GNU Moon

>>62133362
But we have IceCat

>>62133398
IceCat has too many incompatibilities. And it's much older. Plus it's good to have options.

Just fork PaleMoon.

>>62133362
>How many and what kinds of resources would we need
Uncomment four lines in http://blocklist.palemoon.org/27.4.2/blocklist.xml

>>62133549
Comment out*

>>62133549
It seems like that list is not build into the browser. So you need to find where in the code this list is queried and replace or completely remove that part.

>>62133463
>Just fork PaleMoon.
that's the idea, genius. I'm asking about how to do it.
how do we start this project? how do we compile binaries so we can put them into AUR?

>>62133908
http://lmgtfy.com/?s=d&q=how+do+i+fork+something+with+git%3F

That's a good idea, but wouldn't you need some sort of approval from the GNU project before using their name for this?

>>62133968
Retard, I'm talking about actually running the project. It's not as easy as hitting the fork button on Github.

>>62133974
maybe. not sure. plus why would they oppose it? it's just another GNU project.

>>62134057
http://lmgtfy.com/?s=d&q=how+do+i+manage+a+software+project%3F

>>62133702
>where in the code this list is queried
Can be changed in about:config extensions.blocklist.url

>>62134084
kys. slowly so you suffer more.

>>62134094
yeah, but you'd still be using a cucked anti-freedom software.

>>62134124
http://lmgtfy.com/?s=d&q=how+to+thank+somebody

File: GREENISMYPEPPER.png (4KB, 32x32px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 32x32px

>>62133362
Aw shit nigga I can tell you're going to be successful. You even made the logo already!

>>62134057
>Retard, I'm talking about actually running the project

Why would you do it? Just fork and merge any new additions that don't infringe upon user freedom. You'll most likely fail trying to develop the browser by yourself.

>>62134283
I'm not OP but that sounds fine. For now it'll probably be pretty easy too, you'll just need to make sure you're available whenever a new update comes out to basically merge in the changes and update your fork.

But if palemoon starts infringing even more on freedom (which is the main reason to fork it in the first place), the workload might increase quite a bit. Still, I think it's a noble endeavour and worth doing for now.

>>62134057
As for how to actually do it, yeah you'd basically fork the code, change the blocklist, and then distribute it. That last part is hardest because you need to build it, for a sufficiently varied range of architectures, and find a place to host the binaries + get people to download them. But once that's taken care of you're basically good to go.

GNUtards taking actually succesful projects and calling them their own again? Say it ain't so

>>62133362
>memefork of a firefox esr fork
Why?

>>62134479
it's compromised.
https://forum.palemoon.org/viewtopic.php?f=46&t=16504

>>62134491
Why would anyone use furrymoon in the first place?

>>62134491
>Im blocking this addon because all that it does is flooding
>OMGFASCISM

>>62134548
>flooding
But that's not what it does. Thanks for supporting fascism.

>>62134548
The presedence is that the developer may decide for you what you should install or not or how the software should be used. That's counter-freedom.

>>62134057
>maybe. not sure. plus why would they oppose it? it's just another GNU project.
You have to apply to become a GNU project, you can't just call your project "GNU Faggot" without being a GNU project. And since GNU IceCat already exists, has a community, and is being actively developed, I don't understand why you think they'd accept a new browser project that's functionally identical to GNU IceCat.

Honestly why not spend the effort contributing to GNU IceCat, and the GNUZilla project? Creating your own shitty browser fork is just a waste of energy.

>>62133451
>too many incompatibilities
With what? It's a minor fork of ESR.
>and it's much older
As a project? Yes, and that's a good thing. It's stable. In comparison to Firefox's releases? No, the latest ESR has a GNU IceCat release.
>Plus it's good to have options.
"Options" would be having two different browser implementations. Two projects using the same codebases and similar patches with some additional placebo bullshit is not options, it's a waste of time and energy.

>>62134582
>Spamming any ad with false clicks, no matter how many there are
Flooding, false traffic, either way it is sketchy as fuck
And you can still changeva parameter to reenable that addon

>>62134608
Freedom is a myth

>>62134660
>Flooding, false traffic, either way it is sketchy as fuck
No it isn't. Quit making up shit.

File: 1503039275832.jpg (312KB, 1419x1806px) Image search: [Google]

312KB, 1419x1806px

>>62134660
Man is literally not made for freedom.
Man is literally made for constraints, guiding lines, order, routine, hierarchy.
Like all social mammals.
Freedom is a meme that went out of hand.
People are compelled to do what they're told to do, just look at cultural and social trends.
They wouldn't know what to do with freedom; they would be utterly terrorised by it.

>>62134672
How is not sending false clicks to every single ad you come across not pernicious to the site owners?

>>62135507
>pernicious to the site owners
who gives a shit? these people are profiting from exploitation and tracking of people! now we're the bad guys for fighting back against mass surveillance and psychological weakness exploitation?
go fuck yourself with a rusty rake, retard.

>>62134491
I'm pretty mad that this guy put it this way. He's making it sound like the reason adnauseam is malicious is because it does damage to advertisers. When in reality, it damages everyone who uses it. It's essentially malware. Allow me to explain why adnauseam harms you, the user.

