Discussion:
kill bill switch
(too old to reply)
Keith Keller
2014-05-09 02:40:30 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Err...kill switch bill, that is:

http://blog.sfgate.com/nov05election/2014/05/08/kill-switch-bill-gets-second-life-with-senate-approval/

--keith
--
kkeller-***@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us
(try just my userid to email me)
AOLSFAQ=http://www.therockgarden.ca/aolsfaq.txt
see X- headers for PGP signature information
Thad Floryan
2014-05-09 04:21:05 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Keith Keller
http://blog.sfgate.com/nov05election/2014/05/08/kill-switch-bill-gets-second-life-with-senate-approval/
Awww. Frankly I was looking forward to seeing a 3rd movie
in the KILL BILL movie franchise starring Uma Thurman:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0266697/ Vol.1 2003, 8.2

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0378194/ Vol.2 2004, 8.0

:-)

BTW, the idiots and morons who operate SFGate have recently forced
video autostarting when any page at SFGate is selected for viewing.

That stupid change forces me to use Process Explorer on Windows to
kill two instances of "Adobe Flash Player 12.0 r0" (killing the first
instance kills the second instance) for every SFgate page selected
so I can regain control of my system. I suspect the same problem
exists for other OSs but I have been reading SFgate using Firefox
on Windows.

I don't want to disable the Adobe Flash Plugin within Firefox because
it's only the idiots at SFGate and the San Hoser Mockery, er, Murky,
er, Mercury News that cause the problem: bastards.

For those interested, the free Process Explorer is here:

http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/bb896653.aspx

http://download.sysinternals.com/files/ProcessExplorer.zip

It's a standalone program and runs from wherever it is with no
mucking of the Windows Registry.

Thad
David Arnstein
2014-05-09 17:00:13 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Thad Floryan
That stupid change forces me to use Process Explorer on Windows to
kill two instances of "Adobe Flash Player 12.0 r0" (killing the first
instance kills the second instance) for every SFgate page selected
so I can regain control of my system. I suspect the same problem
exists for other OSs but I have been reading SFgate using Firefox
on Windows.
I don't want to disable the Adobe Flash Plugin within Firefox because
it's only the idiots at SFGate and the San Hoser Mockery, er, Murky,
er, Mercury News that cause the problem: bastards.
The Firefox extension NoScript controls Flash on a site-by-site basis.
This is a more elegant solution, as compared to terminating Flash
every time it launches. I am curious as to why you don't use NoScript,
or one of the many extensions that are similar.
--
David Arnstein (00)
arnstein+***@pobox.com {{ }}
^^
Roy
2014-05-09 19:17:20 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by David Arnstein
Post by Thad Floryan
That stupid change forces me to use Process Explorer on Windows to
kill two instances of "Adobe Flash Player 12.0 r0" (killing the first
instance kills the second instance) for every SFgate page selected
so I can regain control of my system. I suspect the same problem
exists for other OSs but I have been reading SFgate using Firefox
on Windows.
I don't want to disable the Adobe Flash Plugin within Firefox because
it's only the idiots at SFGate and the San Hoser Mockery, er, Murky,
er, Mercury News that cause the problem: bastards.
The Firefox extension NoScript controls Flash on a site-by-site basis.
This is a more elegant solution, as compared to terminating Flash
every time it launches. I am curious as to why you don't use NoScript,
or one of the many extensions that are similar.
I use the FlashBlock add-on. It replaces all Flash with a button you
can click and then the flash plays. You can also whitelist websites and
have Flash play without the click.

