Yeah, about:config is one of the best things about Firefox. It allows a standard user not to stumble into settings that would lead to frustration or needing help. But it also lets power users use Firefox the way they want to. I’m always annoyed when a setting is removed from there.
The latest Firefox 127 appeared on June 11 with a modest list of changes – automatically reloading the browser when the OS reboots, closing duplicate tabs, and requiring more authentication to access stored passwords.
A change Mozilla didn't mention in the release notes has users complaining online, though.
Users complained on Mozilla's forums and on Reddit at the time, but it was at least possible to recombine the icons with the option in about:config – but no longer.
As you might imagine, people are not happy, although according to the official response in this complaint, it looks like the change will be reverted in Firefox 128:
According to this thread, users of Firefox on Apple iOS are finding that if you have both a main and private Firefox instances open, when the main one is closed, all the tabs in the private instance are closed too.
Slip-ups like this suggest to us that, as has long been the case, the Firefox developers lack a good understanding of how its remaining followers use it, and why they stick with it.
The original article contains 406 words, the summary contains 179 words. Saved 56%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
Yeah that's a fair point, although it's still a bit… well, funny (not "funny ha ha") that they even temporarily blocked those extensions. Not sure what Roskomnadzor could have done if Mozilla had refused even a temporary block, at least assuming the foundation doesn't have any legal entities in Russia which they may well have
The browser extensions, which are hosted on the Mozilla store, were made unavailable in the Land of Putin on or around June 8 after a request by the Russian government and its internet censorship agency, Roskomnadzor.
Among those extensions were three pieces of code that were explicitly designed to circumvent state censorship – including a VPN and Censor Tracker, a multi-purpose add-on that allowed users to see what websites shared user data, and a tool to access Tor websites.
It turns out wasn't mere PR fluff, as Mozilla tells The Register that the ban has now been lifted.
"In alignment with our commitment to an open and accessible internet, Mozilla will reinstate previously restricted listings in Russia," the group declared.
"Our initial decision to temporarily restrict these listings was made while we considered the regulatory environment in Russia and the potential risk to our community and staff.
"We remain committed to supporting our users in Russia and worldwide and will continue to advocate for an open and accessible internet for all."
The original article contains 328 words, the summary contains 171 words. Saved 48%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
I know this is on the 'work reform' community so I understand most of the comments have that 'bent' to them. I appreciate that.
And I dont want to legitimize giant corporations doing shitty things to employees, so I hope it doesn't come across as defending that behavior.
BUuuuuuttttt, I understand why and how this happens. Lets say hypothetically, you are in a big company or even a public sector/gov't organization. You've moved to remote work across the board. That's awesome!
Now imagine if you had a team that is struggling with competing priorities and limited resources. But you also have 3-4 people on that team that could have retired years ago, but they haven't. Why? Because they can just fucking mail-it-in at home and do little or nothing. As a manager that's overworked yourself, starting the "removal" paperwork process, especially on a public sector employee or an employee at a large company, is daunting. That can be a full-time job in and of itself. Now, multiply that x3 or 4 because you don't just have one employee doing this. That's going to be brutal.
What's a much easier option? RTO. Is it a sure-fire way to get those 3 or 4 to retire? No, they might just come in and be lazy in the office, but there is a good chance that commute, parking expense, extra time away from their family is going to push them over the edge.
There are absolutely, without a doubt, people abusing remote work. RTO is a 'lazy' but semi-understandable way for managers to drive some of those bad apples away. At least in theory. The article suggests not all do.
From my own anecdotal evidence, when people started returning to office, the retirements went up and people moved around more. This freed up positions and let organizations, who were stagnate, grow and promote people.
The down side is: some of your top talent will leave if they get caught up in the RTO mandates.
I'm sorry but this seems very illogical. You're saying that, as a company thats fully remote, its easier to get the WHOLE COMPANY back into the office than it is to do the paperwork to remove a handful of bad employees, while risking losing some of your better employees??
I totally get it and my solution is very similar, see to me going to the office feels like a lot of work but I want to keep my job obviously and so obviously what I intend to do is set fire to the office building so none of us can go back to the office even if we wanted to.
Let me get this straight. You want everyone's working conditions to be worse so some people wil choose to retire? Why stop there then? Dock everyone's pay, reduce vacation time, force people to work over weekends - that will REALLY drive up the people retiring!
The office is the principal-agent problem in spades. Even if your manager is a technical person they don’t necessarily understand all the details of what you’re working on: that’s what they pay you for.
This problem is pervasive throughout society. How many people can hire a dentist, a car mechanic, a plumber, or any of countless other specialists and fully understand what the person is doing so that they don’t get ripped off?
