this post was submitted on 02 Oct 2024
338 points (92.7% liked)

Linux

47527 readers
1540 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] boredsquirrel@slrpnk.net 4 points 1 hour ago

I dont get why you would run that on Firefox. Users will find the corrent one, all good.

Btw is the uBlock without Origin addon still there?

[–] data1701d@startrek.website 25 points 6 hours ago

I almost had a panic attack until I realized this was for UBlock Origin Lite rather than the normal, manifest v2 version. Still mad at Mozilla,though.

[–] UnfortunateShort@lemmy.world 22 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago)

This is more likely someone fucking up and not having a second pair of eyes look at the presumed problem than anything else.

[–] kbal@fedia.io 94 points 10 hours ago (3 children)

The discourse about Mozilla is ridiculous, here and most everywhere. You've got people taking every perceived opportunity to attack them for things they do, things they didn't do, and things it's imagined they might've done. And then another crowd of equally determined people doggedly defending them for every idiotic blunder they make, such as this one.

Meanwhile Mozilla itself has nothing substantial to say. This is not the first time a prominent extension has mysteriously gone missing from amo with Mozilla telling us nothing about its role in the incident. @mozilla@mozilla.social needs to be in the discussion giving us a real explanation of what happened, why they got it wrong, and what they're doing to improve things.

[–] jol@discuss.tchncs.de 13 points 6 hours ago

We have collectively agreed that Mozilla is a) not reviewing extentions enough, and b) reviewing too much.

[–] isVeryLoud@lemmy.ca 32 points 9 hours ago (2 children)

Correct, this two-sided discourse is due to a massive lack of communication on Mozilla's part, leaving room for speculation.

[–] blurg@lemmy.world 1 points 37 minutes ago

True in a way. However, there is a rather large collection of speculation on the Internet that is quite an undertaking to correct. And a large population of people and bots willing to speculate. Also, having once been speculated, each speculation takes on a life of its own. If it gets much more substantial, forget Skynet, we're busy creating Specunet and its sidekick Confusionet -- an insidious duo.

[–] abbenm@lemmy.ml 7 points 7 hours ago

The best I can think of is that the explainer language used to justify the extension's removal was just boilerplate language that got copy+pasted here because someone clicked the wrong button. But even that makes a mockery of the review process.

I think "oops clicked wrong button" would be slightly more defensible, but not by much. If they truly rejected the extension for content in it that it does not have, it's hard to see how a human could make that mistake even accidentally. But maybe there's something I'm missing.

[–] featured@lemmygrad.ml 15 points 8 hours ago

Mozilla.social no longer exists, Mozilla took it down

[–] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 23 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago) (1 children)

There's a dozen Firefox extensions that really matter, at any given time. Mozilla has never appeared to give a particular shit about any of them. Paying special attention based on popularity wouldn't be ideal, but for fuck's sake, their passive-aggressive treatment keeps burning out the developers who fuel their ecosystem, and it would take vanishingly little effort to shield their keystone plugins.

If their active neglect had ruined both uBlock and DownThemAll - I'm not sure I'd be using Firefox anymore, and I've been using Firefox since before it was called Firefox. Why the fuck would anyone normal even consider it?

[–] BigDanishGuy@sh.itjust.works 6 points 7 hours ago (3 children)

DownThemAll is one of those extensions which get installed immediately for me. If I didn't have DownThemAll and uBlock origin, I'd might as well just use edge smh

[–] delirious_owl@discuss.online 1 points 4 hours ago (1 children)
[–] BigDanishGuy@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 hour ago

No, I'm married, I don't do offline pron

[–] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 5 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago)

And the author spent a year hassling Mozilla about how killing XUL plugins would make his wildly popular plugin nearly impossible. Did they move one iota to help that? Nope. Did they adopt DTA functionality natively, like they'd absorbed Pocket? Did they fuck. Their mantra for two straight decades has been "just rewrite!" and they cannot imagine why they kept hemorrhaging devs and plugins and users once Chrome slimed its way into everyone's options.

[–] logging_strict@lemmy.ml 2 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago)

my votes are for nusensor, popupblocker, dark reader, nuke anything

[–] slazer2au@lemmy.world 78 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

Oh so ublock origin lite. A manifest V3 compatible adblocker for chromium browsers.
The original ublock origin is unaffected

[–] abbenm@lemmy.ml 8 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

Firefox will be adopting Manifest V3, but a modded version that enables ad blocking.

[–] turkalino@lemmy.yachts 1 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

But they’re also not ditching v2, correct?

[–] abbenm@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 hour ago

I'm honestly not sure.

[–] Xiisadaddy@lemmygrad.ml 48 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago) (1 children)

That poor dev is just getting so much shit thrown their way constantly having a short temper about it makes sense. They are fighting against an entire industry to make the internet usable for people. I hope everyone who has the means to donates to support the ~~developer~~

Edit: donate to block list maintainers thanks to lemmyvore below for the correction

[–] lemmyvore@feddit.nl 35 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

The dev has not made available any means to donate to him directly. He asks that people donate to the maintainers of the block lists instead.

[–] Xiisadaddy@lemmygrad.ml 7 points 10 hours ago

thank you i updated my comment

[–] jol@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago)

Gorhill is free to do whatever he wants, of course, I thank him for all the good work. But his reaction is honestly childish and dangerous for the community. Once again his decision to pull the plug opens the door to abusers. Now when you go to the addons page and search for uBlock, you may find illegitimate extensions pretending to be uBlock which are trying to collect your data or worse. Less tech say people don't know any better.

[–] vintageballs@feddit.org 64 points 16 hours ago (9 children)

Probably due to automatic extension reviews by Mozilla.

Sad that it happened, but at least it doesn't impact the actual uBlock, only the lite version for which I honestly see no purpose in Firefox anyways.

[–] Virkkunen@fedia.io 73 points 15 hours ago (3 children)

It was a manual review conducted by an actual person that in the end admitted they were wrong

[–] limitedduck@awful.systems 3 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

Where does it say it was a manual review?

[–] NotSteve_@lemmy.ca 1 points 7 hours ago

In the original post on GitHub it's mentioned that it was a manual review

[–] abbenm@lemmy.ml 1 points 7 hours ago

It was a manual review conducted by an actual person that in the end admitted they were wrong

Good to know! I wasn't sure if it was automated or not. That's rough.

[–] vintageballs@feddit.org 24 points 14 hours ago (6 children)
[–] Buddahriffic@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago

Agreed. Especially considering uBlock origin is pretty much the main reason to use FF at all. They shouldn't be delegating reviews of it to someone who would fuck up this badly.

Assuming this wasn't a "test the waters" kind of thing to determine just how much they were reliant on ublock.

I've been using the main FF build for a while now but I'm wondering if I should start looking at the various fork options.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›