I love it because I can go to a web page like the Mercury News and read
the news without any flash stuff starting.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/flashblock/
Thad Floryan
2014-05-09 23:31:29 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Roy
Post by David Arnstein
Post by Thad Floryan
[...]
I don't want to disable the Adobe Flash Plugin within Firefox because
it's only the idiots at SFGate and the San Hoser Mockery, er, Murky,
er, Mercury News that cause the problem: bastards.
The Firefox extension NoScript controls Flash on a site-by-site basis.
This is a more elegant solution, as compared to terminating Flash
every time it launches. I am curious as to why you don't use NoScript,
or one of the many extensions that are similar.
I use the FlashBlock add-on. It replaces all Flash with a button you
can click and then the flash plays. You can also whitelist websites and
have Flash play without the click.
I love it because I can go to a web page like the Mercury News and read
the news without any flash stuff starting.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/flashblock/
Hi Roy,

That also sounds like an excellent solution. I'll try that first
since it's apparently a one-task-only addon and that'll give me
time later to read the NoScript docs.

The real solution is to fire the present webmasters and hire only
those with proper UI & UX creds and experience -- this means Yahoo,
too.

As I wrote previously, the Mountain View, Palo Alto, Menlo Park/
Atherton newspaper web sites are properly programmed in HTML 5 by
a competent person -- same coding used at all three websites.

Thad
David Kaye
2014-05-10 00:53:16 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Thad Floryan
The real solution is to fire the present webmasters and hire only
those with proper UI & UX creds and experience -- this means Yahoo,
too.
There is the belief (and apparently stats to prove it) in marketing circles
that video causes people to stay on web pages longer, and length of stay
tends to translate into ad clicks.

As for me, I'm simply not going to websites that have automatic video, among
them Yahoo sites such as Shine, and anything run by ABC TV (aka go.com).
When I hover the mouse over a link and see it's one of those I just avoid
it. Since everybody lifts everybody else's content, I know that I'll
eventually see the story/info I want on a site that doesn't play video. And
I'm willing to wait if it doesn't show up elsewhere for a few hours/days.




---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com
Igor Sviridov
2014-05-10 00:42:02 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Roy
Post by David Arnstein
Post by Thad Floryan
That stupid change forces me to use Process Explorer on Windows to
kill two instances of "Adobe Flash Player 12.0 r0" (killing the first
instance kills the second instance) for every SFgate page selected
so I can regain control of my system. I suspect the same problem
exists for other OSs but I have been reading SFgate using Firefox
on Windows.
I don't want to disable the Adobe Flash Plugin within Firefox because
it's only the idiots at SFGate and the San Hoser Mockery, er, Murky,
er, Mercury News that cause the problem: bastards.
The Firefox extension NoScript controls Flash on a site-by-site basis.
This is a more elegant solution, as compared to terminating Flash
every time it launches. I am curious as to why you don't use NoScript,
or one of the many extensions that are similar.
I use the FlashBlock add-on. It replaces all Flash with a button you
can click and then the flash plays. You can also whitelist websites and
have Flash play without the click.
I love it because I can go to a web page like the Mercury News and read
the news without any flash stuff starting.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/flashblock/
I've being using Chrome in "Click to play" mode for all plugins for a couple of years now.
The clean web experience is refreshing - and pesky dynamic content is always one click away.
It also ends up consuming much less resources, so i can typically run a few hundred tabs open.

http://www.theverge.com/2012/7/20/3171864/how-to-fix-chrome-in-ten-seconds

--igor
Thad Floryan
2014-05-10 01:04:36 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Igor Sviridov
Post by Roy
[...]
[...]
I love it because I can go to a web page like the Mercury News and read
the news without any flash stuff starting.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/flashblock/
I've being using Chrome in "Click to play" mode for all plugins for a couple of years now.
The clean web experience is refreshing - and pesky dynamic content is always one click away.
It also ends up consuming much less resources, so i can typically run a few hundred tabs open.
http://www.theverge.com/2012/7/20/3171864/how-to-fix-chrome-in-ten-seconds
Hi Igor,

That's good information but I shy away from much of what
Google provides nowadays for many reasons. Though I've
never used Google Voice, think of all the folks who will
be inconvenienced when it goes belly-up on May 15, 2014.

I haven't logged into anything Google for years and when
someone sent me this URL yesterday:



and I was presented with the following:

Content Warning
This video may be inappropriate for some users
Sign in to confirm your age.

WTF -- I did NOT sign in. All the Penn&Teller BULLSHIT
episodes are readily available on YouTube so why should
a video of naked women require logging in to confirm one's
age (which is NOT possible to do without real ID). Idiots.

