* Posts by VinnyG

2 posts • joined 30 Nov 2011

Chrome passes Firefox in global browser share


Wow. I guess we can now look forward to full version releases of Firefox on a weekly, if not daily basis. Mozilla better switch to the exponential version numbering system they have been holding back on right now... </sarcasm>

@gordon "Now if only somebody wrote a good, properly functioning NoScript for Chrome..."

See, there's the rub. My Mozilla browser (switched from FF to SeaMonkey when the FF team started the idiotic version churn) is (relatively) securely locked down not because the Mozilla browsers are intrisically secure, but because of the availability of add-ins like AdBlock Plus, NoScript, Better Privacy, Request Policy, Httpseverywhere, etc., and because I have taken the time to research the about:config parameters and learn how to utilize them. It will take a lot more than changing browser use statistics and slimmer memory footprint (_how_ much does RAM cost per GB these days?) to get me to switch to a browser that does not allow this customization (and, moreover, is developed by a company that, like Facebook, has as its business model marketing information harvested from its users that, given the explicit option, those users would arguably not voluntarily divulge to an unknown third party). Do I wish that Mozilla would modernize the core browser code while retaining the ability to lock it down? Sure, as long as they remain sufficiently open that the code can be audited to confirm that they haven't deliberately introduced their own "harvesting" mechanisms. But for now, I'll stick with the devil I know for everyday browsing. If I want real privacy, I'll fire up Tails.



Zuckerberg submits privacy mea culpa after FTC ruling


What a crock...

This is a wimpy wrist-slap from the FTC. Pray tell, why does Facebook get 30 days to remove information that is the property of former users? I suspect that there has already been a FB corporate department created (since the ruling) charged specifically with aggressively and maximally monetizing the information of departed users during that 30-day "grace" (graceless?) period. The deadline should have been no longer than 48 hours, and that makes generous allowance for server-to-server replication issues. I don't primarily blame the FTC. I don't _really_ blame Facebook or Fark Fuckerburg. I blame the "dumb fucks" (he really was dead-on accurate with that analysis) who use a service that operates under the sole business model of selling users' personal information to parties to whom the user would not voluntarily divulge that information, and expect anything other than the violation and abuse that has been (and will continue to be) forthcoming from that service. Of course, many "free" services from Google and other providers share that business model, but unlike Facebook, most of those services must operate in a more-or-less open ecosystem, which provides opportunities for those of above-room-termperature IQs and modest technical means to circumvent the harvesting of PPI.