Starting today, YouTube is almost unusable on Firefox(old.reddit.com)
old.reddit.com
Starting today, YouTube is almost unusable on Firefox
https://old.reddit.com/r/youtube/comments/1f30ku4/youtube_sabotaging_on_firefox/
250 コメント
Since YouTube has massive resources and famed tooling&processes, presumably either they knew about the Firefox problems before deploying, or (if there was a genuine QA mistake) they'd know about it very soon after deploy, when they'd be able to rollback if they wanted to.
(Obviously, they know about Firefox, they've developed for it since it was available, and they've even been funding it.)
(Obviously, they know about Firefox, they've developed for it since it was available, and they've even been funding it.)
Google funding Firefox is part of the problem. It contributes to the perception of corruption around the Mozilla organization, just as it does when the bus has a supergraphic ad for a car dealership on it.
If the EU was serious about privacy they'd fully fund Firefox.
If the EU was serious about privacy they'd fully fund Firefox.
The perception of corruption is not without merit. Mozilla is pretty corrupt at this point. (Source: I work here).
I really don’t get where this whole “the EU should fund it” idea came from and why it’s repeated so often. Why would the EU throw their tax payer money at another corrupt American corporation? Mozilla has been in bed with Google for several years, has horrible web compatibility, and is only barely still in the privacy lane.
Besides, Europe isn’t the land of open source software and privacy. Look at the laws in the UK, France, and Germany; they’re not exactly privacy friendly. Look at the tech stacks at companies in the UK and Germany, they lean very heavily into the Microsoft/.NET world.
I really don’t get where this whole “the EU should fund it” idea came from and why it’s repeated so often. Why would the EU throw their tax payer money at another corrupt American corporation? Mozilla has been in bed with Google for several years, has horrible web compatibility, and is only barely still in the privacy lane.
Besides, Europe isn’t the land of open source software and privacy. Look at the laws in the UK, France, and Germany; they’re not exactly privacy friendly. Look at the tech stacks at companies in the UK and Germany, they lean very heavily into the Microsoft/.NET world.
Then they should fork it and start a new organization.
The EU and the world could have a privacy focused browser if they paid for it. If they don't they're going to always be waiting for the market to do it and it won't. Given that Mozilla wastes a lot of resources on things that are thoroughly pizzled (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autofac) a browser could be maintained for much less than the current Mozilla budget. This is why "fully funded" as opposed to "funded" is key. So long as the organization feels the need to go around with its hat out it is going to be corrupt.
The EU and the world could have a privacy focused browser if they paid for it. If they don't they're going to always be waiting for the market to do it and it won't. Given that Mozilla wastes a lot of resources on things that are thoroughly pizzled (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autofac) a browser could be maintained for much less than the current Mozilla budget. This is why "fully funded" as opposed to "funded" is key. So long as the organization feels the need to go around with its hat out it is going to be corrupt.
They can fork Chromium instead. Doesn't mean Firefox is the best base to start.
… and there are many Chromium forks out there. For web standards to really be standards and not “Chromium” there has to be a viable non-Chromium browser.
The illusion of choice:
You can have any color car as long as its black. I mean you can run any browser you want, as long as its Chrome.
You can have any color car as long as its black. I mean you can run any browser you want, as long as its Chrome.
If Firefox had 90% of the market would it be a choice?
Yes, because Mozilla can't force is onto it by making google finance and YouTube run like shit on competing browsers
I wonder what your thoughts are on Firefox's absence of an AdBlocker on iOS? Edge has one, Brave has one, but Firefox still doesn't have one. I know that on iOS they can't run plugins, but since the other browsers can, it feels like a lost opportunity.
Could Google's funding be related?
Could Google's funding be related?
Can you elaborate on specifics of corruption?
Basically, follow the money.
To keep nonprofit/tax benefits, the work has to be done for some sort of public benefit. That work never gets done, instead it’s constant reorganizations, hiring/firing, and shuffling money around. We’re always profitable, and every few years there seems to be decent to huge layoffs even though we’re beating revenue estimates and behind on our hiring goals.
Money keeps going up from Google, usage keeps going down, start new projects, never staff them to what is budgeted, cut project, fire people, and the money disappears into the foundation. Foundation sends money out to various levels of ghost and shell corporations.
To keep nonprofit/tax benefits, the work has to be done for some sort of public benefit. That work never gets done, instead it’s constant reorganizations, hiring/firing, and shuffling money around. We’re always profitable, and every few years there seems to be decent to huge layoffs even though we’re beating revenue estimates and behind on our hiring goals.
Money keeps going up from Google, usage keeps going down, start new projects, never staff them to what is budgeted, cut project, fire people, and the money disappears into the foundation. Foundation sends money out to various levels of ghost and shell corporations.
Most of this sounds like poor management and not corruption. But perhaps the corruption is intentional mismanagement to keep it uncompetitive
EU has funded Servo, which is a lot better than giving money to already-rich Mozilla CxOs: https://nlnet.nl/project/Verso/
Why would EU fund a US corporation?
I always find these comments a bit rediculous. You think that big corporations are incapable of having accidental bugs?
Wish that were true. The world would be a much less buggy place.
Wish that were true. The world would be a much less buggy place.
> I always find these comments a bit rediculous. You think that big corporations are incapable of having accidental bugs?
I didn't say they that they couldn't have accidental bugs.
I did note that they'd normally be able to rollback a deploy with problems.
Why do you say that's ridiculous to comment?
