elleeldritchunderground replied to your post: elleeldritchunderground replied to your post: The…
LIES. I refuse to acknowledge firefox’s competency.
So pleased I got to burn off my small collection of nerd rage gifs today.
elleeldritchunderground replied to your post: The main reason I don’t like Google Chrome
To each his/her own. [tested zoom] rereading what you wrote, I see you said BETWEEN 100 and 120. I was like, it goes up to 300%, dude. I’m in love with the url bar search feature.
But you can do that with Firefox too!
Plus, Firefox has an awesome extension called Instant Fox. It lets you turn the url bar into a search engine for a number of different sites, including Wikipedia, Amazon, eBay, the various Google sites, etc. If you use Firefox, I highly recommend it.
…is that I have really bad eyesight. Even with glasses/contacts. I tried using Chrome because I had problems with Firefox being super-slow and crashing constantly, but I quickly discovered that it’s much less customizable than Firefox. Most problematically, you can’t adjust the zoom between 100% (too small) and 120% (stupidly big).
So I went back to Firefox. And I discovered CCleaner and Memory Fox and now Firefox is just as fast as Chrome was for me and rarely crashes.
Besides, Google owns my internet life in almost every other way except for my browser. It’s my one tiny act of resistance against the hegemon.
"The movie, music, and television industries have a long history of resisting new methods to copy and distribute media more easily and cheaply. At different stages, their representatives have decried the player piano, the jukebox, the photocopier, the VCR, and DVD-writing software for destroying the will to create and dissolving millions of U.S. jobs. Duke law professor James Boyle, who specializes in online intellectual-property law, calls it “20/20 downside vision,” where “downside dominates the field, and the upside is invisible.” The attitude was symbolized by the flamboyant Jack Valenti, longtime president of the Motion Picture Association of America, proclaiming to a congressional panel in 1982 that the “VCR is to the American film producer and the American public as the Boston strangler is to the woman home alone.” Mike Masnick, who runs the influential Silicon Valley blog, TechDirt, sees an acute irony in comparing the video recorder to a rapist and murderer. “Movie and television studios are now saying the biggest threat that online piracy poses to their business models is lost DVD sales and rentals,” Masnick says. “That market only exists because of the VCR."
— Rob Fischer, “A Ninja in Our Sites” (via theamericanprospect)
"The show went on sale at noon on Saturday, December 10th. 12 hours later, we had over 50,000 purchases and had earned $250,000, breaking even on the cost of production and website. As of Today, we’ve sold over 110,000 copies for a total of over $500,000. Minus some money for PayPal charges etc, I have a profit around $200,000 (after taxes $75.58). This is less than I would have been paid by a large company to simply perform the show and let them sell it to you, but they would have charged you about $20 for the video. They would have given you an encrypted and regionally restricted video of limited value, and they would have owned your private information for their own use. They would have withheld international availability indefinitely. This way, you only paid $5, you can use the video any way you want, and you can watch it in Dublin, whatever the city is in Belgium, or Dubai. I got paid nice, and I still own the video (as do you). You never have to join anything, and you never have to hear from us again."
— Sales Figures From Louis C.K. (via youmightfindyourself)
