Archived Waterfox, Its Legacy and Looking to the Future (blog.waterfoxproject.org)
submitted ago by TheTrigger
Posted by: TheTrigger
Posting time: 1.9 years ago on
Last edit time: never edited.
Archived on: 4/25/2019 10:00:00 AM
Views: 966
SCP: 45
45 upvotes, 0 downvotes (100% upvoted it)
Archived Waterfox, Its Legacy and Looking to the Future (blog.waterfoxproject.org)
submitted ago by TheTrigger
Sort: Top
[–] GreaseLightning 0 points 3 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago
Their current android version is shit. I had to nab an old apk so i could use it. Destop is flawless though
[–] BB-3 ago
Every time I forget and click play on a twitter video, it makes me want to throw my phone through the wall.
[–] TendiesHitTheFloor 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
Is he a jew?
[–] CaptnObvius 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
How does it compare to Firefox? Same thing without all the SJW bullshit? Should I ditch firefox for it?
[–] 16348233? 0 points 8 points 8 points (+8|-0) ago
Based on an older version with all of the BS pulled out. He keeps up with security updates and fixes things as needed but doesn't put in SJW or tracking shit.
[–] anonym0us55 ago
Will try this
[–] succubustop ago
Brave Browser.
[–] alele-opathic ago
I asked this elsewhere - why use this over e.g. Firefox ESR? The extended support releases don't update, and the most popular one is pre-Quantum (for organizations and institutions who hated Quantum).
There are a thousand Firefox variants, why this one?
[–] Drunkenmoba 0 points 3 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago (edited ago)
[–] alele-opathic ago
You didn't cite any advantages not shared with ESR.
This may be moot though, as it appears they are phasing out 52 ESR in favor of 60, which is the Quantum release. Nevermind.
[–] 16352795? 1 point -1 points 0 points (+0|-1) ago
Which is funny since Waterfox actually does send telemetry back, every time it starts!
[–] 16352842? 2 points -2 points 0 points (+0|-2) ago
Waterfox lures uninformed users with their privacy theater.
[–] TheTrigger [S] 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago (edited ago)
Huh. With this, and your other comment (of which I visited the non-archived version, btw, just to make sure you aren't fucking with me), I have to say that you bring up some valid points. However, your article's critique is with lengthy, intentionally cryptic, misleading privacy advocacy/advertisement.
It's complaining about Facebook's 6,000+ words.
Do you know how many Waterfox's has? 784. (for reference: this comment has 540)
And it covers a lot of material.
Basically, what I'm saying is: it isn't written in alien-jew-lawyer-speak. Could they be more honest about what they do? Actually: not really. It's right there, in plain English. And, I mean, I'd like to think I'm not an idiot, but some of these provisions seem like a no-brainer:
Duh. How will it make sure you don't get the Ubuntu .deb, Chinese version older than yours, without revealing a little information? That seems obvious to me. Like, just by the very act of using such a feature, should one realize that said pertinent information will be sent.
Okay, that's kind of fucky, and I don't like how I have to opt-out of it.
Understand it, don't like it. However: am glad that I am given the option to turn off.
This is duh. Why wouldn't it? This is asinine to argue against. The website is telling you that this company gave it a certificate, authorizing its use: why shouldn't the browser verify that? It's lunacy to think this is a wrong thing to do.
They've always been upfront about that. Their whole deal with Ecosia, etc. Nothing new here.
Dude, from reading that: nothing particularly stands out. I want you, specifically to tell me what you think is wrong about any of that. We just went through it point-by-point. So... enlighten me.