Browser Change From Mozilla

Discussion in 'Questions and Suggestions' started by polymoog, Aug 10, 2017.

  1. polymoog

    polymoog Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2017
    Messages:
    705
    Likes Received:
    1,275

  2. grateful servant

    grateful servant Star

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2017
    Messages:
    1,260
    Likes Received:
    2,862
    Haich likes this.
  3. Lurker

    Lurker Veteran

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2017
    Messages:
    868
    Likes Received:
    1,803
    Nope, not a clue. Though I don't think it really matters. NSA and all.
     
    grateful servant likes this.
  4. polymoog

    polymoog Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2017
    Messages:
    705
    Likes Received:
    1,275
    youre probably right, but i refuse to submit to them. at the very least, i want to make it more difficult for them. any resistance is better than flat out submission.
     
    Lurker likes this.

  5. Lurker

    Lurker Veteran

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2017
    Messages:
    868
    Likes Received:
    1,803
    True story.
     
  6. rainerann

    rainerann Star

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2017
    Messages:
    1,160
    Likes Received:
    2,811
    That is a major bummer to hear that. However, I don't know how seriously I take this partnership considering they are an open source movement that doesn't charge for their services or really have any streams of income. They accept donations and have already received donations from people like Google for a while, but this is probably because they provide so much to the development community.

    The MDN is a staple for every web developer and all of their information is free. They charge nothing for anything you would ever want to learn about in regard to web development. So I'm a little skeptical about this because I don't know how Soros can really take control of something that is already so free and transparent to the public. There is just so little that is hidden in the MDN world and because they don't make their own profits, I don't see offending someone like Soros as a good business move on their part.

    I really don't know how I feel about this. I support net neutrality, but MDN doesn't win or lose depending on whether or not we use their browser. They are nonprofit network already existing on private funding. I think I will have to wait and see what their definition of fake news is. There is a lot of crap on the internet. There was that video of the girl who was married to Hugh Hefner that someone had dubbed over with a script saying she was some clone grown in a lab that was clearly fake. Some people might think that is real. I don't know if that is something that should be allowed.

    Technically, the internet is kind of like the wild west. If we look at the history of book publishing or any sort of peer reviewed journal, there is a significant editing process that takes place before information was released to the public. I think it would depend on how inline their methods were with this process that has already existed for several hundred years and did censor material because a lot of it sucked and wasn't worth printing.

    If the parameter includes claiming to be a news organization to deceive people that you have a certain level of credibility and then producing information that is clearly false, I don't know whether I see the harm in controlling something like this.

    If the parameter includes scanning someone's personal blog that is clearly using a WordPress default template so that everyone knows this is just someone's personal ramblings for keywords in order to prevent them from discussing a certain subject, I think that would be wrong.

    But, if the focus of their investigation of "fake news" centers on click bait sites that masquerade as a legitimate news source. I don't know that I really care whether those are removed or not. There is some real crap news on the internet. If they could reduce a lot of tabloid-like news somehow, that would be awesome.

    I think we just have to wait and see if removing fake news means what we think it means. In reality, most of the stuff on the internet would never have been published by any newspaper or book company and that isn't entirely a bad thing.

    Either way the Tor project seems interesting. It is a web browser built on the Mozilla source code, so it might have some familiar features. The main difference I see in different web browsers is the number of applications is reduced with smaller web browsers. I never use applications on my web browser so this doesn't really bother me. https://www.torproject.org/index.html.en

    I found it from a list of best web secure browsers because that is all I really care about when it comes to a web browser. http://www.techworld.com/security/best-8-secure-browsers-3246550/ There were a couple others that looked interesting too, but the Tor project seemed the most independent. I couldn't tell how a lot of them were created, which bothered me. I don't know who made Tor either, but it is unlikely that someone did with the intention of creating profits because they used open source code.

    Just my 2 cents.
     
    mecca likes this.
  7. polymoog

    polymoog Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2017
    Messages:
    705
    Likes Received:
    1,275
    tor can be tracked by the government. i think it was proven in a court of law (i think a p***philia case, BTW), but it was not disclosed how for reasons of national security (the usual BS line).

    the fake news they are referring to is anything that goes against the official government propaganda line. "conspiracy theories" are also to be removed from the searches in the very near future, since they feel that science has given the final word on such debates.


    this is from a different article, but on the censorship of YT.
    http://www.activistpost.com/2017/08...g-guidelines-include-conspiracy-theories.html

    [​IMG]
     
    rainerann likes this.
  8. rainerann

    rainerann Star

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2017
    Messages:
    1,160
    Likes Received:
    2,811
    Even this definition, I actually don't know if I disagree with, and there is a very easy fix for this if people want to present this information to the public. You would just have to explain your conclusions in a way so that the information is presenting a possibility rather than a fact. It really isn't that hard. People would probably do better taking some college level research writing classes than watching a lot of this stuff on YouTube anyway. They would learn a lot about how to present conclusions based on research in a more professional way.

