On Thu, 16 Jul 2015 16:01:42 -0700, Natu wrote:
>Tor browser
Tor browser not necessarily is slow, but it is missing comfort such as
a history.
I need around 1½ hours to compile a kernel with a default Arch
configuration and around 3½ hours to compile Firefox.
In Western civilisations we seldom n
On 07/17/2015 01:01 AM, Natu wrote:
> On 07/16/2015 02:55 PM, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
>> On Thu, 16 Jul 2015 13:43:25 -0700, Natu wrote:
>>> And yes, you have to turn off features in firefox to avoid
>>> similar spying behavior, but it can be done without maintaining your
>>> own version of the source
On 07/16/2015 05:50 PM, Daniel Micay wrote:
>> I don't know that I even trust openssl anymore. I used to run chromium,
>> but got tired of it passing so much information back to google, so I
>> went back to firefox. What I run is not an ideal solution. I'm open to
>> other suggestions. I used t
I don't know how exactly this thread morphed into a debate about
Chrome/Chromium vs. Firefox, or Google vs. Mozilla (Although I think Daniel
Micay makes some interesting points re Google vs. Mozilla.), but for now,
flashplugin-11.2.202.491-1 has finally been released. And while that's
great for lin
> I don't know that I even trust openssl anymore. I used to run chromium,
> but got tired of it passing so much information back to google, so I
> went back to firefox. What I run is not an ideal solution. I'm open to
> other suggestions. I used to love chrome, but got tired of google
> spying.
On 07/16/2015 02:55 PM, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Jul 2015 13:43:25 -0700, Natu wrote:
>> And yes, you have to turn off features in firefox to avoid
>> similar spying behavior, but it can be done without maintaining your
>> own version of the source code.
> But we need to monitor Firefox. A
On Thu, 16 Jul 2015 13:43:25 -0700, Natu wrote:
>And yes, you have to turn off features in firefox to avoid
>similar spying behavior, but it can be done without maintaining your
>own version of the source code.
But we need to monitor Firefox. A minute ago I deleted 7 Yahoo entries
in about:config.
On Thu, 16 Jul 2015 13:10:47 -0500, Francis Gerund wrote:
>shows in the URL diplay area as: "about:preferences#applications"
Ok, my guess was that you were talking about those preferences. My
Firefox doesn't have an entry "Flash video".
On 07/16/2015 01:06 PM, Daniel Micay wrote:
> On 16/07/15 03:48 PM, Natu wrote:
>> On 07/16/2015 05:10 AM, Ben Oliver wrote:
>>> I have to agree with Ralf, you will be fine.
>>>
>>> I have been flash-free for 18 months now and it's going absolutely fine.
>>> Unless you have a penchant for flash gam
On 16/07/15 03:48 PM, Natu wrote:
> On 07/16/2015 05:10 AM, Ben Oliver wrote:
>> I have to agree with Ralf, you will be fine.
>>
>> I have been flash-free for 18 months now and it's going absolutely fine.
>> Unless you have a penchant for flash games, there's very little reason to
>> have it instal
On 07/16/2015 05:10 AM, Ben Oliver wrote:
> I have to agree with Ralf, you will be fine.
>
> I have been flash-free for 18 months now and it's going absolutely fine.
> Unless you have a penchant for flash games, there's very little reason to
> have it installed any more.
I totally support phasing
Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> Where exactly is this entry?
In the Firefox menu bar, click the "Open menu" icon (3 stacked horizontal
lines)
Then click the "Preferences" icon.
Then click "Applications" in the menu at the far left.
[Note: shows in the URL diplay area as: "about:preferences#applications
On Thu, 16 Jul 2015 12:01:09 -0500, Francis Gerund wrote:
>Just noticed in Firefox 39.0-1 preferences an entry "Flash video".
Where exactly is this entry?
I heard that H.264 from Cisco phones home, resp. auto-updates, so you
might want to edit about:config to use gstreamer H.264. Perhaps this
aut
Just noticed in Firefox 39.0-1 preferences an entry "Flash video". In the
drop down menu next to it, "Use mplayerplug-in is now gecko-mediaplayer
1.0.9 (in Firefox)" is selected.
Gecko-mediaplayer 1.0.9-1, Build Date: Tue 27 May 2014 is installed.
I could uninstall gecko-mediaplayer, but quite a
On Thu, 16 Jul 2015 12:20:48 -0400, Daniel Micay wrote:
>On 16/07/15 12:06 PM, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
>> http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/jul/14/facebook-end-adobe-flash-firefox-blocks-hacking
>
>Mozilla blocked the vulnerable version, as they've done in the past.
>The current release isn't
On 16/07/15 12:06 PM, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Jul 2015 13:10:33 +0100, Ben Oliver wrote:
>> I have to agree with Ralf, you will be fine.
>>
>> I have been flash-free for 18 months now and it's going absolutely
>> fine. Unless you have a penchant for flash games, there's very little
>> reas
On 07/16/2015 01:37 AM, Sebastian Pipping wrote:
> On 16.07.2015 01:22, D C wrote:
>> I've actually posted a thread on the forums about this. For youtube you can
>> just use HTML5.
>
> To my best knowledge, it depends on the video / the compression
> algorithm used. For some videos on YouTube HTM
On Thu, 16 Jul 2015 13:10:33 +0100, Ben Oliver wrote:
>I have to agree with Ralf, you will be fine.
>
>I have been flash-free for 18 months now and it's going absolutely
>fine. Unless you have a penchant for flash games, there's very little
>reason to have it installed any more.
http://www.theguar
On 16 July 2015 at 13:04, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Jul 2015 19:45:35 -0500, Francis Gerund wrote:
> >Just uninstalled flashplugin (really should never have installed
> >anyway). can always try gnash later, but I'll try without to see how
> >it goes.
>
> Gnash can't replace the proprietary
On Wed, 15 Jul 2015 19:45:35 -0500, Francis Gerund wrote:
>Just uninstalled flashplugin (really should never have installed
>anyway). can always try gnash later, but I'll try without to see how
>it goes.
Gnash can't replace the proprietary crap. I neither have the
proprietary, nor gnash installed.
20 matches
Mail list logo
