kbal

Well, I guess Canadians who want to watch Prodigy are out of luck. There certainly isn't any other way to see it. It's just impossible.

That word did not originate as a racial slur, but became one in 20th-century South Africa, according to Wikipedia.

In Arabic, the word kāfir ("unbeliever") was originally applied to non-Muslims before becoming predominantly focused on pagan zanj (black African) who were increasingly used as slaves.[2] During the Age of Exploration in early modern Europe, variants of the Latin term cafer (pl. cafri) were adopted in reference to non-Muslim Bantu peoples even when they were monotheistic. It was eventually used, particularly in Afrikaans (Afrikaans: kaffer), for any black person during the Apartheid and Post-Apartheid eras, closely associated with South African racism, it became a pejorative by the mid-20th century and is now considered extremely offensive

That depends on what's making it take so long, among other things. But with sufficient effort I suppose the more sneaky fingerprinters (those which aren't aren't already blocked by other extensions) could probably be made difficult to notice for unprepared users. JShelter popping up a big warning about a "very high" level of fingerprinting activity is a pretty good hint though, and I take it as a suggestion to add some rules for ublock if I expect to visit that site again.

As it continues to get more common, maybe it's time to go back to using noscript as well.

Yeah my main browser is easily fingerprinted due to the many ways it is non-standard. I'll use torbrowser or something if it actually matters. But JShelter does not really make that problem worse for most people, and it probably frustrates some fraction of attempts — including those that rely on web workers apparently.

The page load time of creepjs would not be acceptable for use in real life. Anything with that much creepy js is going to get itself blocked by other means.

If I visit that page I get a "fingerprinting activity detected" warning from JShelter and then a mostly blank page with "FP ID: Computing..." at the top, and a bunch of javascript errors in the console.

Most sites are fine with the settings where I normally leave them, but it's not much of a surprise for one that's devoted entirely to browser fingerprinting to be broken by JShelter. Stopping or at least making more difficult most fingerprinting attempts is among the things it does. It can't stop all of them of course, but it's one component that helps to work against them.

It appears that you're trying to install a kernel for which dkms can't build the version of the v4l2loopback kernel module that you have.

I don't see why this would affect Gnome, but if it's causing problems for the rest of the system maybe try uninstalling v4l2loopback-dkms until you can get a version that works, or else use an older kernel.

Alternately, if you're feeling brave and this is the same version that's in debian stable right now, you could edit /usr/src/v4l2loopback-0.12.7/v4l2loopback.c and replace strlcpy with strscpy in two places.

You can stop that (and many other things) with jshelter.

Be extra careful not to hurt your ear this week, you won't be able to bandage it

[François Legault] says his government will form a committee of experts to look into issues surrounding gender identity. He said he understands the concerns on both sides of the issue ...

[...] Dough Ford and Education Minister Stephen Lecce for suggesting that public educators are trying to “indoctrinate” kids who decide to use different pronouns.

One Mozilla developer claimed that explaining PPA would be too challenging

It's not that difficult to explain. "When you visit the website of a participating advertiser whose ads you've seen, do you want us to tell them that someone saw their ads and visited their site, without telling them it was you? Y/N"

But if they asked such a question almost all of the small fraction of users who bother to read the whole sentence would still see no good reason to want to participate. Coming up with one is that hard part. It requires some pretty fancy rationalizations. Firefox keeping track of which ads I've seen? No, thanks.

If there was an option to make sure that advertisers whose ads I've blocked know that they got blocked, I might go for that.

The writer apparently thinks that the previous Mozilla misstep into advertising land was the Mr. Robot thing six years ago, which seems to confirm my impression that this one is getting a bigger reaction than their other recent moves in this direction. We'll see if the rest of the tech press picks it up. Maybe one day when the cumulative loss of users shows up more clearly in the telemetry they'll reconsider.

Pessimists get just as many disappointments, but fewer surprises. Optimism and pessimism are orthogonal to effort and will.