    This actually isn't saying that you can't present information on conspiracy theories on YouTube. You just can't say that the Vatican is part of the New World Order plans as fact. You would just have to say that it is a strong possibility that the Vatican is involved in New World Order plans because... That really isn't hard to do.

    I don't agree with the NSA spying. However, I don't know whether using data on the internet to convict a p***phile is a bad thing either.

    For the most part, data science is really fascinating to me as well when it is done in a transparent way.

    It is interesting that you say Tor is tracked because privacy is what they advertise. However, the internet was original developed to be a method of military communication. There is no way to know what is truly on the back end of anything on the web, but that doesn't mean that Tor is involved in this.

    In general, I support most open source projects because of their transparency. Even closed source companies like Microsoft have had to implement some association with free services because of the popularity of open source code. In a sense, it is very similar to the larger companies trying to take over the organic market because of the competition it created for them. That would be why I would think Soros wants to be involved with Mozilla because they are considered the best web browser of all, and they started as a completely free project, that has gone on to dominate this market.

    Open source projects are competition for major technologies companies and they are built on a foundation that is difficult to corrupt because there are no real profits involved.
     
    mecca likes this.
  9. polymoog

    polymoog Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2017
    Messages:
    705
    Likes Received:
    1,275
    re: the pedos.... for me, the ends never justify the means. there are always other ways to ensnare the pedophiles without violating laws. an infringement of their rights, as vile as they are, is an infringement upon ours.

    i understand what you are saying. but being a strong free speech advocate, i would still want the ability of people to say what they like, including claiming something which is false as fact. the alternative is an internet filled with qualifiers and legalese to get around censors. after all, no one should have to speak in such a manner.
    i am not saying people should not strive to be accurate when writing. lies are free speech, as is hate speech, with libel and slander being another issue. when the government is the judge and jury in determining what is and what is not "fake", expect any logic or evidence proving a conspiracy theory to be totally irrelevant. as a matter of fact, if we look at history, expect those which are proven to be the first to be attacked and eliminated.

    as for Tor, i was stating that it is not the ultimate in anonymity as it claimed to be. i agree with you that it is not being used to push some social agenda. i should have clarified my position as i went a bit off tangent.
    the tor browser was originally created by the military.
     
    rainerann likes this.
  10. rainerann

    rainerann Star

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2017
    Messages:
    1,160
    Likes Received:
    2,811
    I agree with what you are saying, which is another reason I am undecided about the concept of censorship on the internet. I guess what you have to say here, helps me to define my position better on the subject of censorship of the internet.

    I am firmly against government mandated censorship of all forms. The government should have no role in how information is distributed on the internet except in cases where criminal activity can be proven.

    With that said, there are really limited ways to catch pedophiles demonstrated by the discussion we had on the show To Catch a Predator. You are basically depending on victim testimony and this requires children to be involved in these criminal cases, which is difficult to expect of children who are victims of the crimes in questions. If there is a way to track pedophiles on the internet and this provides evidence needed to prosecute pedophiles, I am completely for the use of data for this purpose.

    Clearly, the issue that mainly comes up with the subject of government tracking is whether or not people can be targeted for political reasons. It would be nice to develop protections for things like this that are not presently clearly defined in our legal system and so it does create the possibility for the government to act in a way that compromises regular citizens for political reasons. This should be prevented.

    However, the owner of any website has the right to censor anything they want. Whether we like it or not, if YouTube wants to censor what is posted on their website, there is nothing we can do to stop this in the same way as protestors can't take their megaphones into your grocery store and protest changes made to the employees health insurance plans. We have censorship of free speech when it occurs on private property already. The same should in theory apply to the internet and the owner of the site should have permissions to do whatever they want with whatever product they are allowing the public to use on the internet.

    If we don't like it, we can create a new site that defines a different set of parameters, and as long as this is done independently of government involvement, I can't really say I have an issue with it. I think most of the concern over this issue is whether censorship demonstrates some partnership between sites like YouTube or Mozilla and the government. At the moment, there is no reason to believe this is the case and they have the right to refuse allowing certain things to be posted as an independent website the same way a business can require you to wear a shirt if you want to be served lunch.

    We have to still recognize that the owners of what is posted on the web have rights the same way the people using the web do too as long as this is done without government requiring this.
     
