figure out themselves if it the information is trustworthy or not.

>>61867755
>>hate
>Where does it say that?
nvm, i''m blind

>>61867755
>Where does it say that?
in the blog post above.
>Enabling people to figure out themselves if it the information is trustworthy or not.
No, you stupid retard, they want to "flag" articles themselves.

>>61867779
retarded, too

>>61867781
That is your opinion. But not the reality.

>>61867755
>Enabling people to figure out themselves if it the information is trustworthy or not.
Unless, of course, they don't agree with it or it doesn't tow the line for whatever SJW agenda they're pushing at the time. And then it's evil and needs to be removed from the Internet, because reasons.

>>61867331
yup, it was fun while it lasted
rip sjwzilla

>>61867795
>That is your opinion. But not the reality.
you're a moron. go be stupid somewhere else. go back to plebbit.

>>61867795
>libral media establishment in charge of truth
literally 1984, this is the future you chose. just remember that when your door gets kicked in.

>>61867829
>in charge of truth
???
read the actual article and tell me where it says anything like that.

>>61867823
no u

>>61867843
>liberal have no information literacy and want to be in charge of it
you see the problem yet?

>>61867861
>want to be in charge of it
Yeah, I see the problem. You're illiterate.

>>61867877
>if you disagree with the policies you're illiterate lol
you see the problem yet?

>>61867331
>2017
>not using pale moon

>>61867885
You're making all that shit up about what is Mozilla going to do. Yet you have no proof. You cannot show me anything they have done or written that would indicate that Mozilla wants to control or censor anything.
They didn't say any of this. You might think this is what they are going to do, because it would fir your view. But that isn't the reality.

>>61867930
Yeah, let's give a bunch of SJW whackjobs control over information. That seems rational.

>>61867899
>muh broken extensions
See https://addons.palemoon.org/incompatible/

>>61867930
>You're making all that shit up about what is Mozilla going to do
liberals are funny bunnies, irrational at best diabolical kaniving and naive at worst.

>>61867331
Most of them has a working replacement or was announced to be ported famicom.