Penn&Teller's BULLSHIT series on ShowTime:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penn_%26_Teller:_Bullshit!

would be rated "X" if it was rated due to language, extreme
nudity with female/ma/e genitals, and often some violence.

I have all the BULLSHIT seasons on DVD but Season 7 has been
censored and doesn't have "THE VATICAN" episode. Took only
a moment to find it on YouTube, download it as an MP4 and
burn it to DVD for viewing along with the Amazon-bought DVD
seasons. Here's more info about that episode:

Penn and Teller Bullshit! Season 7 Episode 10 The Vatican

runtime 26:18
Published on Aug 11, 2013

Penn & Teller: Bullshit - Season 7 - Ep 79: The Vatican

runtime 26:18
Published on Jan 1, 2014
Penn & Teller discuss the Catholic Church and their involvement
campaigning against homosexuality efforts, condom use, and in covering
up sex abuse by its priests. They talk with Italian satirist Sabina
Guzzanti, whom the Vatican attempted to punish for criticizing Pope
Benedict XVI (Ratzinger is his real last name)

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1502177/
The Vatican (28 Aug. 2009)
Penn and Teller reveal what an evil organization the Vatican really is.
This episode is not included on the Season 7 DVD and has also been
removed from the Showtime website.

Thad
Eli the Bearded
2014-05-11 03:56:33 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Thad Floryan
I haven't logged into anything Google for years and when
http://youtu.be/lWU1PSFHMM4
Content Warning
This video may be inappropriate for some users
Sign in to confirm your age.
WTF -- I did NOT sign in. All the Penn&Teller BULLSHIT
No need to sign in to download it.

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=youtube-dl

$ youtube-dl http://youtu.be/lWU1PSFHMM4
[youtube] Setting language
[youtube] lWU1PSFHMM4: Downloading webpage
[youtube] lWU1PSFHMM4: Downloading video info webpage
[youtube] Confirming age
[youtube] lWU1PSFHMM4: Extracting video information
[download] Destination: 18 Friend Of The Family (1995) Full Movie-lWU1PSFHMM4.mp4
[....]

I let it download about ten minutes of the filme, looked at the partial
download and deleted it. Dull soft porn.

Elijah
------
there's also jwz's youtubedown tool
Thad Floryan
2014-05-23 23:42:36 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Eli the Bearded
Post by Thad Floryan
I haven't logged into anything Google for years and when
[...]
Content Warning
This video may be inappropriate for some users
Sign in to confirm your age.
[...]
No need to sign in to download it.
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=youtube-dl
[...]
Hi Eli,

I cannot thank you enough for your mention of 'youtube-dl'

Per my testing so far, it downloads any video from any site
no matter how the video is protected or location obfuscated.

Case in point just 10 minutes ago when a friend sent me the
"Legends" video trailer URL:

This is pretty neat -- turn down the volume.

http://player.vimeo.com/video/93587997

runtime 2:35

Something on my system(s) is/are blocking vimeo or
something it's using so I had to download the MP4
to play it on one of my linux systems (which can
download any video from any website) as you can see:

$ youtube-dl http://player.vimeo.com/video/93587997
[vimeo] 93587997: Downloading webpage
[vimeo] 93587997: Extracting information
[download] Destination: Legends 2014 Trailer-93587997.mp4
[download] 100% of 41.72MiB in 00:12

{ I replaced spaces in filename with "_" }

$ ll Legends_2014_Trailer-93587997.mp4
-rw-r--r-- 1 thad thad 43751125 May 2 02:13 Legends_2014_Trailer-93587997.mp4

Another nice thing about 'youtube-dl' is that it preserves
the original file's date/time like 'wget' does.

