• ramble81@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Careful, there are some edgy people out there who don’t want to use more than one browser because Firefox doesn’t work with their cameras /s

      Meanwhile, I’ll still be using Firefox too

        • ramble81@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          May be bad phrasing, but Firefox doesn’t support h.265 so there’s limitations with streaming video on some camera platforms and other sites.

          • Kusimulkku@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            TIL Firefox doesn’t support HEVC. Hadn’t really noticed that before, I guess it’s why some Jellyfin streams started transcoding for me.

            • DefederateLemmyMl@feddit.nl
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              3 months ago

              I guess it’s why some Jellyfin streams started transcoding for me.

              You’re better off using the Jellyfin Media Player standalone application anyway.

    • deadcade@lemmy.deadca.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Yes. There’s only 3 major browsers. Chromium (Chrome), Firefox, WebKit (Safari). Nearly every other webbrowser is a fork of one of these, most are forks of Chromium, including Opera. As such, most webbrowsers will be affected by the change.

  • linearchaos@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    Maybe we’re thinking about this wrong. Maybe we should all start running plugins that just load whatever ads that show up in the background hundreds of times without showing them to us. Every viewer is thousands upon thousands of impressions and click through rates become absolutely miserable. We can make the ads worthless or maybe even make them cost a significant amount of money to host.

      • ArchRecord@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        It’s mildly effective in the sense that it will decimate click-through rates, but if enough people did it, they would start filtering by IP, and you’d need to change how many ads it clicks on so it looks more human.

        It also still gives advertisers your data, since it still has to load the ads on your system to click them, so it’s not as privacy-preserving as a full-on adblocker that outright blocks every advertisement and tracker related network request in the first place.