    Karlysymon, mecca and polymoog like this.
  11. polymoog

    polymoog Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2017
    Messages:
    705
    Likes Received:
    1,275

    i hear you. and you would be 100% right if it were not for this:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...aker-sued-refusal-make-gay-marriage-cake.html for me, the bakery had the right to refuse service on what they deemed as inappropriate-- its their company. a customer can vote with his feet and give another bakery the business. however, they lost the suit in the UK on the grounds that religious refusal is unlawful.

    a similar case is pending in the US:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masterpiece_Cakeshop_v._Colorado_Civil_Rights_Commission
    Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission is a pending case before the Supreme Court of the United States that will be heard in its 2017 term. The case centers on whether creative businesses can refuse service due to its First Amendment rights of free speech and free exercise of religion in light of public accommodation laws, in particular, by refusing to participate in same-sex marriage ceremonies on the basis of one's religious beliefs.

    if the bakery in the UK lost, then youtube has no right to decide what they feel is inappropriate, even as a private company. the deciding factor will be the US case, as YT is based in the US, being owned by google.

     
    Karlysymon and rainerann like this.
  12. rainerann

    rainerann Star

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2017
    Messages:
    1,160
    Likes Received:
    2,811
    Yah, I agree that the bakery had the right to refuse to make the cake for the couple. They should have won in that case because there is no reason the couple couldn't have gone to another bakery. There are plenty of other bakeries to choose from. I don't think people realize how they affect the freedom to choose when they bring the legal system into these situations. We start to lose the freedom of choice by forcing other people to do something.

    Most people are so convinced that it is better to make yourself into a victim instead of act like an independent adult who can keep looking for another option. There is a saying that goes "when one door closes another opens" for a reason.

    This way YouTube can have the freedom to implement rules for their content, and that way, you and I can create websites that do allow what we want even if the same content isn't allowed on YouTube all without legal permission or intervention.

    The problem I think with saying that someone like Mozilla can't censor fake news is that it is the same as saying that we can't make our own rules if we were to create a website too. If we hinder their freedom to post content according to the rules of the developers, the same could happen to us.

    If we are able to advocate that businesses and website can make their own rules as an exercise of their right to free speech, we can reduce the probability that government will have to intervene to settle disputes. The less government involvement the better.

    Right now, as much as it might offend people to be told that their content wouldn't be permitted on a Mozilla browser, we still have the freedom to create competition. I don't want to lose that freedom.

    This is why I support the Libertarian party. They support the freedom of speech at the business level and individual level. There is no reason we should ever have to involve government in these things because of freedom of speech if people could understand it in such as way as to use it to their advantage. Some people see the glass as half empty. Some people see the glass as half full. The glass is always filled with the same amount of liquid so everyone is equal except some people see that there are still choices in our present circumstances, and some people feel like there aren't.
     
    polymoog likes this.
  13. polymoog

    polymoog Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2017
    Messages:
    705
    Likes Received:
    1,275
    completely in agreement with you, rainershine. : )
     
    rainerann likes this.
  14. polymoog

    polymoog Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2017
    Messages:
    705
    Likes Received:
    1,275
    ok, i have some answers.

    dump soros and mozilla. get "brave".

     
    rainerann likes this.
  15. polymoog

    polymoog Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2017
    Messages:
    705
    Likes Received:
    1,275

    Dtube has the potential to leave youtube to the SJW crowd. things are looking up!
     
    rainerann likes this.
  16. polymoog

    polymoog Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2017
    Messages:
    705
    Likes Received:
    1,275
    Karlysymon and rainerann like this.
  17. Devin

    Devin Star

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2017
    Messages:
    1,564
    Likes Received:
    2,883
    wow i use mozilla and duck duck go. i love ad block though! can anyone recommend an email that has good privacy? i was using one called unseen but the emails were getting delayed
     
  18. rainerann

    rainerann Star

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2017
    Messages:
    1,160
    Likes Received:
    2,811
    I like Tutanota, but be careful because they are part of a new trend of websites that don't have password retrieval methods for security. Lost one of my emails that way, but I created another one because I really like them. So far so good. https://tutanota.com/
     
    polymoog and Karlysymon like this.
  19. polymoog

    polymoog Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2017
    Messages:
    705
    Likes Received:
    1,275
    seems that gab.ai has now been dumped by google. that means gab.ai is good! i think ill sign up.

    the speech at the end sounds promising.
     
    Devin likes this.
  20. Devin

    Devin Star

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2017
    Messages:
    1,564
    Likes Received:
    2,883
    hey thanks!!
     
    rainerann likes this.

Share This Page