Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | ars's commentslogin

A profile is a full new browser, these containers are just tabs. So they mix into the current browser window.

They are much more lightweight, and the workflow is better, just switch tabs.


I have containers on Firefox, and I do NOT have this extension installed.

They've been available natively on Nightly with some basic UI support since they were first implemented a decade ago. Some other pre-release builds have them too but it's been too long and I cannot remember which ones did or didn't.

I don't use Nightly and I've been using containers for I think that long without any extension for it.

Edit: looks like I enabled them manually and couldn't remember/find it, it's in about:config under the name "privacy.userContext" instead of "containers".


as far as i remember, the low level container functionality was always in the core browser. what the extension adds is the UI to manage containers. with this change it appears the UI is merged back into the core browser.

It's been there just as long, turn it on with "privacy.userContext.ui.enabled" and manage them at "about:preferences#containers"

The addons added extra functionality but everything they've listed in this announcement is already there. Sounds like they're just flipping these two flags by default.


The Facebok Container extension also makes containers available.

I'm a little confused here, I've been using the containers feature already for years now on Firefox. And I have no add-on installed for it, it just works.

So what is it that they're adding?


Kubernetes

Serious answer:

> For almost a decade, many of you have relied on our Multi-Account Containers extension to keep work, personal, and privacy-sensitive browsing separate without needing multiple browsers or profiles.

> We’ve heard your feedback and understood the value you find in that separation. Now, we’re bringing the power of the Multi-Account Containers extension directly into the heart of Firefox for all to benefit from.

I'm confused too, maybe it's preinstalled, but disabled?

I remember seeing this Fb container symbol in a tab from time to time in my private machine, but I think I did enable something in advance.

Or it's that I just see it extremely rarely due to uBlock origin.


You could have containers but the software itself had no way to manage them. The extension provided the de facto default way to manage them. I think now they are baking the functionality in. I wish they would actually flesh out split tabs. It is so barebones it pissed me off enough to sort of stop using Firefox on a few boxes altogether after decades of use.The browser seems to be the last thing on this company's mind.

No, it's at about:preferences#containers and has been for years if you turn it on in about:config (privacy.userContext.enabled and privacy.userContext.ui.enabled).

> So what is it that they're adding?

They enable it by default without having to go to about:config or install an extension that use the container capabilities.

You have probably done one or the other a long time ago without remembering it.


What's the point in it existing then? Just for a couple of the chosen few?

I'm aware that lots of people can be destructive, but there's a balance.


For its own sake, not ours.

Beauty does not exist for its own sake, it only exists in the mind of someone else.

We still don't know how, like from a physics point of view, thermoreceptors detect temperature.

I would do something that isn't *.me, since it was them that suspended it.


I think you misunderstood -- OP is running op-s-domain.com/telegramchat -> redirect t.me.

They updated op-s-domain.com/telegramchat -> redirect telegram.me.


I think you also misunderstood, they are suggesting OP redirect to a telegram domain that isn't on the .me TLD, as the other .me is potentially at risk of also being taken down.


This is barely an issue… changing the redirect is instantaneous.


fair enough -- dunno what domains telegram uses


telegram.dog


I am amazed that this exists and can't figure out if this is just some random person's redirect or an official domain.

.is might be a choice, since archive.is continues to be available despite many legal threats

You don't have to be an Icelandic national to register a .is


kiwifarms and sci-hub have been kicked off .is


Based on that heuristic, .st is a very good domain, as is .gl (which hosts Anna’s-archive’s registration).


.st went down for most of a day:

https://blorn.com/post/29851770158/beware-cutesy-two-letter-...

Little TLDs may be poorly run. Would not trust again.


Technical failures are different from procedural ones (didn’t verisign blow up dot com or something years ago?).

The future is domain resiliency - whether that’s via apps or other methods.


I currently check Wikipedia to find out the current domain for sites that are subject to frequent takedowns.


wikipedia happily censors domains, it's not a free speech community.

They operate in antiphase: annas-archive.st and sci-hub.gl are suspended.

This couple checked all the domain zones money can buy and... ended up using different sets, with zero intersection


.is is a very resilient TLD indeed, and it's well known in some communities.


how about .to? that's what i'm mainly using for my url shortener/redirects and haven't run into any issues... yet


A recent change in .to management gave it the technical ability to take down domains quickly.


[flagged]


> American business based in America and doing business that benefits American citizens, rather than some random banana republic.

This makes a huge presumption of rock solid stability of political/economic system, that America is not going the direction of a banana republic, in terms of graft, corruption and patronage, which it certainly seems to be these days.


“Banana republic” is specifically a term referring to countries that are puppets of the United States on behalf of commercial interests (the trope-naming example being Gautemala on behalf of United Fruit Company); in the absence of an imperial power pulling US strings on behalf of that powers’ commercial interests which dominated the US economy, it would be hard for the US to be reasonably described as going the direction of a “banana republic”.

What it is more going the way of a major power resenting a weakened position in the world falling into authoritarian and/or kleptocratic nationalist dictatorship leaning on the propaganda of restoring national greatness, somewhere between Hitler’s Germany and Putin’s Russia, which is a very different situation than a banana republic.


No.. that's not specifically it at all.