Thad
Eli the Bearded
2014-05-24 02:45:50 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Thad Floryan
Post by Eli the Bearded
No need to sign in to download it.
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=youtube-dl
I cannot thank you enough for your mention of 'youtube-dl'
Per my testing so far, it downloads any video from any site
no matter how the video is protected or location obfuscated.
I wouldn't go that far, but it does work for many cases.
Post by Thad Floryan
Another nice thing about 'youtube-dl' is that it preserves
the original file's date/time like 'wget' does.
It also will automatically resume an interupted download if you
rerun it. I will say that the --rate-limit option is somewhat
frustrating. It seems to do speed throttling at a very coarse
level. By observing network usage I see it download a chunk as
fast as possible, wait a while, then download the next chunk.
I say "seems" because it could just be poor interaction with
caching somewhere else, but other programs on my system seem to
throttle sanely.

Elijah
------
now opts to download smaller files for throwaway videos
Thad Floryan
2014-05-24 11:13:45 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Eli the Bearded
Post by Thad Floryan
Post by Eli the Bearded
No need to sign in to download it.
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=youtube-dl
I cannot thank you enough for your mention of 'youtube-dl'
Per my testing so far, it downloads any video from any site
no matter how the video is protected or location obfuscated.
I wouldn't go that far, but it does work for many cases.
[...]
Hi Elijah,

Here's what I considered to be a bizarre case of identifying the
video to be downloaded and youtube-dl did everything perfectly.

For those unaware, the authors of GIMP have a magazine which is
now up to the 5th edition as of December 2013:

http://gimpmagazine.org/

Issue 1, September 5, 2012, 48MB, 50 pages:
http://dl.meetthegimp.org/GIMP+Magazine+Issue+1.pdf

Issue 2, December 5, 2012, 67MB, 100 pages:
http://dl.meetthegimp.org/GIMP_Magazine_Issue_2_DIGITAL.pdf

Issue 3, March 6, 2013, 58MB, 88 pages:
http://dl.meetthegimp.org/GIMP_Magazine_Issue_3_DIGITAL.pdf

ISSUE 4, September 4, 2013, 183MB, 100 pages:
http://dl.gimpmagazine.org/GIMP_Magazine_Issue_4_DIGITAL.pdf

ISSUE 5, December 11, 2013, 47MB, 92 pages:
http://dl.gimpmagazine.org/GIMP_Magazine_Issue_5_DIGITAL.pdf

They're preparing Issue 6 and there's a Call for Content
for Issue 7.

They also have a "Director's Cut" video accompanying each issue:

GIMP MAGAZINE . ISSUE #1 . SEPTEMBER 2012
http://gimpmagazine.org/issue1/

GIMP MAGAZINE . ISSUE #2 . DECEMBER 2012
http://gimpmagazine.org/issue2/


GIMP MAGAZINE . ISSUE #3 . MARCH 2013


GIMP MAGAZINE . ISSUE #4 . SEPTEMBER 2013


GIMP MAGAZINE . ISSUE #5 . DECEMBER 2013


But I couldn't figure out how to download Issue 1's MP4.

Turns out that simply specifying the Issue 1 URL was all that
was required and youtube-dl finds and dewnloads those it finds:

$ youtube-dl http://gimpmagazine.org/issue1/
[generic] issue1: Requesting header
WARNING: Falling back on generic information extractor.
[generic] issue1: Downloading webpage
[generic] issue1: Extracting information
[download] Downloading playlist: GIMP Magazine – Issue 1 | GIMP Magazine
[generic] playlist GIMP Magazine – Issue 1 | GIMP Magazine: Collected 1 video ids (downloading 1 of them)
[download] Downloading video #1 of 1
[youtube] Setting language
[youtube] KO5OFqWH3gA: Downloading webpage
[youtube] KO5OFqWH3gA: Downloading video info webpage
[youtube] KO5OFqWH3gA: Extracting video information
[download] Destination: GIMP Magazine - Issue 1 - Directors Cut _ Commentary-KO5OFqWH3gA.mp4
[download] 100% of 47.47MiB in 00:14

Now THAT was VERY impressive.

