Hi, I'm going to [remove Services.jsm](bugzilla.mozilla.org/1780695) (posted [an announcement to dev-platform](groups.google.com/a/mozilla.org/g/dev-platform/c/Erw6hvE92TE)), but I found that there are [many references in comm-central/suite/](searchfox.org/comm-central/search?q…&path=suite%2F&case=false®exp=false). I've filed [bug

1841845](bugzilla.mozilla.org/1841845). can anyone take it?

arai[m]: WG9s may take it

sure I can handle that

thank you!

lapcatsoftware.com/articles/2023/7/1.html you so silly Moz://a

they aren't sure people will accept it

so mozilla the test case once again

if mozilla users accept it.. anyone will

.. except a few of us

lol

news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36602193 leave it to Hackernews to try to spin this as something good

I didn't read all of it yet, but it's starting to look like this might not even get noticed, the way it's being implemented

tomman

of course it's good, it prevents noscript and adblockers from running

"they could disable bad addons on banking websites!" => yeah, where "banking websites" mean "Bank of America, Wells Fargo and Chase, and MAYBE Barclays in the UK"

and not, for example the 20ish banks we have here in Venezuela :P

have fun maintaining a whitelist for thousands of banks :P

maybe a better implementation would be asking the user "the following add-ons are considered incompatible with this site...do you want to disable...", but, then... I don't think this feature is that, isn't this about a list of allowed extensions, not the other way around?

supposedly this "feature" will only impact "non-Mozilla-monitored" addons

...whatever that means

did they mean "unsigned addons"? You can't install those anymore on anything but the "developer edition", and (maybe?) ESR

or "we'll give a free pass to the Top 10 addons"

did no one see this coming literal years ago?

i mean besides me

just wait until they make it so it forces specific add-ons on sites

due to partnerships

and bundling

I could see that as something that _Google_ would do, actually

mozilla is the token opposition to the gooplesoft whatwg nonsense

"YourBank only gets better with Google Chrome YourBank Edition - install now and get a free MasterCard!"

wasn't this - disabling something because of banks - also said to be behind why Gecko allowed sites to make password login forms "un-rememberable"?

well token alternative

remember

think of eme

eme was never gonna work across the board until mozilla acceeded and then adobe dropped out

well, the case of EME was very distinct: we didn't wanted DRM crap in our browsers, but people like your mom and my auntie wanted muh Netfixes

if mozilla had resisted adobe would have stayed in the game to be an alternative and eme would not be the only drm

(I still refuse to get a Netflix account due to that)

your mom doesn't watch netflix on a 4000 dollar workstation she watches it on her ipad

that should have nothing to do with one another

and the 4000 dollar workstation had silverlight already working fine established for years

EME came in the era where iPads weren't as widespread as they're today

now it's all a moot point

don't say linux either cause lol your mom ain't runnin linux on her laptop

2015

2013-2015

Mozilla caved in, Adobe stabbed them in the back, and people watch Netflix on their cellphones anyway :/

am I the only dinosaur that still believes that video playback do NOT belong to web browsers, but to actual media player software?

iPads are widespread?

tomman: no.

depends on the market, of course

(re: videos in browser)

for me it usually is also about: it goes much better if it's handled by a media player

njsg: and yet you tell that to other users and they give you angry stares

that said, the last few times I tried to follow something longer with SeaMonkey, it seemed to work well

although that might have been without audio, so I can't tell if there was any sync problem (Which would end up being likely because of the hardware, not the browser)

I completely avoid any kind of video watching on browsers (this is why I lament the death of Flashblock, a very fine video blocker)

just like I avoid any kind of YouTube usage in general

something from Yle Areena, I think it does have a banner saying the browser is old, but works

if I absolutely MUST watch something, I use VLC or mpv+yt-dl(p)

IN GENERAL.. i say that video playback should not be a primary feature but BASIC common clear formats are fine .. and maybe some streaming bits.. but drm and this video-centric reality not so much

tomman

Oh, just got one of those "Upgrade Yer Browser" nags... from Crunchyroll

the push towards JS-powered HTML5 video as a replacement for GIFs has confused my workflow a bit, for now something that'd show up as a gif gets blocked as a video

And then you have extreme cases, like when JWZ converted all his stupid animated GIFs into performance-murdering MP4 videos to save bandwidth

(and which justified my install of a video blocker)

I am just gonna start a new protocol

with blackjack and hookers?

depends

it is obvious http(s) is a lost cause the web protocol is the app protocol

so let's just come up with a new prefix and do it all over taking the best of what we learned so far and let me do whatever

tomman: that's interesting, I get these blocked here. I think by noscript

my new protocol will treat unsigned and self-signed as traditionally http .. and ca signed dv and ev as we knew it a few years ago

will it have clients for Windows 9x/Me? otherwise nope :D

i love msagent

what about bonzi?