Every request adnauseam sends to Google contains your IP address. This is the way protocol works. The ID of each ad corresponds to a location. Thus using adnauseam allows Google to build a big beautiful profile on your browsing habits. It is considered malware when a developer doesn't disclose behavior that can harm you, the user. Use adnauseam all you want, but be aware of what you are doing. Consider the time tested tactic of blocking scripts asa safe alternative that wont give Google data about you.

>But I use a tracking blocker too!
Using adnauseam, "You" make a request for each fake click to Google. The only way to hide "You" (your IP) would be to use a VPN. This is related to protocol, not javascript. I'm actually giving adnauseam the benefit of the doubt in that it already prevents scripts and additional data to be sent to Google. Thus TrackMeNot is a useless placebo in this case.

The more fake clicks you send to google from your IP, the easier it is for Google to filter out your fake clicks. Again, they are still building a profile about your browsing habits. An actual safe way to run adnauseam, while still being effective, would be to constantly use a VPN while constantly changing you IP address. This will make it harder for Google to identify your traffic as a potential fake click.

>>62135708
>Thus using adnauseam allows Google to build a big beautiful profile on your browsing habits.
You're a moron. It does exactly the opposite by obfuscating your tastes and behavior. Read the fucking paper, shill.

>The more fake clicks you send to google from your IP, the easier it is for Google to filter out your fake clicks.
That will be true when Google manages to predict random events. That will never happen you mentally challenged moron.

>>62135708

it's hilarious how scared Google is!!! they're sending in shills like this idiot to spread FUD on 4chan! after all those articles were published about 4chan waging war on Google's business model, we've been inundated by shills like this telling us that it "doesn't work".

hah! nice try! nice try shill I'm gonna press that START button few more times and send you more fake clicks and waste the money of your advertisers. fuck you.

>>62135769
Using adnauseam, "You" make a request for each fake click to Google. This is not a matter of scripts or browser fingerprinting. Its just how TCP/IP works. You are sending your IP address to Google allowing them to build a profile of you. The only safe way to use adnauseam would be consistently using a VPN and consistently changing your IP address.

>>62135820
Why do you care so much what people do? If it's so easy for Google to predict random events, why are they sending shills like you telling me to stop?
KYS

>>62135851
I care about people who don't know what they're doing being harmed by the network layer. You cannot use adnauseam by itself. You absolutely need to use a VPN and you cannot have a static IP. Otherwise, you are much safer blocking ads.

>>62135851
Can you please go back to /pol/? Adults are talking.

>>62135889
>>62135895
nice try google shill.

If this does get off the ground, make sure the tagline is:

"A GNU moon rises"

File: 1503881860684.png (73KB, 500x365px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 500x365px

>>62135948
>Disregards very good advice that still lets him use his meme ad-on
This is great. We get to watch /pol/ get fucked in the ass in real time.

>>62135989
50 more rupees into your account, google shill.
ps: educate yourself for better shilling: https://github.com/dhowe/AdNauseam/wiki/FAQ

>>62136020
I've read that in its entirety. As stated before this is not a matter of browser obfuscation. It is related to the TCP/IP protocol that everything uses to communicate. Whether its an Ajax request or an XmlHTTPRequest, it still uses the exact same network layer protocol. In order to send a request, you need a return address. That is your IP. Every fake click sends Google your IP, regardless of how many application layer scripts are blocked. You need to use a VPN. And you can't have a static IP. Otherwise Google builds a profile on you giving them value and harming your privacy.

>>62136081
Just send special header in packet for your router to give fake ip on NAT.

Normal: internal ip -> router -> public ip -> google server
Best: internal ip add header -> router -> fake ip -> google server

>>62136179
Change the fake IP for every request and its a lot safer than nothing.

>>62134618
>Honestly why not spend the effort contributing to GNU IceCat, and the GNUZilla project? Creating your own shitty browser fork is just a waste of energy.
GNU Project would be better creating their own browser from scratch and not constantly desorosing a browser which is always changing its goal posts.

File: DHdQlDxUwAA90Fw.jpg (34KB, 640x684px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 640x684px

>>62134660
>Freedom is a myth
Freedom is a feeling and a right.

>>62135820
Building a fake profile, not patterning your actual interests. This hurts the ability to target ads, which lowers the value of advertising in general. This eventually hurts anyone who uses ads as their main source of income via hurting Google's bottom line. This js the goal: To remove the value of advertising so content producers rely less on them. Revenue methods like Patreon, as absolutely cancerous as they are, are way better than the ecosystem of ads and malvertising we have.

>>62133398
I still haven't manage to install icecat on windows 10

>>62136804
>pretends to need Icecat's extra privacy over default Firefox
>uses Windows

>>62136887
I don't mind M$ spying on me, they don't know what to do with the data they collect
I don't mind NSA/CIA/othe shit like that spying on me, I have nothing illegal to hide
But google it's different, they are evil and smart enough to make me concern about muhh privacy

>>62135233
>PaleMoon
shit

>>62136804
wingdings 10 is like a botnet you can't escape
https://www.privacytools.io/#win10

>>62133908
>how do we start this project? how do we compile binaries so we can put them into AUR?
Maybe you should stick to logos