Thad

David Kaye
2014-05-12 07:02:25 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Thad Floryan
WTF -- I did NOT sign in. All the Penn&Teller BULLSHIT
episodes are readily available on YouTube so why should
a video of naked women require logging in to confirm one's
age (which is NOT possible to do without real ID). Idiots.
I hate most things Google these days. A few weeks ago I was going to
download Trend's HeartBleed add-on for Chrome, which is supposed to test
websites for the security flaw. Clicking on the link provided me with a
Google login page. While I have a Google login (which I don't use), I
wasn't about to use it to download an add-on for Chrome which Chrome should
be providing me in the first place.





---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com
Steve Pope
2014-05-09 19:30:14 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by David Arnstein
The Firefox extension NoScript controls Flash on a site-by-site basis.
This is a more elegant solution, as compared to terminating Flash
every time it launches. I am curious as to why you don't use NoScript,
or one of the many extensions that are similar.
Do you happen to know if this is possible in IE?


Steve
Roy
2014-05-09 19:44:40 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Steve Pope
Post by David Arnstein
The Firefox extension NoScript controls Flash on a site-by-site basis.
This is a more elegant solution, as compared to terminating Flash
every time it launches. I am curious as to why you don't use NoScript,
or one of the many extensions that are similar.
Do you happen to know if this is possible in IE?
Steve
How about


http://lifehacker.com/5533694/use-internet-explorers-built-in-flash-block-feature
Eli the Bearded
2014-05-09 20:02:16 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by David Arnstein
Post by Thad Floryan
I don't want to disable the Adobe Flash Plugin within Firefox because
it's only the idiots at SFGate and the San Hoser Mockery, er, Murky,
er, Mercury News that cause the problem: bastards.
The Firefox extension NoScript controls Flash on a site-by-site basis.
This is a more elegant solution, as compared to terminating Flash
every time it launches. I am curious as to why you don't use NoScript,
or one of the many extensions that are similar.
Looks like if you use Adblockplus to block launch.newsinc.com you don't
get the video player. I use ADP to block lots of content that is not
strictly "advertising". I don't use noscript because there are many
cases where I'm quite willing to let scripts run, for example the submenus
on sfgate.com.

Elijah
------
retunes ADP every few months, or when encountering real nasties
Thad Floryan
2014-05-09 23:38:40 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Eli the Bearded
Post by David Arnstein
Post by Thad Floryan
I don't want to disable the Adobe Flash Plugin within Firefox because
it's only the idiots at SFGate and the San Hoser Mockery, er, Murky,
er, Mercury News that cause the problem: bastards.
The Firefox extension NoScript controls Flash on a site-by-site basis.
This is a more elegant solution, as compared to terminating Flash
every time it launches. I am curious as to why you don't use NoScript,
or one of the many extensions that are similar.
Looks like if you use Adblockplus to block launch.newsinc.com you don't
get the video player. I use ADP to block lots of content that is not
strictly "advertising". I don't use noscript because there are many
cases where I'm quite willing to let scripts run, for example the submenus
on sfgate.com.
Hi Elijah,

That's good information, too; thanks!

I operate with many blocks in place because I simply don't trust
most websites to care about their visitors. This applies to the
New York Times also when, about 2 years ago, some 300,000 visitors
were infected with malware due to links to 3rd-party sites serving
adware/malware. And, no, I was not infected there and, FWIW, have
never been though I have friends whose systems seem to succumb all
the time and they're constantly rebuilding their systems. Sigh.

Thad
David Kaye
2014-05-10 01:01:41 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Thad Floryan
And, no, I was not infected there and, FWIW, have
never been though I have friends whose systems seem to succumb all
the time and they're constantly rebuilding their systems. Sigh.
Thad
There seems to be some luck of the draw here or something. I have had about
600 clients over the years, mostly individuals who do lots of web browsing,
and yet very few of them have infection issues anymore. And the ones who do
are the ones who get a LOT of problems.

The day after I restored a customer's computer to pristine condition, she
managed to download something called "Websteroids", and then complained to
me that her computer "wasn't fixed". She'd let enough time pass (more than
60 days) so that I didn't feel obligated to give her a freebie. Websteroids
puts up more ads and redirects than I've ever seen one program do. Well,
two programs; the other is hidden.