not the buddi software just bonzi

can he come too

was it an actual MS Agent (as in, implemented using that technology) or just something that looked like one?

yeah it was

you can use em in mso2k3

or whatever version the format was unified with office

cause office used a more primitive version closer to bob than msagent in the 97/2k days

i believe

IIRC Office switched to Agent in Office 2K

but yeah by 2k3 it was pure msagent

the one used in 97 was some primitive prototype of sorts

2k used MS Agent for sure, but with different actions

2K will install the Agent runtime too

just an older version of it

i think 2000's were still different from standard

IIRC only Windows Me didn't really required that runtime since it already shipped with it

as in, the agent character will have a lot of additional animations defined for MSO, or maybe that wasn't mandatory and was just what these characters had?

97 might have been different, it was at least in its own window, wasn't it?

no the office chars were not COMPLETELY standard just more standard than 97's by xp or 2k3 it was all the same format the msagent format

and now that I remember, I recall using O2K "actors" with standard Agent, but of course with less actions

njsg: yeah, 97 were enclosed in a tiny window frame

my favorite office chars are f1 and links

I only used the Office Logo :D

that html5 version includes links I was considering adding it to xul chrome code but it would only work inside the window

I recall office 2k ones being compatible, yet with differences, I don't recall the details. I hopefully still have the documentation HTML Help file buried down somewhere

probably along with the toolkit to build HTML Help files.

njsg glad I am not just fabricating memories

MattATobin: I'm just not sure about what the differences are, I'm almost sure you could still use them from MS Agent code. But anything beyond that would require me go look to see if I still have that code somewhere, I can be mistaken on that

frankly I am surprised they didn't just create a cortana agent char and tie it to the speech api and literally use technology they have had for 20 years to make that shit way better than a talking search bar

playing with the MSAgent API was a fun exercise in VisualBasic

it could be, for example, that both could be inspected with MS Agent software but that you couldn't use the Office ones in the same way

--Visual Basic 6

oh yeah, they had a speech API Already by then

just add the MS Agent type library, create a instance, load an actor, and done

yes

njsg: I do recall that the speech API only worked with some actors

for example, Merlin

the same speech technology still in windows .. more or less

TTS and speech recognition

they licensed it from L&H

yes

it might have been more recent, but worked in 4.10.1998

the same shit they still use

the same one that made translation software

wonder what they're doing now

talking search bars apperently

WOW

tomman: I don't recall *these* details, I only remember playing with the TTS voices directly

they imploded 20 years ago!

yes

might have been just the TTS settings, I'm not sure I actually coded anything with it

tomman: so imploded 20-ish years before X Corp?

njsg: i feel bad you didn't get a chance to explore more at the time

they actually went bust after Windows XP went RTM

tomman.. of course text to speech already reach its height with a little dos program called monologue

really what more do you need .. except perhaps zarvox

lol

"After the bankruptcy, Nuance Communications (known then as ScanSoft) acquired all of the speech technologies. The revenues of the company grew sharply from $17.1 million in third quarter of 2001, to $216 million in Q3 2008.[9] Vantage Learning acquired all of the proofing, spelling, and linguistic search technologies."

ah, Nuance

literally a bondiblue imac with OS 8.6 has superior speech recon than siri

I recall that one from the voice recognition features on my Motorola dumbphones

even untrained siri

my lg vx6100 2004 feature phone had better voice command recon than android does now

lol

...and now Microsoft owns them

beep Say a command

time

so they finally own Lernout & Hauspie speech recognition software after all these decades

Current time is twenty-six eighty-one

...

yeah

no excuse

20 hours six minutes 81 seconds?

MattATobin: many dumbphones of the early '00s used Nuance voice recognition software

back then it had another name, can't remember it

nah 26 hours and 81 minutes

... wait, what did I just write?

LG standard time

lol

nah i used to be able to overflow memory and corrupt the clock display

VoiceStream or something like that

I thought "oh well this makes hours and minutes acceptable", apparently I didn't look past that

on one of my phones

Know what I can do with a bondiblue imac with OS 8.6 on it I cannot do with any modern fake-AI device?

Say Computer... some action.. and it work

i can't do that with today's devices

for some reason I can't make them JUST respond to the word COMPUTER

and they don't understand anything I ask them

maybe they feel you're turing testing them

I am absolutely doing that.. constantly.

