Google, Mozilla announce ending support for Adobe Flash

>>61014
related:
http://gadgets.ndtv.com/apps/news/mozilla-to-start-blocking-flash-content-in-firefox-from-august-863474

>Adobe Flash has been running out of favour from major browsers for quite some time now. HTML5 has made the Web plugin look redundant and dated. The latest step taken in the direction of discontinuation is by Mozilla Firefox, which has decided to step away from the plugin by blocking "certain Flash content that is not essential to the user experience" from August and then keeping it off by default starting 2017.

>Mozilla has said in a blog post that although the browser will continue to support legacy flash content after August, starting 2017, it will require "click-to-activate approval" before a website activates Flash plugin for any content.

http://gadgets.ndtv.com/internet/news/google-details-plans-to-start-blocking-flash-in-chrome-this-year-838175

>In a bid to get more developers to adopt HTML5, Google has announced plans to slowly phase out support for Adobe Flash Player in Chrome. The company looks to implement this change by the fourth quarter, after which Flash will come bundled with Chrome but its presence will not be advertised by default.

niiiiice. Sometimes the only way to get people off bad habits is to take away their means of indulging in them.

Good. There's no excuse for Flash in 2016.

Ffs how I'm going to play those shitty flash animation?

>>61023
eventually you are going to have to save them and view them in an external player program.

I'm sure people will write 3rd party browser extensions/addons that will play them still in browsers but it remains to be seen how good those will be.

>>61014
Ff had dropped support for flash in their 64bit version months ago

>>61023
Go to adobe's website and find their stand alone flash player.

>>61023
Wasn't Firefox developing a plugin for that? Shumway or something iirc

Does this mean >>>/f/ is dead?

I have seen the end of days, and years from now men will say...

Here began the fall of >>>/f/

the only sites i see using flash for videos are tons of illegal streaming movie/show sites and tons of porn tubes.

thank god because pornhub is an unoptimized peice of mollases

not to mention its laborious to save flash videos directly to computer.
its like, i already downloaded it, why cant i just have it?

They're not doing it to avoid crashes. Just trying to curb adblocking.

>>61014
They practically already ended support for flash years ago

>>61071
>curb adblocking.

Adblocking will work just as well on html5 targets -- probably even better.

>>61043
>>61045
People have been saying that flash is dead for years, this will change nothing -- /f/ will remain the same.

>>61107
If anything there would be a filter in /f/'s userbase

Problem is: when I watch a flash movie, I can locate a copy of the flv file in some cache folder on the hd. With html5 I cant.

Based Mozilla. I cannot think of a company whom I regard higher.
I should actually donate to them.

>>61274
>flash movie
>flv
Pick one.

>>61306
.flv is for flash video format.

>>61018
>current year meme.
>not used sarcastically.
You actually use those? I mean come on, it's 2016, grow up already!

>>61087Ooh, you naive child.
Check how google ads are displayed, then check how you could actually remove those using DOM.
Doable, but you'd slow down your computer. Mind you, not as much as if you keep google ads playing, especially since they stopped using flash, my older comp can't handle google anymore. Flash advert-ridden websites? not as big of a problem.

>>61391
Used in the context of technological advancement it's perfectly fine considering how tech gets exponentially better each year, this goes from hardware to software.

>>61405
>Updates to software? I mean come on, it's 2016!
>Tech companies rewrite software all the time!
Yeah, no.
Updating where needed, fine. Rewriting is pointless.

thank fucking god

go the fuck away flash

go and stay go

>>61880
Do you have a mental disorder or something?
What would you want over flash? Unity? Terribly written buggy javascript code?
Or do you just not like content

>>61880
Four, six, four, I saw

This is not a good haiku

Go die in a fire

>This list of blocked files would gradually be expanded to those Flash files used by advertisers to see if their ads were being watched, he said.

This sounds like a good thing. I'm not sure how extensive current ad-blockers are in terms of removing these types of elements.

>Tackling these hidden and ad-related files should cut crashes and page "hangs" by up to 10%, he added.

