Firefox becomes a full botnet

Pale Meme doesn't have this problem.

>>62037246
Iridium doesn't have this problem

Ungoogled Chromium doesn't have this problem

With Brave you won't encounter these obstacles.

File: iridium.png (15KB, 686x148px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 686x148px

>>62037301
>Iridium

Seems pretty dead :\

>>62037246
I just went back to botnet.

Your collected data will be used to empower minorities and people of color.

>>62037427
Fuck it, lynx time.

>>62037246
It's a pretty nice idea because the unbiased sampling will give a more correct inference about a population which means a better product and so on.

>>62037246
Disappointing but at least it'll be opt-out. Firefox wanting to use data to improve itself is nothing compared to the Google machine creating a profile for you, following you everywhere, and putting you in a bubble.

>>62037246
Mu problem with Google is not that they research excellent statistical machine learning techniques but is that they fire engineers for truth. So I'm perfectly well with Firefox. Alongside with Jews, Mozilla is even more based and powerful than the pajeetted Google.

>>62037497
Except when you know that Firefox has been using Google itself to track users too

https://github.com/mozilla/addons-frontend/issues/2785

Not to mention that all those SJWs in-house may leak your browsing history if they see it useful for their cause.

>>62037246
Cool. I like it. I hope it helps them. And yes, it is telemetry but their browser is fully open source and they're literally the only competitor to Chrome. I don't care about some opt-out telemetry. It will probably be fully removed in waterfox anyway so Firefox users don't have to worry.

>>62037497
True, Google's money is advertisement, they really interested in getting not just a technical information about usage but rather a social one and it more likely fits to the local teenager-tier definition of a botnet.

> a lot of addons dead soon
> losing marketshare
> slowly adding telemetry bullshit
cuckzilla got corrupted, its just going to become like crappy copy of chrome, i would call it, the tranny chrome, it even uses the google analytics bullshit on their addons page, fucking Christ

Why do you care if they collect anonymous data?

But they already collect telemetry unless you explicitly disable it.

>>62037606
Use w3m or lynx or curl.

>>62037618
Who cares if they know 96% of /pol/ visitors purchase dragon dildos online using food stamps.

who else /netrunner/?

>>62037606
>> a lot of addons dead soon
Won't the dead add-ons just be ones that are already dead and not supported by the devs? If it was worth having I'd imagine they would update/rebuild it.

>>62037644
I'm in the rest 4%.

>>62037497
Mozilla are using Google tech (RAPPOR) for this data collection. If you don't trust Google, you cannot trust Firefox.

>>62037533
>is that they fire engineers for truth

Whereas MozCorp forces out employees for holding an opinion, without them even needing to write some autistic manifesto and pass it around. Looking forward to your mental gymnastics to explain why this is okay.

>>62037703
>forces out employees for holding an opinion
Do you have a link to read about that?

File: IMG_20170822_112933.jpg (361KB, 1080x1533px) Image search: [Google]

361KB, 1080x1533px

It's ok, they are only doing it to protect us from wrongthink and harmful opinions

>>62037703
>MozCorp forces out employees for holding an opinion
How did you learn this?

>>62037246
Waterfox doesn't have this problem

>>62037427
white is still a color

>>62037785
wget neither

File: IMG_20170822_212611.jpg (344KB, 1080x1620px) Image search: [Google]

344KB, 1080x1620px

>>62037772
It was on the news

Anonymized data is okay; so long as there is a way to opt out. I trust Mozilla far more than Google and co due to their history. The data is very limited. Additionally, there (should) be an opt out option. If there is not a way to opt out, then that is a concern.

>>62037289
>>62037301
These

>>62037649
I thought it was dead?
I haven't seen any threads on it yet. As far as I know the autist devs here on /g/ didn't even get to a pre alpha.

>>62037814
In fact, white contains all colors

>>62038041
>As far as I know the autist devs here on /g/ didn't even get to a pre alpha.
Well, you haven't been paying any attention then, have you? They have a logo, anon.

>>62037246
Disgusting.

File: 1503157179220.jpg (6KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 500x500px

>>62038090
so if we mix enough the next generations will end up being white again?

>>62037948
Wow, and this guy is now the CEO of Brave software, which produces the Brave browser. So the creator of Javascript is in charge of Brave? Interesting, I thought it was just a small time thing.

Brave shill should use this info when promoting the browser here

Why do people endorse Iridium when the browser itself admits it can't keep up with undoing the Google botnet?

>>62038115
Only if you can change people into beings of light instead of pigment.

god fucking dammit
I just switched back to firefox from ungoogled chromium
if Brave used Ublock instead ABP it would be perfect for me, but no
What browser should I be using?

>>62037246
You are blind. Mozilla has been collecting data for about a decade. Even IceCat (albeit an addon may have been the culprit??) made a call to Google's safebrowsing website (found via wireshark), even though that's supposed to be disabled. I ended up changing all remote URLs in IceCats about:config to 127.0.0.1. I also wasn't what exactly caused it, so I disabled SpyBlock and uBlock. Would anyone be interested in an IceCat addon that changes all URLs to 127.0.0.1 in the about:config?

>>62038210
Yes. Some people won't even know that this happens until they see that such an addon exists.

ESR 52 doesn't have this problem

>>62037653
Yes

>>62037606
Except telemetry can fully be disabled. If anything it's a better version of Chrome. Nightly was proven to be faster than chrome recently, so firefox is far from being dead.

File: pm.png (46KB, 192x192px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 192x192px

>>62038203

>>62038203
Slimjet (64 bit version)
Extremely underrated browser that nobody mentions on /g/. Absolutely reliable, literally "just werks!" and is also ungoogled and has a lot of added privacy options in the settings. It even has a built in adblocker, but I still use ublock origin.

>>62037289
It's has "custom proprietary binary builds by furfag with anal probe" problem.

>>62037470
lynx, links, elinks, emacs w3m maybe. There are still a few choices out there, but they are getting slim.

>>62037478
>It's a pretty nice idea because the unbiased sampling
>unbiased sampling
>unbiased

OK /g/, what browser should I use?

File: viv_icon.png (229KB, 3072x3072px) Image search: [Google]

229KB, 3072x3072px

>>62039032

>>62039004
>>62039004
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sampling_bias

>fulltime w3m for several years now
Haha fite me, mozilla

>>62039096
How are you posting if w3m doesn't support any scripts.

>>62037289
>>62037301
>>62037314
>>62037785
>>62038250
Icecat doesn't have this problem.
>>62039076
>proprietary

File: IBM_WebExplorer.jpg (39KB, 800x583px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 800x583px

If it's not broke don't fix it

>>62039111
Pass.

why did firefox remove the

xpinstall.signature.required

config option.
fucking annoying, the addon i want to use is only updated on its github.

>>62039262
Apparently if you want to use any addon permanently, even ones you don't plan to distribute through AMO, it has to manually inspected and approved by a human at Mozilla.

I've been making some locally and can load them for debugging, but I have to do it each time I open the browser. Pretty annoying, but I can see where Mozilla is coming from (security perspective)

>2011+6
>not using Waterfox
ishiggydiggy