Uh, welcome to society, I guess. That's not a “problem with society”, that's just society. It's what being human is about, developing meaningful relationships with other humans. The actual problem is that we have put in place barriers and obstacles to make us even more isolated and less integrated, thus stripping ourselves off of the social strategies and mechanisms that reduce risks on that principal-agent problem. It is way harder for your car mechanic to rip you off when they are also your neighbor and life long friend. If they defraud you, you can ruin their reputation in the community and thus make them unable to acquire any more jobs in that community. The might also feel an emotional moral compulsion to not hurt you, and vice-versa, for you to fulfill a just payment.
I’m skeptical of the claim that an average person has the power to ruin someone’s reputation as a punishment for wrongdoing. Our society is large and extremely anonymous. People can easily pick up and move to another town, if that’s even necessary at all.
Generally I think the only people whose reputation gets damaged severely enough to follow them around for the rest of their life are public figures or infamous criminals such as murderers and rapists.
I personally have been ripped off quite severely by an unscrupulous HVAC company and I don’t see much recourse. I could try to damage their reputation but then they could sue me for libel. I think their unscrupulous behaviour is likely protected by the enormous contracts they make their customers sign and the government gives them the power to have your natural gas supply shut off if you refuse a costly repair they deem necessary.
I’m skeptical of the claim that an average person has the power to ruin someone’s reputation as a punishment for wrongdoing.
If you read my comment, you'll realize that it is explicitly in the context of a small tightly knit community. If they decide to leave the community, then that's a win for the community, now we don't have to deal with the bad actor anymore.
Our society is large and extremely anonymous
If you pay close attention, that was exactly my comment. That is the problem with our current society, not the principal/agent problem. That is just a society. We evolved in a world where you hardly had to keep up with a handful of individuals, maybe meet less than 500 people your entire life. We are not fit for a world with 8 billion+ of us and you can potentially interact with millions of them directly with a tiny glass device in your pocket. That is not something we are good at. We are good at forming strong bonds and meaning relationships with a handful of people who you can sort of trust almost completely at all times, and they will in turn relay you information about who amongst the strangers to trust or not. It is the fundamental basis of gossip.
Why's that? Lots of people DID quit due to this. They knew it was a free way to get reduced headcount without needing to do layoffs, thus avoiding the negative publicity.
Then they can rehire people for cheaper, with explicit in office / hybrid contract terms
They're referring to the other 3/4 of managers & hr who responded that they didn't want employees to leave because of return to office policies.
They, apparently, genuinely believed that rto would have some tangible benefits, or were just trying to make their employees lives harder for a laugh, and didn't expect it to affect headcount at all.
I had a friend who made a point of "needing" to go into the office an average of one day every week during the pandemic. His logic was that, if his job could be done entirely from the comfort of his living room in the suburbs, eventually the bosses would realize that it could also be done entirely from the comfort of someone else's living room in the Philippines or India.
Most practical examples of out-sourcing has however failed to show any worthwhile savings, while working from home has shown remarkable increases in productivity.
Other time zones and that makes communication difficult, so no quick IM with "by the end of the day" as that means something different over there. Different culture and way of doing things, so have to spend a lot more effort in communication being very clear. Even then they're far away where it's a lot easier to hide stuff until the hole is very deep. Travel expenses going up very quickly for a little training for a new guy. It can be so fun to work with teams in a different continent.
Hiring someone in India means that the person is gonna give you as much dedication as their wage will allow. If they produced top of the line stuff they would want close to top of the line compensation.
Perhaps true with office work (so many tales of people saying they got shit code from overseas developers) and such, but I think the savings were very real for manufacturing, at least for a period of time. Happy to be corrected if that's wrong.
His fears happened to me. I worked a fully remote job for 5 years and ended up getting a horrible boss who worked me insane hours and liked to remind me that he could replace me with someone in India for 1/10th my salary.
I left and got a hybrid job that is 2 days in office. It pays 50% more, has a free gym, free EV charging, 30 days of vacation, and better health insurance. And I have a niche specialty so they won't be able to replace me easily. Feels much more secure.
Some do. The ones that don’t are garbage companies not worth the time to begin with. It depends heavily on the type of work you do. If your company can squeak by with shit quality work, then you probably don’t belong there to begin with.
My company has a large presence in India and exclusively hires there now as far as I know, but I will concede that the employees from there are very good in general. They're actual employees though, not contractors. And there are a lot of issues that arise from the language barrier, timezones, management etc
Yeah but they still haven't found a way to assign a monetary value to consumer trust, so it doesn't show up on the spreadsheets that are used to make decisuons. Only thing that matters is line go up, shareholders can always find a different company to squeeze later.
While the work could be outsourced to foreign countries there is still some hurdles to overcome. Language barriers, cultural barriers, time zones, labor laws, the paperwork involved with taxes, worker reliability, the threat of scams (see N. Korea), etc. But hey, let them find out for themselves.
This makes no sense. What could possibly be in the office that's needed AND can't be purchased in the Philippines? Is your friend working for a government agency building military or spy equipment which can't be shipped overseas?
The moment boss man can do this, is the moment it will do it... your friend does not understand what game he is playing. It is rather sad for adult people to think like this but here we are.
theregister.com
Hot