dessant

58 ms·

1. 541.▲
   by dessant 7y ago

   I've just discovered Coinbase Commerce [1], it's an awesome way to quickly start accepting cryptocurrencies, they offer hosted payment pages, payment buttons, webhooks, everything you want. It took me a couple of minutes to sign u
2. 542.▲
   by dessant 7y ago

   This reads like one of those articles where they list established services and casually include an unknown one. It's best to disclose your affiliation.
3. 543.▲
   by dessant 7y ago

   Can users install apps on their iPhones, unless they were approved by Apple? That's the future of software freedom and user liberties on macOS.
4. 544.▲
   by dessant 7y ago

   The complete loss of control over your own devices is being gradually normalized.
5. 545.▲
   by dessant 7y ago

   This was heartbreaking to read. I don't understand how anyone can defend not being able to run software on their own devices, unless it was approved by Apple.
6. 546.▲
   by dessant 7y ago

   Of course, I'm mainly pointing out that if Mozilla retorts to use compatibility as a reason for deprecating parts of the webRequest API, they'll most likely be dishonest.
7. 547.▲
   by dessant 7y ago

   Vanilla ad blocking will continue to work because companies that participate in Acceptable Ads [1] will be happy to implement restricted ad blocking, such as Eyeo with Adblock Plus, while advanced and effective ad blocking that is not funde
8. 548.▲
   by dessant 7y ago

   Mozilla is free to implement Manifest v3, while preserving the webRequest API in its current state. Maintaining the blocking abilities of the webRequest API would not introduce any incompatibilities with Chrome extensions, because they simp
9. 549.▲
   by dessant 7y ago

   That's the correct link, and it is deflection. When developers tell you that the extension review process is so unfair that it feels like bullying [1], and ask you what changes do you plan to introduce to prevent this, the least you ca
10. 550.▲
    by dessant 7y ago

    And once asked a clear question, the developer advocate deflects and stops answering: https://github.com/uBlockOrigin/uBlock-issues/issues/745#iss...
11. 551.▲
    by dessant 7y ago

    I completely understand, retaliation is a real possibility in such cases. This is why it's important to find a safe way to organize, and for a considerable number of employees to protest.
12. 552.▲
    by dessant 7y ago

    The general direction of GitLab can also be steered by employees. They could organize, publish a statement, and refuse to check in for work on Monday. It all depends on how many GitLab employees believe strongly enough in these values, and
13. 553.▲
    by dessant 7y ago

    I was expecting Paul Machle (CFO) to resign, at least they seem to be completely divorced from the values that GitLab was built upon. > I don’t understand. This should not be an opt in or an opt out. [Telemetry] is a condition of using
14. 554.▲
    by dessant 7y ago

    There is no public service yet for submitting extensions: https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/t5/Discussions/How-do-yo...
15. 555.▲
    by dessant 7y ago

    Google has shipped Manifest v3 in Chrome Canary, which severily limits how extensions are allowed to block and modify requests. What is Microsoft's plan regarding Manifest v3 in Edge Chromium, are they going to deprecate the blocking c
16. 556.▲
    by dessant 7y ago

    Personal sacrifice is often required for things to change. Any developer who publicly speaks up about these issues may be hurting their employment prospects, not just Google employees.
17. 557.▲
    by dessant 7y ago

    They could do something better than resigning: voice their concerns both internally and in public. I have yet to see a HN comment posted by a current Google employee that has criticized Google's data harvesting practices or monopolisti
18. 558.▲
    by dessant 7y ago

    > I don't really buy using legislation. Alternatives exist and people don't seem to care to use them. Google is engaged in using its market dominance in one segment to gain or maintain dominance in others, while suppressing the
19. 559.▲
    by dessant 7y ago

    > Yes: minimize or stop using them... The web has very little lock-in There are people who could not register to vote in time because reCAPTCHA has blocked them.
20. 560.▲
    by dessant 7y ago

    Do we have any recourse against this monopoly, other than voicing our concerns repeatedly while they ignore us? Can we launch a class action lawsuit against Google if they harm people by limiting consumer choice, and force us to be tracked
21. 561.▲
    by dessant 7y ago

    That's a corrugated steel panel.
22. 562.▲
    by dessant 7y ago

    > Add-on install will not be locked to addons.mozilla.org. You can continue to use automatic signing and distribute through whatever channels you like Extensions which require signing by uploading to addons.mozilla.org are controlled by
23. 563.▲
    by dessant 7y ago

    Please do not label local extensions as inherently unsafe, it's extremely disingenuous to label software that has not been rubber-stamped by Mozilla as unsafe. You keep bringing up CORS, but that is a security directive that can be dis
24. 564.▲
    by dessant 7y ago

    I think Debian already compiles Firefox with a flag to allow unsigned extensions, but this may require further changes.
25. 565.▲
    by dessant 7y ago

    I agree that having a discussion on the actual threat model Mozilla is working with is the best way to approach this issue. Mozilla is trying to defend against malware or adware with root access on the device. Malware with root access can d
26. 566.▲
    by dessant 7y ago

    Users should be treated with respect and given control over their own devices, while platforms should do their best to implement safe defaults, and educate users about the potential risks of certain actions. CORS is a security directive set
27. 567.▲
    by dessant 7y ago

    Chrome's example clearly shows that having secure default options, while also giving users more control and educating them about possible drawbacks, is a viable alternative to restricting user freedoms and keeping users ignorant. The e
28. 568.▲
    by dessant 7y ago

    > I got concerned for a moment that this will end up forcing all extensions to be available only from Add On store, (similar to Chrome). Thankfully it’s not that. Mozilla is working on achieving exactly that, and in fact Firefox is alrea
29. 569.▲
    by dessant 7y ago

    Mozilla intends to remove all methods for installing private extensions in the release version of Firefox. The extension source code must be disclosed to Mozilla during signing, and it must adhere to their add-on policies [1]. Mozilla is bl
30. 570.▲
    by dessant 7y ago

    Chrome allows installing local extensions from a source folder, and the installation persists across browser sessions. Firefox extensions installed from a local source folder in about:debugging are removed at the end of the browser session.