this post was submitted on 08 Feb 2024
2 points (100.0% liked)

Mildly Infuriating

35043 readers
202 users here now

Home to all things "Mildly Infuriating" Not infuriating, not enraging. Mildly Infuriating. All posts should reflect that.

I want my day mildly ruined, not completely ruined. Please remember to refrain from reposting old content. If you post a post from reddit it is good practice to include a link and credit the OP. I'm not about stealing content!

It's just good to get something in this website for casual viewing whilst refreshing original content is added overtime.


Rules:

1. Be Respectful


Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.

Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.

...


2. No Illegal Content


Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.

That means: -No promoting violence/threats against any individuals

-No CSA content or Revenge Porn

-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)

...


3. No Spam


Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.

-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.

-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.

-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers

-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.

...


4. No Porn/ExplicitContent


-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.

-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.

...


5. No Enciting Harassment,Brigading, Doxxing or Witch Hunts


-Do not Brigade other Communities

-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.

-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.

-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.

...


6. NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.


-Content that is NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.

-Content that might be distressing should be kept behind NSFW tags.

...


7. Content should match the theme of this community.


-Content should be Mildly infuriating.

-At this time we permit content that is infuriating until an infuriating community is made available.

...


8. Reposting of Reddit content is permitted, try to credit the OC.


-Please consider crediting the OC when reposting content. A name of the user or a link to the original post is sufficient.

...

...


Also check out:

Partnered Communities:

1.Lemmy Review

2.Lemmy Be Wholesome

3.Lemmy Shitpost

4.No Stupid Questions

5.You Should Know

6.Credible Defense


Reach out to LillianVS for inclusion on the sidebar.

All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

top 37 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] fitgse@sh.itjust.works 1 points 7 months ago

🍻here’s to all the developers out there who makes sure there site works great not only with Firefox, but also with ublock origin and piholes!

It is always shocking to me how many sites or apps completely fail to load if you dare block google analytics!

[–] DesertMagma@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Well good thing my employer runs a script every 15 min to set the default browser to Edge.

[–] linearchaos@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

They probably get better metrics off of you running corporate logins and edge. Edge is equivalent to Chrome It supports all the same plugins.

It's probably just secops picking the low hanging fruit dissuade you subverting network security.

[–] n3m37h@sh.itjust.works 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)
[–] linearchaos@lemmy.world 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

When I say that Edge is equivalent to Chrome, I don't mean that Edge is exactly Chrome It's not what I said and it's not what I meant. I mean that for all intents and purposes you can use edge for anything you want to use Chrome for. Major differentiation is that you're giving all of your data to Microsoft in lieu of Google. And you could look at all the other chromium base browsers and say yeah you could do the same thing with those but in this case we have a business user. There's businesses are probably already running Microsoft networks. They might very well already have Microsoft SSO. Edge is going to have all kinds of great tie-ins to active directory policy. So secops/it is going to try to force you to use Edge, instead of say Firefox with a barely have any control over or maybe brave where you're going to try TOR or IPFS and just basically be a stain on their HIDS board.

[–] n3m37h@sh.itjust.works -1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Edge is equivalent to Chrome It supports all the same plugins.

What's this then?

[–] linearchaos@lemmy.world 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Jesus man I just explained it to you. Welcome to my block list

[–] n3m37h@sh.itjust.works -1 points 7 months ago

Ah I see Mr I'm never wrong

[–] Emerald@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago

"We're a very inaccessible and hostile webpage. Turn back now."

[–] eager_eagle@lemmy.world 0 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

As if they needed to check for ""compatibility"" at all - just let the users try their makeshift coded-in-a-weekend browsers, or their 2008 version of IE.

The better question is why some websites even bother checking for the browser when the vast majority of people uses mainstream options that follow web standards and self-update.

Checking the browser version kind of made sense 15 years ago when updating the browser depended on the user's awareness and willingness of doing so, and the lack of standards across browsers was blatant. Nowadays that's pretty much useless. The maximum these sites should be doing is displaying a banner letting the user know their browser might be incompatible (because it's likely not in a way that prevents usage), then fuck off.

[–] RegalPotoo@lemmy.world 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I had a client once who used to be obsessed with this. By his logic, if a potential customer visited the website and had a bad experience because the site didn't work properly in their browser, they'd think the company was unprofessional and wouldn't come into the store and we'd lose them as a customer forever. Analytics showed that 99+% of people would visit in one of the big three, and he wouldn't pay for someone to test the site on the less popular browsers, instead he insisted on fingerprinting logic that broke all the time and probably caused more bounces than any possible rendering quirks from niche mobile browsers would have caused

[–] eager_eagle@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

It's ridiculous some people even consider blocking a browser completely and having a near 100% chance of turning away the customer that uses it instead of just letting the user browse and have a significant chance of nothing bad happening.

