FiReFoX !
Why not choose your web browser (office suite…) when you install or launch an iso image?
There is a choice between free and proprietary drivers when the iso image is launched.
2 Likes
Opera should also be removed
Pamac shows more browsers available from extra repository: brave-browser , dillo , eolie , fiery, lynx , netsurf , nyxt , palemoon , qutebrowser
I have a merge request which lacks the final teest in gnome
1 Like
I made a list of what has to be updated in the application list of manjaro hello:
To remove, because are dropped to AUR:
Browsers - Midori, Opera
Email - Sylpheed
Texteditor - Atom
PDF - Pdfmod
Graphics - Tux Paint
Video - Xplayer
Audio - Clementine, Deadbeef
Video - Simple screen recorder
Filesharing - qtransmission
System - isousb, alma
Suggestions to add:
E-Book - Coolreader, Foliate, Bookworm
Graphics - Pinta
Video - mpv
Audio - Strawberry, Qmmp
Media - VokoscreenNG
chat - Fractal
Filesharing - qbittorrent, transmission-qt
p.s. i actually tried to do the edits myself but
Fork Error!
You tried to fork Applications / manjaro-hello but it failed for the following reason:
– Limit reached You cannot create projects in your personal namespace. Contact your GitLab administrator.
Maybe @philm or @Yochanan can help with enabling forking for me?
1 Like
With manjaro-application-utility installed manjaro-hello is slow to launch with warning/error messages, but it does show Applications button
Other browsers listed in manjaro-application-utility are working for installing packages via pamac GUI
If the package can be de-bugged and updated it would be useful for changing applications after 1st boot and getting packages updated
We have things to update packages - the package manager(s).
To the degree that we see any packages as optional it would make a lot more sense to have such decisions moved earlier in the process, during install, rather than some ‘software selection suite’ application that one uses after the installation.
Otherwise, besides the redundancy, and I dare say sloppiness that something like this shows - if its useful at all it feels like a sort of catered mimicry of the windoze experience - 1-29 postinstallation steps to add desirable software and remove junk, but ‘in an app’ hurray.
I dont mean to denigrate anyones hard work - but ‘m-a-u’ and similar at best act as bandaids and stand as testaments to shortcomings elsewhere (decisions out of sync with users, poor package choices, missing features, unrealized potential of calamares plugins, etc).
5 Likes
Especially if this hello program contains programs suggestions from 5 years ago (the date of creation of the data file) or a link to facebook, on which the last post is also 5 years ago. Twitter which is X since last year was a bit better, last post was from 2020 if i am not mistaken.
I edited above to make it more clear I was speaking about the software selection application.
While I dont personally enjoy ‘Hello’ much - its not an objectively terrible thing to have a post-install ‘Welcome’ (that can be disabled or removed) pointing towards useful things like documentation or the graphical package manager.
Those things should be useful and current though of course. 
(The socials are an odd assortment - the subreddit isnt official nor handled by any team member for another example. Not to mention they dont exactly appear as clickable. With the only one current being the yt one I wonder if they should be included at all. A homepage link should suffice [where there could be further socials])
I guess thats just to say that Hello could use some touching up but wasnt really what I had in mind above.
I love Firefox, but privacy is quite important to me, and at the moment it is quite easy to switch off the ad feedback in FF, don’t know how long that will last if a lot of FF users switch it off and considering Mozilla have spent a lot to purchase Anonym they probably aren’t going to be too happy about that option going forward.
I do have a strange love hate relationship with Vivaldi though I did vote for it, will have to use it more.
1 Like
As has been pointed out, the PPA feature - if working as intended - offers more privacy than standard tracking through ads. If you value privacy and refuse ads you will likely be using an adblocker anyway in which case PPA is not doing anything (afaik).
Ultimately I think that for the average user PPA should be much preferable to normal, intrusive ads, but will only ever see widespread adoption if more browsers than just FF will offer it (Chrome cough).
3 Likes
Thank you very much for this!
I’ve gone ahead and enabled it again thanks to this article.
It is, indeed, very enlightening. Also a bit frightening.
No, I don't know what Galileo has to do with it...except that he's Galileo Figaro and, quite frankly, magnifico...
2 Likes
I’m kinda disturbed to see all these people trying to make this new feature look like a good thing. Being less bad does not equal to good. To summarize what happened, Mozilla bought an ad company, they made this new tool for less invasive ads and user tracking and can now provide to advertisers good tasty data (while having the whole data before being ‘aggregated for better privacy’). They enforced user data collection and distribution without consent. Also the argument of “people who care enough already use ad blockers blabla so others’ data can be exploited without their consent, it’s OK guys” is kinda nuts to me. I could do analogies with rape and condoms but I guess you get the point already.
2 Likes
For the record, I did say that I dislike the way they introduced it.
