Firefox, relic without a future

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
26 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox, relic without a future

The Real Bev
On 09/14/2017 07:36 AM, Wolf K wrote:

> On 2017-09-12 16:35, The Real Bev wrote:
>> On 09/12/2017 08:47 AM, Wolf K. wrote:
> [...]
>>> IMO, FB would do better to offer a paid subscription service sans ads,
>>> and with fine-grained control over posts/viewers. Sort Of like a private
>>> mail service. I'd happily pay $10 a month for that.
>>
>> I wouldn't.  AdblockPlus is free and works well.
>
> I would because FB's algorithms for displaying posts are defective. Like
> Google's, they over-value current read history.
>
>> FB is nowhere near as good as usenet.
>
> For interest groups. yes, except that every now and then a Usenet group
> is messed up by trolls or by flooders.
>
>> Perhaps I'd feel differently if I
>> didn't have to jump through hoops to view FB videos with firefox (Chrome
>> has no problems) and
>
> ??? No problems with FF on Win8.1 Pro/64.

Probably a slackware thing.  Lots of stuff just doesn't work right.  I
have to open the video in a new tab, and click on the triangle twice --
and the spacing is important, sort of like a Venus flytrap.  Then I wait
for it to open in the 'theater' (or whatever) mode and play.  Maybe 30
seconds after the first click before it starts.  Same thing in 'safe' mode.

>>if I could see ALL the posts I've chosen to see on
>> a timely (or "at all") basis.
>
> That's precisely what I would pay for. All control at my end. You can't
> control any ad-supported service. Blocking ads isn't the same as control.
>
> If FB won't provide that service, maybe somebody else is smart enough to
> do so.

Usenet :-(


--
Cheers, Bev
   "As a mortician I always tie the shoelaces of the dead together.
    If there actually is a zombie apocalypse it will be hilarious."


_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox, relic without a future

Wolf K.
In reply to this post by PietB-2
On 2017-09-13 13:53, PietB wrote:

> Wolf K. wrote:
>> I note that my younger FB friends are posting less on FB, but don't have
>> any stats t5o confirm a trend.
>> IMO, FB would do better to offer a paid subscription service sans ads,
>> and with fine-grained control over posts/viewers. Sort Of like a private
>> mail service. I'd happily pay $10 a month for that.
>
> I'd never spend even a single dime on a privacy nightmare like FB.
>
> -p

Neither would I.


--
Wolf K
kirkwood40.blogspot.com
"Wanted. Schrödinger’s Cat. Dead and Alive."
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox, relic without a future

Wolf K.
In reply to this post by The Real Bev
On 2017-09-14 11:16, The Real Bev wrote:

> On 09/14/2017 07:36 AM, Wolf K wrote:
>> On 2017-09-12 16:35, The Real Bev wrote:
>>> On 09/12/2017 08:47 AM, Wolf K. wrote:
>> [...]
>>>> IMO, FB would do better to offer a paid subscription service sans ads,
>>>> and with fine-grained control over posts/viewers. Sort Of like a
>>>> private
>>>> mail service. I'd happily pay $10 a month for that.
>>>
>>> I wouldn't.  AdblockPlus is free and works well.
>>
>> I would because FB's algorithms for displaying posts are defective. Like
>> Google's, they over-value current read history.
>>
>>> FB is nowhere near as good as usenet.
>>
>> For interest groups. yes, except that every now and then a Usenet group
>> is messed up by trolls or by flooders.
>>
>>> Perhaps I'd feel differently if I
>>> didn't have to jump through hoops to view FB videos with firefox (Chrome
>>> has no problems) and
>>
>> ??? No problems with FF on Win8.1 Pro/64.
>
> Probably a slackware thing.  Lots of stuff just doesn't work right.  I
> have to open the video in a new tab, and click on the triangle twice --
> and the spacing is important, sort of like a Venus flytrap.  Then I wait
> for it to open in the 'theater' (or whatever) mode and play.  Maybe 30
> seconds after the first click before it starts.  Same thing in 'safe' mode.
>
>>> if I could see ALL the posts I've chosen to see on
>>> a timely (or "at all") basis.
>>
>> That's precisely what I would pay for. All control at my end. You can't
>> control any ad-supported service. Blocking ads isn't the same as control.
>>
>> If FB won't provide that service, maybe somebody else is smart enough to
>> do so.
>
> Usenet :-(

Usenet is public broadcast.

The advantage of FB is that you can post for the public, or for friends,
or for some group. Like having an automated email/listmail service. I'd
like even more fine-grained control, and no ads.