> dependent on exporting a single product or commodity, often controlled by foreign-owned entities [0]

Such countries/regions long existed before the US, although the term was coined by a US writer (William Sydney Porter), and the Banana industry (specifically) has a lot to answer for (in the US specifically). A region making money from.. foreign-owned chips, oil, IT-consultants or Sardines has the same status. The term has a terrible history (surprising the Gap hasn't rebranded).

[0]: https://www.britannica.com/topic/banana-republic


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banana_republic

Banana republic isn’t specific to US control and it’s actually not that unreasonable to call Russia a banana republic


Because their economy is almost exclusively oil? Quite a few countries of the world would qualify if that's the case.


Yeah, is banana republic meant to be a rare thing by definition?


The US being a puppet state of US commercial interests seems to be an apt description.


Being an American citizen, I prefer to do business with American entities, regardless of what shitty opinion her detractors may express. I am loyal to her, more loyal than I would be to Tonga, or Montenegro, just to choose some random examples.


I don't think you're wrong that tiny pacific island nations are not stable or reliable, at this point they're all either a client state of China, the USA or Australia.

But I think it's also unfair and mean spirited to say that a country like Nauru (barely a country, IMHO, population of 12500 people) is "prostituting" itself by allowing 3rd party registrars to sell domains for a profit, since they have basically no other resource with the bird guano originated phosphate mines now being stripped clean. Would I use a Nauru domain? No. Do I go out of my way to insult them on the internet? Also no.


Btw, I highly doubt Nauru makes much money selling their ccTLD, they manage it directly on the island and each domain costs a whopping 500$/year.

Better examples: Tuvalu (.TV), Anguilla (.AI)

Both of these countries (anguilla is not independent though) only get a cut of the money from the domains; all the technical management is done by GoDaddy for .TV and Identity Digital for .AI. In my opinion, very sad.

.AI was run by a local guy in Anguilla (Vince Cate) utilizing the https://cocca.org.nz/ domain SaaS, but Identity Digital took over in late 2024.


> I highly doubt Nauru makes much money selling their ccTLD, they manage it directly on the island and each domain costs a whopping 500$/year.

Yeah, can't imagine anyone buying any of these domains. I mean yes, it's literally the exact word for "naked" in French, but nobody speaks French so there's definitely no chance they make any money


"The most common translation for "naked" in French is nu (masculine) or nue (feminine)."

NU is the country code for Niue.

Not Nauru. Nauru is NR.

NU is an interesting story, the control of the domain was granted in exchange for providing internet services to the island, and its operation was later transferred to the Swedish Internet Foundation. The islanders want the domain back


Interesting read from 2004: https://www.theregister.com/on-prem/2004/12/20/we-were-sold-...

But I strongly disagree with your conclusion. gTLDs are also run by profit-driven companies and operate under ICANN's US-rooted system. ccTLDs at least offer some jurisdictional autonomy and diversity.

And many "trendy" ccTLDs are not actually run by unstable local governments. .me, for example, is operated with GoDaddy and Identity Digital, while .to relies on Tucows, a Canadian company.

So the irony is that these ccTLDs often end up controlled or technically managed by the same North American companies you consider more trustworthy. Very few small/island countries actually manage their ccTLD directly, which is extremely sad.


Didn't the crustacean site temporarily lose its domain a minute ago because someone had to make an in-person payment to whatever Serbian mafia controls .rs?

Vanity domains are beyond stupid and not worth the trouble.


It's a pretty good heuristic if some of the more targeted communities choose a TLD and stay up for some time.


isis


ospf-vs-is.is


Imagine getting kicked off .isis


.isis would fall under US jurisdiction so that would be easy. They're very censor-happy in the US.


That's not likely to help, it was the .me people that suspended it, they will likely do the same with telegram.me


Perhaps I've misunderstood, but I think it's not the text that is unicode complete, it's the transliteration rules that are.

Unless you install special rules you won't be doing extra computation.


Not even any built-in transliteration rules, but the transliteration rules engine. One has to load a custom ruleset to exploit it – and I presume no sane implementation is going to accept rules from untrusted input.


Resetting it will kill bacteria, certainly. But there are a number of heat-stable toxins that once created will not be destroyed that way.

I guess you've been doing this for a while, and presumably it's been working, plus I know that historically this is how people lived. But be aware it's not risk free.

A suggestion: A pressure cooker - not for the pressure, but because they can be sealed. Heat the food, then let it cool without opening it. Kind of a less secure form of canning.


You are perfectly free to keep selling what we've been eating. No one is forcing people to plant the new stuff.

If you make patents illegal, no one will breed new stuff. How does that help?

All that will do is cause people to grow the old stuff, which they still can, even if the patent exists.

Do you get what I mean? Adding a patent does not reduce anything, it only adds a new option.


> If you make patents illegal, no one will breed new stuff. How does that help?

There would still be public, industry-group and philanthropic research. But yes, probably much less.


And there still is today. But are they producing good nectarines? Apparently not as good as these.

I know that occasionally philanthropic research works out, but generally I find that people are motivated by profit.


> You are perfectly free to keep selling what we've been eating. No one is forcing people to plant the new stuff.

This common sense statement should be true, but is wholly ignorant of the lawsuits farmers deal with from seed suppliers


Which law suits would those be? It seems to me that the reality is that GMO seeds are really useful and all the lawsuits Ive seen are farmers wanting to use them without paying royalties.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: