Website won't load. #74

sigh That's annoying. It's hard to have conversation with people if the maintainer is going to do that. Is there a way to protect my issue from deletion?

Unsure.

Also, do you know why they're behaving this way? I still don't know what i did to piss them off.

If you don't want to work on this then that's fine. I created this issue here and elsewhere to seek the help and support of those that would.

While you're willing to talk to me can i ask you a few questions? For example, did i do something to piss you off? If I said something unintentionally to make you block me, then I apologize. I didn't mean to say something offensive, and as far as I'm aware of, I didn't.

Also, i wanted to share my script here for those that need a fix right now.

I just find it irritating to work on something for free and have people always expect more, you concealed from me using a different version of Firefox than the main one, if i had known it was ESR, i would have lost less time on this, so next time make it clear and the maintainer will save time and a headache, then you try to pressure me into adding you on discord or email to propose a fix i already know i will not merge.

That said i do apologize for blocking, i unblocked you and now i just ask for this to end because it's unnecessary drama. If you are unhappy with my decision, there are alternatives like https://atproto.at or https://aturi.to and forks of PDSls that might work or would accept your fix.

I also deleted the previous issue because it was turning into dogpilling and nonsense

Feel free to copy your fix here but I don't want to see more drama, and that includes the community of devs who replied, I did not ask for this, I didn't even reply in the original thread, yet I'm taking all the heat.

I didn't mean to give the impression that i was expecting something. I'm sorry if i did. Also, i wasn't trying to pressure you, i just couldn't fit the script into BlueSky's chat. The character limit was too short.

But concerning FireFox, i didn't conceal using some other version of FireFox. I'm using the main one. Though i have been considering switching to R3dFox.

Again, i didn't mean for any of this to happen. I just wanted to help and i thought i was. I still think i am. If you don't want to be a part of this then i completely understand. I have just enough coding knowledge to have a lot of respect for people like you so I'm sorry if i gave the wrong impression on anything or caused unnecessary stress. If there is anything i can do to make up for it or ease tensions just tell me and i'd be happy to do so.

ESR isn't the main version. It's an OLDer version with new security patches.

@perry.rip No. "ESR" it's not a Firefox version at all. It's a different set of updates for the main version of Firefox, which I have, which I have stated multiple times now. pds.ls and I are referring to forks of firefox like R3dfox, waterfox, librewolf, etc.

Please do not try to restart the drama over pedantics. pds.ls has stated that they wish to avoid more drama, and if I haven't stated it as well, I would also like for the drama portion of this work to be over.

@sin-shadow-fox.tngl.sh I'm sorry to keep banging on this but I hope to clear the confusion.

An "Up to date" message on your browser can mean multiple things, but at the end of the day two things matter: Features completeness and Security patches.

When we are saying "the main version" or "the main channel" we are referring to the latest release (159 at the time of writing), which is guaranteed to have all the new features and goodies that us devs need to create what we want. As other have said, since every browser self updates, when building modern websites web developers assumes that everyone runs a browser release which is at most two and a half years old. The missing feature in your browser was implemented in Firefox 125, released 16th of april 2024, so it's considered baseline, more on that here: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Glossary/Baseline/Compatibility You can see yourself that 115 is less than 125, and according to caniuse.com less than 0.44% of the internet traffic runs a firefox version older than 125.

The latest release is guaranteed to have the latest features and the newest security patches, but sometimes not everyone can afford to run the latest bleeding edge version (most of them are old corporations, industrial facilities and institutions). This is why "Extended Support Release" (ESR for short) or "Long Term Support" (LTS) versions exists. ESR is a label that the developer, Mozzila in this case, give to a specific version to say "We won't add new web feature to this version, but if some security bug or exploit pops up we'll fix it". The devs call this "backporting". Firefox 115 is considered an Extended Support Release and hasn't been receiving new web features from years, like the missing Intl.Segmenter, just critical security patches. Those versions often keep support for unsupported OSs, like win 7, while newer versions don't.

Your "Up to date" doesn't mean that you have the newest version, it means that you have the latest version that your win 7 system can run, wich has the minimal security patches that are considered critical to receive. Be carefull there, because minimal doesn't mean all, there might be some exploits left unpatched because they were deemed low risk.

You can get a glimpse of software support timeline here: https://endoflife.date/firefox As you can see, the support for Firefox 115 will end in 4 month from now, if I were you I'd be looking for a replacement soon, and if I may, i would add that if you are looking for extended support for your OS, you should look for browsers which can provide that. I know nothing about R3dFox, but make sure that they can bring the support that you want.

Closing thoughts on Linux, the times where a distro would be abbandoned are long gone, sure there might be a few newly released distro with some random person behind it, but distros like Debian, Fedora, Arch, Ubuntu and many others have HUGE financial incentives and interests from billion dollar companies to keep the them secure and up to date. Just to name one, Fedora is backed financially by AWS, because Amazon Linux is based on it. I can't see how that can change any time soon.

PS. Even if something feels safe it doesn't mean that is. When talking about the OS, the "I haven't catched a virus so far, therefore win 7 is safe" is simply not true. I haven't died in a plane crash, therefore plane are safe, I think you can get what I mean. Win 7 IS very vulnerable and won't get any new fixes, I get that it's a pain in the a** (excuse my french) to move to another OS, but not doing it means driving a car that is disintegreting itself while attempting to fix it, sure you might me a good mechanic, but is it worth the effort when lots of good alternatives exists? Here just some of win 7 vulnz, and many are very bad: https://app.opencve.io/cve/?product=windows_7&vendor=microsoft

Closing on VPNs, they don't protect you from clicking on shadow links or from browser exploits, they simply reroute your traffic and may apply a filter on some content that gets trhough, but they are not magic bullets (but the marketing doesn't tell you that, huh..) VPNs and antiviruses are not the condoms of the internet, having a patched OS and software is.

@lorenzopecchio.com First, “we” is an assumption. You may speak for yourself, but speaking for others is an overreach. Most people understand “up to date” to mean the best that is intended/available. Mozilla is the one that decides when that message appears.. If you disagree with that usage, that’s fine, people disagree on a lot of things. But in this case, yes, my browser is up to date.

Also, “need” is a bit of a stretch. Intl.Segmenter didn’t always exist, and the web ran just fine without it. Trust me, I was there, lol. But the bigger point here is compatibility, or more specifically, whose definition of compatibility gets treated as valid. One of the many reasons I never moved to Windows 8/10/11 was the loss of program compatibility (DOS being a clear example). Treating your preferred compatibility as the universal standard is the same as treating your definition of “up to date” as universal. Now there are many chinks in the chain here: the OS dev, the browser dev, the website dev, and the program dev, and a lot gets lost in that shuffle. A lot of people with different priorities making decisions for everyone else, and I’m just the end user trying to make the best out of this situation and, when possible, fix what i can, as I’m trying to do here.

As for Firefox’s support of Windows 7, again, I have no control over what Mozilla does. I could file a request in their forums noting the lack of Windows 7 support, but given Mozilla’s track record with ignoring their userbase, I’m not optimistic it would go anywhere. I may be forced to move to R3dFox, I don’t know. What I do know is there are problems that I can fix, and I try to focus on those. Quote: “Focus on what you can control, not what you can’t.”

On the topic of Linux, I am aware of “the main three,” but that isn’t the whole decision for me. I’ve been in Windows’ architecture for close to 30 years. Not only would switching OS at all be a harrowing endeavor, but it would also mean learning a lot, and all on a bet that the floor won’t drop out beneath me. Surely you can understand my hesitance and desire to wait for a centralized Windows clone, I hope.

As for security, I get where you’re coming from. Survivorship fallacy. But that’s not the reason why I say Windows 7’s vulnerability is exaggerated. The reason is that at its core, every OS is “vulnerable.” OSes like 10/11 get a pass because Windows Defender is treated as built in. I think I mentioned this at some point, but I’m not sure. But someone literally tested Windows 10 with Defender enabled against Windows 7 with nothing, not even an antivirus. On top of that, many security services like antivirus and VPNs are not only aware of what they’re dealing with but are experts in their field. I don’t see a fundamental reason they can’t match or exceed Windows Defender in practice.

In short, a good combination of VPN, antivirus, a hardened browser like Firefox, and not clicking on things that say “free hooters here” not only can but do provide rral protection.. Avast has aborted plenty of bad links, and Firefox itself has blocked plenty of websites. A “patched” OS cannot do that, be it 7 or 11.

Now please, as I said earlier, both I and pds.ls would prefer to avoid further drama on this thread. If you’d like to keep discussing it, feel free to DM me on Bluesky or Discord, I’m happy to continue there. On this thread, please keep comments to the Intl.Segmenter issue or none at all.

Fueling the drama is not my intention, I wrote the message with the hope of clarifying some facts, trying to help you and possibly others in the same situation.

We still disagree on the security part, but i'll leave the choice to continue this conversation privately up to you. I'm here to help if needed.

"Doubling down" may not be the right choice of words as it has a negative disingenuous connotation. I also would not have described this event as "fun". As for the font, no hard feelings. I know it's "edgy" which some people do not like, i just simply didn't approve of blanket subjective statements like "it's objectively bad" when that's a matter of personal taste. I and 212,785 other people think it looks cool.