--
Wolf K
kirkwood40.blogspot.com
"Wanted. Schrödinger’s Cat. Dead and Alive."
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox, relic without a future

Endegee
On 14-Sep-2017 14:21, Wolf K wrote:

> On 2017-09-14 11:16, The Real Bev wrote:
>> On 09/14/2017 07:36 AM, Wolf K wrote:
>>> On 2017-09-12 16:35, The Real Bev wrote:
>>>> On 09/12/2017 08:47 AM, Wolf K. wrote:
>>> [...]
>>>>> IMO, FB would do better to offer a paid subscription service sans ads,
>>>>> and with fine-grained control over posts/viewers. Sort Of like a
>>>>> private
>>>>> mail service. I'd happily pay $10 a month for that.
>>>>
>>>> I wouldn't.  AdblockPlus is free and works well.
>>>
>>> I would because FB's algorithms for displaying posts are defective. Like
>>> Google's, they over-value current read history.
>>>
>>>> FB is nowhere near as good as usenet.
>>>
>>> For interest groups. yes, except that every now and then a Usenet group
>>> is messed up by trolls or by flooders.
>>>
>>>> Perhaps I'd feel differently if I
>>>> didn't have to jump through hoops to view FB videos with firefox
>>>> (Chrome
>>>> has no problems) and
>>>
>>> ??? No problems with FF on Win8.1 Pro/64.
>>
>> Probably a slackware thing.  Lots of stuff just doesn't work right.  
>> I have to open the video in a new tab, and click on the triangle twice
>> -- and the spacing is important, sort of like a Venus flytrap.  Then
>> I wait for it to open in the 'theater' (or whatever) mode and play.  
>> Maybe 30 seconds after the first click before it starts.  Same thing
>> in 'safe' mode.
>>
>>>> if I could see ALL the posts I've chosen to see on
>>>> a timely (or "at all") basis.
>>>
>>> That's precisely what I would pay for. All control at my end. You can't
>>> control any ad-supported service. Blocking ads isn't the same as
>>> control.
>>>
>>> If FB won't provide that service, maybe somebody else is smart enough to
>>> do so.
>>
>> Usenet :-(
>
> Usenet is public broadcast.
>
> The advantage of FB is that you can post for the public, or for friends,
> or for some group. Like having an automated email/listmail service. I'd
> like even more fine-grained control, and no ads.
>

You can fine tune FB even more with F.B. Purity add-on.
Will also work with Firefox 57 and up.
http://www.fbpurity.com/
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox, relic without a future

The Real Bev
In reply to this post by Wolf K.
On 09/14/2017 11:21 AM, Wolf K wrote:

> On 2017-09-14 11:16, The Real Bev wrote:
>> On 09/14/2017 07:36 AM, Wolf K wrote:
>>> On 2017-09-12 16:35, The Real Bev wrote:
>>>> On 09/12/2017 08:47 AM, Wolf K. wrote:
>>> [...]
>>>>> IMO, FB would do better to offer a paid subscription service sans ads,
>>>>> and with fine-grained control over posts/viewers. Sort Of like a
>>>>> private
>>>>> mail service. I'd happily pay $10 a month for that.
>>>>
>>>> I wouldn't.  AdblockPlus is free and works well.
>>>
>>> I would because FB's algorithms for displaying posts are defective. Like
>>> Google's, they over-value current read history.
>>>
>>>> FB is nowhere near as good as usenet.
>>>
>>> For interest groups. yes, except that every now and then a Usenet group
>>> is messed up by trolls or by flooders.
>>>
>>>> Perhaps I'd feel differently if I
>>>> didn't have to jump through hoops to view FB videos with firefox (Chrome
>>>> has no problems) and
>>>
>>> ??? No problems with FF on Win8.1 Pro/64.
>>
>> Probably a slackware thing.  Lots of stuff just doesn't work right.  I
>> have to open the video in a new tab, and click on the triangle twice --
>> and the spacing is important, sort of like a Venus flytrap.  Then I wait
>> for it to open in the 'theater' (or whatever) mode and play.  Maybe 30
>> seconds after the first click before it starts.  Same thing in 'safe' mode.
>>
>>>> if I could see ALL the posts I've chosen to see on
>>>> a timely (or "at all") basis.
>>>
>>> That's precisely what I would pay for. All control at my end. You can't
>>> control any ad-supported service. Blocking ads isn't the same as control.
>>>
>>> If FB won't provide that service, maybe somebody else is smart enough to
>>> do so.
>>
>> Usenet :-(
>
> Usenet is public broadcast.
>
> The advantage of FB is that you can post for the public, or for friends,
> or for some group. Like having an automated email/listmail service. I'd
> like even more fine-grained control, and no ads.

You can devise various groupings of friends, which might seem to make
things easier, but not necessarily -- I have family, skiing, mozilla,
motorcycle, and close friends (which is everybody).  AdblockPlus and
Social Fixer give more control.

But I like the public aspect of usenet.  Strangers wander in and become
valued parts of the group, and that doesn't happen on facebook.  I'm not
certain how the ungrouped facebook feed works, but I don't see a lot of
stuff that friends and friends of friends don't post.  Insularity.
There are interest groups, but not many people write long and thoughtful
messages, and I miss that.

OTOH, if all you want to do is say :-), that's pretty damn easy.


--
Cheers, Bev
   "If you expect to score points by whining, join a European soccer team."
                                                   --Demotivators poster
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Firefox, relic without a future

Wolf K.
On 2017-09-15 13:19, The Real Bev wrote:
[...]
> But I like the public aspect of usenet.  Strangers wander in and become
> valued parts of the group, and that doesn't happen on facebook.  I'm not
> certain how the ungrouped facebook feed works, but I don't see a lot of
> stuff that friends and friends of friends don't post.  Insularity. There
> are interest groups, but not many people write long and thoughtful
> messages, and I miss that.
[...]

Well said.

--
Wolf K
kirkwood40.blogspot.com
"Wanted. Schrödinger’s Cat. Dead and Alive."
_______________________________________________
general mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/general
12