And waste less bandwidth. Not everyone is connected to the Internet via Triple Extreme Deluxe Highspeed T1. There's no sense in sitting around waiting for a shit ton of third-party scripts (all of which are probably used to track your browsing habits) to load before you can access a page's contents.

>>61949
webgl?

>>61966
flash-less google ads eat up more of my bandwith than a flash game ever has, let alone an advert.

>>61978
You just don't like your websites working, do you?

>>62108
That would imply that he knows how to make a website.

>>61949
I'm not him, but I want nothing. Whatever your site is doing in Flash, I don't want to exist. I don't want drag-n-drop file uploading (HTML forms work just fine and don't have the associated security issues). I don't want embedded video (my media player can handle network streams). I don't want 3D websites. I don't want websites that have access to USB devices. When I want to play graphics intensive games, I want to use my computer to play those games, not to manage the supervisor of the thread-pool in which resides the JIT which is compiling javascript to native code, which will then be run in a supervised sandbox and access shims through shims of shims...

I want to be able to access easily indexable content. I want to be able to copy links and have them link to something other than a landing page. I want the content to work even if sent through a screen reader. I want it to work with browsers that we can actually audit for security, as opposed to FF or the webkit-baseds, with their un-auditable multi-gigabyte source code tarballs. I want to never have to question whether a website "works correctly" because they should be so fucking simple that the answer is always "yes", and if your website isn't that simple, then have you considered using a protocol other than HTTP, which was explicitly designed to be fucking stateless?

An animated drop-down menu is not "content". A spinning cube of a website is not "content". "Content" is what I came there to get, and it is always one of 1) plain text, 2) an image, or 2) a link to a more complicated file which I will download and open, at my leisure, with some other application.

/f/ actually does flash "right". The flash files are just resources that are linked to, so I can download them and launch them with gnash in a real sandbox, not subject to oh, let's see, any of the one hundred and ninety-five CVEs from 2016 alone listed at https://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvekey.cgi?keyword=flash

And fuck CAPTCHA.

>>62125
wisdom

>>62118
>>62108
webgl is fine. The world just hasn't caught up yet.

As happy as I am, I am also pretty sad about this. A lot of shit is lost and essentially obsolete because of this, mostly flash games and the like.

I feel like making a huge movement to convert everything to HTML5 in some way so that this shit doesn't end up as the virtual equivalent of a 5 1/4 inch floppy disk and lost in the cyber ether

>>62185
Flash will still exist like COBOL and BASIC and Apple LOGO still exist even today, but it will be relegated to the files of historians and hobbyists.

As clunky as it seems, click-to-activate for flash has worked extremely well for me. No shitty ads abruptly playing loud-ass videos whenever I'm browsing some low-tier site, it's nice.

>>61949
Flash games are dead. Deal with it.

>>62353
Yeah right, I've seen flash games made just last year. There's also plenty of recent animations made in flash.

>>61014
fucking retards.

throw away 15 years of awesome games and awesome animations. abandon the only format supporting vector graphics, audio, video images and endless coding possibilities in one self-contained file. go ahead.

fuck.

>>63254
>only format supporting...
uuuuuuhhhhh

>>63254
>throw away 15 years of awesome games and awesome animations.

They aren't going away. Just use a standalone flash player.

>>61014
Why do they decide to flat out remove things rather than making them a toggle on/off option?

Keep it off by default and let people reenable it if they want

>>63327

Exactly. What is the point in removing it anyways?

>>61014

Flash isn't banned, article titles are misleading. Support however is being phased out, which is very stupid on the part of the developers.

Flash is good for many things, and HTML5 is better for others, there's no reason to call previous file formats obsolete because something new has come out. Especially because now many users will be without a way to play flash games and animations on older websites which haven't been updated.

>>63254
they aren't abandoning shit u stupid kike, u can still enable it but its disabled now by default. the 64bit version had 'update' quite a number of months ago

>>63329
1. Removes the need for all the Flash-specific crash-proofing and security that they needed for native support.

2. Sometimes the best way to stop a monopolistic proprietary standard like Flash is to have the suppliers' oligarchy collude to not support it. It's perverted capitalism, but it's probably better than the alternative of government (which for these companies would have to be international) interference.