Do you see the agenda here? we are being attacked by shills. this is why there
is suddenly so much (((((((((politics))))))))) here. they do not approve of GNU
icecat. just like ((((((they))))) do not approve of GMO labeling, or laws that
protect the second amendment, or anything that upholds the freedoms of this
crumbling country. why was a hero like edward snowden hunted like an animal?
ask yourself who benefits from the failure of GNU icecat. ask yourself why
system-d was created and forced into ALL linux out of nowhere for no reason,
just as people switched over to run from windows 10, soylent green edition?
--
Securely sent with Tutanota. Claim your encrypted mailbox today!
https://tutanota.com
23. Sep 2016 13:21 by [email protected]:
> "Daniel Quintiliani" <> [email protected]> > writes:
>
>> Why is everyone so opposed to an addon for something that nobody uses?
>> I can't imagine anyone clicking 20 dialog boxes per each loaded banner
>> ad. So opposed to using an addon that they are unwilling to update
>> serious security problems in software?
>>
>> All I know is that all of this politics is aggravating me and I have
>> not used IceCat in months for my own personal safety. I not only have
>> Linux but Windows to worry about so having security is more important
>> than whether something should be farmed out to an already existing
>> addon or included in the browser. IceCat can be a great alternative as
>> it's pro-privacy and anti-DRM. All our arguing has delayed an IceCat
>> release for too long and we will not be taken seriously as a free
>> browser if we keep arguing about cookies until Firefox 60.0 ESR is
>> released.
>
> Except for the part about politics, I fully agree with Daniel. I care
> about cookies as well, but the built-in "ask me every time" option was
> never satisfactory, because it involves asking the user far too many
> questions.
>
> The only satisfactory solution I've found for cookies involve add-ons.
> I've been using "Cookie Monster", which works well enough that I've not
> tried any others. GNU IceCat already depends on add-ons for critically
> important functionality (e.g. avoiding non-free Javascript), so why not
> rely on add-ons for cookies?
>
> Regardless of your opinion on that, asking the IceCat maintainer to make
> additional non-trivial changes to upstream Firefox, when he's obviously
> too over-burdened with his existing workload, is counter-productive.
> Perhaps you do not understand how much work would be involved.
>
> David, have you tried "Cookie Monster", or any other similar add-on?
>
> Mark
>
> --
> http://gnuzilla.gnu.org
--
http://gnuzilla.gnu.org