It should have been done openly and with enough context for the users to make an informed decision.
However I also think that the reality of the web as we have it is that there are ads which are used to finance services for which people would have to pay otherwise (which people seem to like even less) and those ads are a huge intrusion to your privacy. If (and that’s a big if) PPA can help to drasitcally reduce direct tracking of individual users, I indeed think it’s a good thing, as the ideal alternative (a web which is largely free of charge and of tracking) is highly unlikely to happen in the foreseeable future.
However I also think that realistically this needs to be regulated by legislative bodies, as such attempts will probably not become more than technical previews of what might be possible.
2 Likes
So you would argue for the status quo? It’s certainly a position that you can take, but “less bad” does literally mean “less bad”. As I said earlier, if we could redesign the entire Internet architecture from the ground up, other options may be available. This is not the world we find ourselves in.
I’d argue that this isn’t true either. This is an experiment through the telemetry system, and Mozilla does prominently display their privacy policy when you create a profile, or when they change their privacy policy. They include instructions on how to disable telemetry as well. At the moment, the data is not going to any advertisers, because it’s just a test of the system. Deploying the system would likely require an amendment to the privacy policy, but as things stand, every user of Firefox who cares about privacy enough to read the privacy policy, even skimming through it, should have consented to this type of experiment (or opted out by turning off telemetry).
There’s a whole other conversation on how people unconditionally click through privacy policies.
3 Likes
Then you have still misunderstood the things.
Lets make it very simple.
If you take firefox browser as shipped by manjaro with this feature enabled and the same browser with this feature disabled. To be inclusive we will assume the site they visit is one that supports PPA (otherwise it would be moot). In this scenario the browser with PPA enabled would be more private.
I hope that is clear enough.
7 Likes
I was surprised here nobody mentioned Floorp for the perfect replacement of Firefox.
Another new browser is Zen Browser which is also amazing.
Firefox should be removed without thinking much because its getting worse and we cannot trust Mozilla. It is still better to use gecko based browser for now instead of chromium based. Vivaldi is no way for me because it is not private and trustworthy as it claims.
1 Like
Floorp has been mentioned several times, including a post I made which had this quote from an online article:
2 Likes
What exactly is the status quo in this context?
Less bad is still bad.
So, opt out versus opt in.
Assuming this is the case, then one could reasonably assume that it is because this is a step in the progression towards an eventual goal.
I think that most Linux users prefer opting in, rather than having to read a fluid privacy policy to learn that, at least at the moment, they supposedly can opt out if they don’t want their activities tracked.
How can anyone trust that data collected from their online activities isn’t being used in a manner which is inconsistent to what is claimed by FireFox?
There are simply too many examples of user data (aka telemetry data, lol) being harvested and used in a manner that is contrary to the privacy interests and stated manner by said company. Like Google and Chrome in private mode…
As you seem unaware, the status quo is pervasive tracking by advertisers, which is almost entirely unavoidable without breaking websites. There are obvious things, like Facebook like buttons. And then there are less obvious things, like using Javascript and first party cookies or local storage in ad APIs to do the tracking. I’ve stated it before: if you want to advocate for absolute privacy against advertisers, you need to be advocating for shipping a browser with no support for JavaScript, or the complete disabling of all cookies and local storage. If you are not advocating for this, then pervasive tracking will remain the status quo. Obviously, doing this will break large swathes of the Internet.
It’s also clear that you don’t trust Firefox. Fine. However, you trust them enough to run their code on your computer? At some level you need to trust the people providing the software, unless you plan on reviewing every single change to the source code and removing the bits that you don’t like.
And while opt-in may be preferred, people just click through things without reading them regardless, meaning any checkbox is going to be basically a 50-50 toss-up on if it gets clicked or not. Because users don’t read things like licenses or policies, we simply don’t have a user interface for opt-in that actually works. An example of “not reading” would be Gamestation which claimed each customers “immortal soul” in their terms of sale. And I’d certainly argue that Firefox’s approach is more privacy minded than, for example, the Manjaro Forums which just says “By registering, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.” and does not bother to ever show you the privacy policy or terms of service at all.
To reiterate: the status-quo is not privacy minded, and most people are not privacy minded.
Fair enough, I must be unaware. I wasn’t aware that not tracking users would break websites - translation: websites are unable to function, I guess. If true, even in part, what a shame and sad state of affairs.
No, by default I don’t trust Firefox.
People should be able to maintain their privacy without having to read every single line of these lengthy word salad legalese privacy policies. Not to mention, the standard of privacy is being eroded, and has been for a long time. Thanks largely to companies like Facebook, and so many others which not only don’t give a rat’s ass about respecting people, are seeking more and more ways to monetize their activities and make them unwitting financial cash cows.