Meanwhile, I have customers to make heavy use of porn and gaming sites and
aren't the least bit bothered by malware. They all (infected and
non-infected) all use either MSSE or Avast, and I'm in the habit of turning
off unneeded services to limit exposure.

Weird.




---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com
Thad Floryan
2014-05-10 01:19:45 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by David Kaye
Post by Thad Floryan
And, no, I was not infected there and, FWIW, have
never been though I have friends whose systems seem to succumb all
the time and they're constantly rebuilding their systems. Sigh.
Thad
There seems to be some luck of the draw here or something. I have had about
600 clients over the years, mostly individuals who do lots of web browsing,
and yet very few of them have infection issues anymore. And the ones who do
are the ones who get a LOT of problems.
[...]
Hi David,

I can believe it. At Sigaba I was once asked by the Board Director
why his [Windows] computer was so slow. I walked over and took a
look and what I saw was not much different from these (I'm really
NOT kidding):

Loading Image...

Loading Image...

Loading Image...

Loading Image...

Loading Image...

:-)

Thad
Thad Floryan
2014-05-09 23:20:02 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by David Arnstein
Post by Thad Floryan
That stupid change forces me to use Process Explorer on Windows to
kill two instances of "Adobe Flash Player 12.0 r0" (killing the first
instance kills the second instance) for every SFgate page selected
so I can regain control of my system. I suspect the same problem
exists for other OSs but I have been reading SFgate using Firefox
on Windows.
I don't want to disable the Adobe Flash Plugin within Firefox because
it's only the idiots at SFGate and the San Hoser Mockery, er, Murky,
er, Mercury News that cause the problem: bastards.
The Firefox extension NoScript controls Flash on a site-by-site basis.
This is a more elegant solution, as compared to terminating Flash
every time it launches. I am curious as to why you don't use NoScript,
or one of the many extensions that are similar.
Hi David,

Head slap and facepalm, color my face red, I do use NoScript but haven't
read its docs because it always installs its updates always at the most
inopportune time, so I was unaware that it could handle site-specific
Flash control.

What SFGate and the SJMN do is reprehensible and killing the Flash
process via Process Explorer seemed the most expeditious solution.

Thank you for the NoScript hint -- I'll read the docs.

As you can see, I use NoScript on Linux and Windows:

Loading Image... 91kB

Loading Image... 107kB

Thank you again and have a nice weekend!

Thad
David Arnstein
2014-05-09 23:41:31 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Thad Floryan
Thank you for the NoScript hint -- I'll read the docs.
Thad,

I suggest that you configure Firefox so that the little NoScript icon
is visible in one of your Firefox toolbars.

When you land on a web page that has Java or JavaScript, you can
right-click on the little NoScript icon. This will display a menu that
contains options to whitelist or blacklist the Java/JavaScript sources
that are "in" the web page that you are viewing. This is a convenient
way to populate your whitelist.

I am trying to save you the trouble of reading documentation.

In the options window for NoScript, there is a tab named "Embeddings."
On this tab, there are options to "Forbid" Java, Flash, and so forth.
I suggest that you activate most of these options. Then you can use your
Whitelist (another tab) to allow Java from the sites that you trust.

Problem: I don't think that NoScript can provide separate whitelists
for Java, Flash, and other steaming piles of shit. If this is your
requirement, then you will need at least one more Firefox Extension.
FlashBlock will do nicely.
--
David Arnstein (00)
arnstein+***@pobox.com {{ }}
^^
Thad Floryan
2014-05-10 00:40:44 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by David Arnstein
Post by Thad Floryan
Thank you for the NoScript hint -- I'll read the docs.
Thad,
I suggest that you configure Firefox so that the little NoScript icon
is visible in one of your Firefox toolbars.
Hi David,

The same version Firefox on all my systems (Linux, Windows, etc.) has
the NoScript icon as the 4th icon from the left in the toolbar. Here
is a small screenshot on one of my Windows systems today:

Loading Image... 22kB

Note I have a local HTML file as the homepage on all my systems -- I
dislike "bookmarks" and similar ilk and prefer a structured design for
my specific needs. Here's the #INET and #INFO portions of home.htm:

Loading Image... 129kB

Loading Image... 122kB

The identical version of Firefox looks and functions differently on
Linux, Solaris, Windows, and I presume MacOS X (noting I have no Apple
gear here).

