💾 Archived View for bbs.geminispace.org › u › HanzBrix › 22706 captured on 2024-12-17 at 15:23:26. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Re: "Mozilla removes the 'do not track' setting"
@CarloMonte The HTML5 standard is actually defined as such and defined to mostly only rely on CSS. So it should be possible for you to say, create a PureHTML conglomerate, where you hand out "verified" stickers.
The beauty if this is that they also can't use and wouldn't even have to be concerned with cookies and GDPR, there wouldn't be any.
So there is a lot of promotional work to be done, but I think it could be spun positively.
You could also do a "speed" verification, mostly meant to check if they are overloading the page with uncompressed images and other nonsense.
Dec 11 · 6 days ago
🦋 CarloMonte · Dec 11 at 17:01:
almost. incompatible is here the key. i doubt that a smooth transition is possible.
@CarloMonte what incompatibilities? Far as I know HTML5 and CSS3 were written to be stand alone technologies. All browsers should be compatible with it, so it is more of a question of incentivising people to stay away from JS and cookie use.
Shouldn't be too hard either, as most JS pages, load like ass on mobile phones, which is the predominant webviewer now.
🚀 stack [OP] · Dec 11 at 18:25:
Is loading "like ass" bad?
@stack not bad per se, just sticky and flakey. 😂
🚀 stack [OP] · Dec 11 at 18:58:
I suppose the art of the bidet is not universally adopted!
@stack I don't think installing a bidet in your phone is a good idea!
👻 darkghost · Dec 11 at 22:07:
@hansbrix Oh great! NOW you tell me!
Mozilla removes the 'do not track' setting — Citing that "many websites ignore this feature" Mozilla removed it. Many drivers ignore stop lights! Lets remove them too. At least you could see that I did not want to be tracked... Alrhough that probably made me more interesting. [https link] In all likelihood this makes no difference except it does show that we're going in the wrong direction...