We may be in a post-extermination era.. but when it comes to true-AI glitching its self into being.. I shall make an exception.

we ain't smart enough for it to happen by design just yet

but a glitch

that is totally within reasonable possiblity

tomman

you asked me a question about why we need a new xul parser

and would it run on windows 98

know what does parse xul and run on windows 98?

Gecko 1.8

theoretically it should be far simpler to whip into something that can be expanded upon far easier than say altgecko 52

merge it with trinity-base

and THEN bring it up to current day runtimes and libs

boom Netscape Desktop

More scorn from the goggle lapdogs:

frg_Away: seems the moonies didn't BOTHER to port anything but the JS intl bits not the bits that expand the mozintl xpcom component so downloadsutils can be fixed after changing the api

didn't they used to have some angry fat guy who did that shit?

whatever happened to him?

* didn't they used to have some angry fat guy who looked out for that shit?

MattATobin something Palemoon specific or does it affect SeaMonkey too?

that is a good question

you are much more dilligent following mozpatches

i suspect you have the deps for bug 1201232

which is needed because of the intl api changes they just backported

i dunno does your unknown content dialog look like this?

hopefully you got a link

via matrix

to irc

cause if so then yeah you missed something else nop

you know i know I am an asshole perfectionest with unrealistic expectations but really? does anyone but my self and maybe a few people here never TEST anything before they commit it?

especially when it involves javascript the thing that drives the everything

MattATobin Yeah Bug 1422658 and Bug 1422415 are in. Was some time ago but I hope I got every dependency in. Was lots of stuff then.

well you and I know how deep the tangle can get and proper linking ain't what it used to be

i THOUGHT they knew it as well

Bug 1434844 too

One of the reason IanN and I prefer to follow the orginal patches. You loose track otherwise unless you have either time/skill and manpower. I am usually short on 2 of the 3 :)

or a Tobin.

maybe..

the rusticles just make the evo56 codebase unattractive for me

else I'd use it

that and lack of working webcomponents

i am shitting you on that one dude heh

hell you might have backported em in already that is how unintrested in those I am beyond other people's estimation of relevance factoring in

me .. I am leaning toward merging trinity with gecko 1.8 and going from there

trinity desktop .. kde3 fork

do what SHOULD have happened 15 years ago

MattATobin well now 464 dependent rust packages in central. "Only" 181 in our branch. I which we had the resources to kick this out forever. This will be a maintenance nightmare for mozilla down the road.

Unless you believe the drivel that this is the future.

if this was 3 years ago I'd make some claim like "Believe this: I will be the last XUL Client standing" .. that might actually happen but not nearly as in a gradious fashion as I would prefer

I LIKED being grandiose..

or rather I liked when being grandiose was further removed from reality

heh

I dunno.. I look at the uxpstream i get most code shit from and I dunno if I will ever be happy being downstream to catch and filter all the shit that floats down

and because they are slipping in proceedure it makes it harder to follow and deal with

i think doing something with 1.8 would be better just not a web browser .. not without an updated html parser but it would do just smashingly for local or restricted html rendering

especially with enhancements through 1.9.2

early toolkit and full xpfe .. honestly frg with how much you have spoken to me.. you know that is far more attractive to me and my intrests than whatever the web demands today

indeed I have the SeaMonkey project for keeping xpfe and xpinstall completely intact in 1.8

else it would have rotted through 1.8 until removed largely in 1.9

and the code would be far simpler to maintain if focused

keep doing interlink and do mariner and keep borealis in flux cause it may be 1.8

and embed chromium/webkit

that too.. pre-busting of easy embedding

this is almost too perfect of a pile of old crap

isn't it?

you know selective moz-progression eventually will be too difficult to do without catching everything else up

especially when it is js or dom

embedding is dead. Lots of other stuff like xulrunner too. I rather strip the excess baggage off and retain the core code and classic add-ons.

news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36602701 you're not allowed to say mean things about Mozilla in HN, even if they're true

Yea, they really don't like people disagreeing with the corps mantra...

"your comments are disruptive and not constructive"

I lurk in the ##hntop channel, that's the only thing that leads me to comment. I've been downvoted often, and my comments usually appear near the bottom of the long list of text, where noone will ever see it...

Outside of HN's prejudices though, some good news links appear in the ##hntop channel...

I liked this article: thebaffler.com/salvos/construction-time-again-sisson

It is nothing that new. addons.mozilla.org has the ability to scan your add-ons and disable / replace any it wants. Also to put new ones in. I was about the rip out the code in 2.53 but it has a bit too many dependencies for a quick slash and hack. Disabling add-ons on websites is the only new one here.

Even with it in SeaMonkey 2.53 does not run the client code for this stuff so safe.