People are not going to change browsers to visit this website unless they absolutely have to - in which case they'll hate this company for it.

[–] EmperorHenry@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 7 months ago (2 children)

brave browser is right there. Just saying.

[–] Psythik@lemmy.world 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Firefox is less sketchy, and is one of the last browsers left that isn't based on Chromium. Just saying.

[–] EmperorHenry@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Firefox is less sketchy,

Not anymore, If you want a firefox based browser, go with mullvadbrowser, Tor or Librewolf, all with canvas blocker set to the proactive? protection profile...I think it's called.

[–] nymphlode@pawb.social -1 points 7 months ago (2 children)

what's sketchy about Firefox?

[–] fernlike3923@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 months ago

This video explains pretty well how Firefox is turning worse on the privacy aspect of things.

It connects you to google analytics and other advertising companies like double-click

Librewolf is firefox without the crap that firefox has now.

[–] bingbong@lemmy.dbzer0.com -1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

~~brave~~ vivaldi

!only if you have to use chromium of course!<

[–] tal@lemmy.today 0 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (2 children)

https://gs.statcounter.com/browser-market-share/mobile/worldwide

According to this:

On the desktop, Firefox has about 6% marketshare, and Edge, the Windows default, about 11%.

On mobile, however, Firefox is at 0.5%, and Edge at 0.3%.

A lot of people only browse the Web on a mobile platform. And the ones using those tend to use the default browser bundled with their phone; if what they have out-of-box works, they're not going to install anything else. Apple bundles Safari, and Google bundles Chrome, so that's what gets used.

[–] PanoptiDon@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago

Chromebooks are frequently used in US schools, this has to screw the statistics.

[–] Venator@lemmy.nz 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

It still doesn't explain all the extra work of detecting and intentionally blocking firefox...

[–] tal@lemmy.today 1 points 7 months ago

I expect that they had something break on it and decided that it wasn't worth the time spent fixing it, so they just blocked it so more users didn't run into it. A simple message may be annoying to them, but at least they have a straightforward workaround then.

I mean, don't get me wrong, I use Firefox on both mobile and desktop, but it's not too hard to see why they'd do a cost/benefit analysis like that. No one company is in the business of trying to do antitrust work, to avoid a browser monopoly, and that'd be the reason why it'd be important to have competing browsers.

[–] maxwisecracks@lemmy.world 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

for the love of god, charge your phone

[–] Dragster39@feddit.de 0 points 7 months ago

4%, absolute madman, probably only had time to make this post and can't answer comments anymore

[–] AVeryCleverName@lemmy.one 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I wonder if it would work if you spoofed your user agent.

[–] HelloHotel@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago

it almost always does, lol

[–] prosp3kt@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

To avoid testing on other platforms. Money is limited.

[–] blahsay@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago

This could be a 'works better on chrome popup'. Instead it's a hard block

[–] bjorney@lemmy.ca 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Chrome implements features that aren't standards track into their browser, and lazy/oblivious devs use these features to build their products - only to realize wayyy too late it won't work in Safari/Firefox because it uses APIs that are chrome only

[–] bleistift2@feddit.de 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Firefox still has no month or week inputs. These things have been standardized 10 years ago and implemented in Chrome as of version 20.

[–] squid_slime@lemmy.world 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

That input sucks, ui design and its not intuitive at all. Its more frustrating that I can't just type dates in

[–] bleistift2@feddit.de 0 points 7 months ago

That input sucks, ui design

I have no clue what you’re trying to tell me with that.

[–] Zacryon@feddit.de 0 points 7 months ago

If it's a website which only works with a specific browser, it's a shitsite.

[–] LazaroFilm@lemmy.world 0 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

Companies like chrome because it’s the most used browser. So if they develop for it, and only for it without caring of compatibility on others, then it’s cheaper. And since they don’t want you to use another browser and complain that their site is broken, the just block you.

[–] Arfman@aussie.zone 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Shouldn't they just commit to follow the web standards? Most modern browsers strive to follow those standards.

[–] Black616Angel@feddit.de 0 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Well chrome should, yes. But they don't.
Then some JavaScript framework developers think "well this non-standard feature is neat, let's use that everywhere" and then companies who use their framework (or a framwork dependent on it) can't support all browsers.

It's a multilayered problem (as always) with lots of individually decisions that make sense, but don't work out in the end (as always).