On Linux (CentOS below) with "about:addons" in the URL box, the tool bar
is still shown but on Windows it is obscured as you can see:

http://thadlabs.com/PIX/CentOS_Firefox_addons.png 91kB
http://thadlabs.com/PIX/Firefox_addons.jpg 107kB

Why each Firefox version is significantly different depending on whether
it's Linux or Windows is a sign that Mozilla has some flaky ideas about
designing software. I had to revert Thunderbird to 2.0.0.2 on ALL my
systems because Mozilla was going bat-guano-crazy with new releases every
few minutes (or so it seemed at the time) and I did not and do not want
tabs in my email client. Similar for Firefox (though a few tabs are OK):
I've held at 16.0.2 for all my systems for similar reasons especially
given how Mozilla can remote control things on one's system beginning with
Firefox 17 -- e.g., disable Java which really angered me.
Post by David Arnstein
When you land on a web page that has Java or JavaScript, you can
right-click on the little NoScript icon. This will display a menu that
contains options to whitelist or blacklist the Java/JavaScript sources
that are "in" the web page that you are viewing. This is a convenient
way to populate your whitelist.
I am trying to save you the trouble of reading documentation.
Thank you VERY MUCH! I really appreciate your explanation above.
Post by David Arnstein
In the options window for NoScript, there is a tab named "Embeddings."
On this tab, there are options to "Forbid" Java, Flash, and so forth.
I suggest that you activate most of these options. Then you can use your
Whitelist (another tab) to allow Java from the sites that you trust.
Problem: I don't think that NoScript can provide separate whitelists
for Java, Flash, and other steaming piles of shit. If this is your
requirement, then you will need at least one more Firefox Extension.
FlashBlock will do nicely.
Along with the ad blocking and some video blocking using /etc/hosts and
its Windows equivalent. :-)

Thank you again for your thoughts in this regard!

Thad
Thad Floryan
2014-05-16 02:46:46 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by David Arnstein
[...]
Problem: I don't think that NoScript can provide separate whitelists
for Java, Flash, and other steaming piles of shit. If this is your
requirement, then you will need at least one more Firefox Extension.
FlashBlock will do nicely.
Hi David,

Yep, FlashBlock works perfectly in this regards since the only
troublesome sites are SFgate.com and http://www.mercurynews.com/
during my usual web browsing.

The version I have at the moment is 'Flashblock 1.5.17' and I've
been testing it for a week now with Process Explorer also running
and noticed almost zero CPU time consumed at the above two sites.

I very much appreciate your suggestion because Flashblock, like
a lot of Linux/UNIX software, does just one thing and does it well
so I didn't have to change NoScript parameters for just this one
purpose. With that written, I really need to review NoScript's
docs for other reasons. :-)

Thank you!

Speaking of FlashBlock, it initially blocked this URL on me:

http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap140514.html

which is NASA's Astronomy Picture Of the Day with the above one
being live video from the ISS as part of a test of 4 video cams
that switch every now and then. At the moment (7:47pm PDF) the
image is black but note the ISS orbits in 90 minutes so there
should/would be live video a number of times each day with cams
facing "forward" and "rearwards (including the solar panels)".

The present location of the ISS with respect to Earth can be
seen here:

http://eol.jsc.nasa.gov/HDEV/

Thad
Thad Floryan
2014-05-16 02:56:58 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Thad Floryan
[...]
The present location of the ISS with respect to Earth can be
http://eol.jsc.nasa.gov/HDEV/
Yep, right now the ISS is in shadow show the video is black as
can be seen here:

Loading Image... 93kB

"Right now" is 7:48pm PDT so give it 30 minutes or so.

Thad
Loading...