I didn't say they that they couldn't have accidental bugs.
I did note that they'd normally be able to rollback a deploy with problems.
Why do you say that's ridiculous to comment?
I don't think it's ridiculous, it's just they might not necessarily care enough. They will consider it a bug if there's enough uproar, for now there are just a couple of unhappy users here and there, no reasons to revert something that presumably took a lot of work to implement, especially if the fix takes more effort than the original implementation (I wouldn't be surprised since we're talking about performance differences between browser engines).
I kinda hope that time-to-render is in their A/B rollout metrics to prevent rollouts...
In the world of fail early, fail often this stuff is bound to happen. That said YouTube works fine for me minus the obvious resolution issues that YouTube has been enforcing forever because of DMCAon some videos
[deleted]
You’d be shocked how shitty the development practices inside a bigco can be. Working at a FAANG-level company is profoundly disillusioning.
One of recent Chromium updates (affected Chrome's and Edge's wide release, not just betas) completely broke all pages with select elements containing a large amount of option elements. We're talking 100+ times slower parsing of the page. An internal tool of ours went from rendering pretty much instantly to 30s long hangs and/or crashes.
Found the bug: https://issues.chromium.org/issues/341095522
Found the bug: https://issues.chromium.org/issues/341095522
From the thread:
> We’re now directing users to move away from Chrome
…to where, exactly?
> We’re now directing users to move away from Chrome
…to where, exactly?
It feels more like YouTube just doesn't prioritize an unpopular browser. Google only put resources into Firefox so they can say they're not a monopoly, but that strategy didn't really pan out. So, now, they're probably going to stop caring about Firefox altogether.
I have a strong feeling the developers behind sites like YouTube and Reddit don't actually use the software they make, because both are slow and laggy to use on any computer I use.
I just can't think of any other reason why they're both so infamously bad.
I just can't think of any other reason why they're both so infamously bad.
As they say, you aren't the customer, the advertiser is the customer.
If the site works for the 95% of ad dollars who use Chrome on their phones, it works as intended.
If the site works for the 95% of ad dollars who use Chrome on their phones, it works as intended.
> the advertiser is the customer.
Excellent point. If any change on the site caused ad views or clicks to drop by >1%, automated tests probably shoot flares up to the exec level. Whereas the vast majority of users on FF are blocking ads anyway, so their lagging performance probably barely registers on those tests.
While YT probably still has non-ad automated performance tests, in the case of a non-Chrome, non-Apple desktop browser, those tests probably run every odd Thursday and regressions send a toast message to an intern. :-)
Excellent point. If any change on the site caused ad views or clicks to drop by >1%, automated tests probably shoot flares up to the exec level. Whereas the vast majority of users on FF are blocking ads anyway, so their lagging performance probably barely registers on those tests.
While YT probably still has non-ad automated performance tests, in the case of a non-Chrome, non-Apple desktop browser, those tests probably run every odd Thursday and regressions send a toast message to an intern. :-)
Even advertisers don't matter anymore, only metrics. Because they can be manipulated.
The software engineering show isn't being run by engineers, middle-managers or even MBAs anymore.
It's run by product people who treat it like a mini dictatorship.
So releases like this have to go out, no matter the consequence.
The software engineering show isn't being run by engineers, middle-managers or even MBAs anymore.
It's run by product people who treat it like a mini dictatorship.
So releases like this have to go out, no matter the consequence.
Working on software rarely, especially at large companies, means you have any sort of agency over the features of the software. That's Not Your Job (TM).
What actions do you find slow and laggy? There are definitely UX improvements, but I don't find either laggy on the multiple platforms I use them on, as long as I have a good network connection.
They use it but in Chrome on a maxed out MacBook Pro
Another wild-ass guess is that a lot of garbage may be generated? I had to use an intranet site that was developed on an older version of vue, and that version apparently was a profligate allocator; difference between chromium and firefox was stark.
On an only-slightly-related note, if anyone knows how to use the new firefox profiler when there is no internet access, please point me at it.
On an only-slightly-related note, if anyone knows how to use the new firefox profiler when there is no internet access, please point me at it.
>desktop_polymer.js
its doing such fun things as patching tons of standard js methods (.append() .appendChild() etc) for no reason other than maybe fighting adblockers?
When debugging own scripts/extensions running on YT every other call to standard function ends up calling some proxy in desktop_polymer.js
its doing such fun things as patching tons of standard js methods (.append() .appendChild() etc) for no reason other than maybe fighting adblockers?
When debugging own scripts/extensions running on YT every other call to standard function ends up calling some proxy in desktop_polymer.js
even after load, youtube shorts (the doomscrolling section of youtube) has a 2-3 second lag between when the audio starts on a new video and when the video starts moving.
seems monopolistic. what's goin on with peertube and rumble these days
seems monopolistic. what's goin on with peertube and rumble these days
my question is why isn't this being tested for before it is rolled out? shouldn't google be running testing on their sites for each of the major browsers before dropping it on everyone?
Also, it is Firefox on the desktop. 90% of YouTube views come from mobile, and Firefox only has about 5% market share on the desktop. So desktop Firefox is a half a percent of the overall users of youtube.
Is it any surprise that maintaining support for a browser that delivers less than a percent of the total users is deprioritized or just forgotten about?
Is it any surprise that maintaining support for a browser that delivers less than a percent of the total users is deprioritized or just forgotten about?
Despite those stats, if Google wants to avoid being called a monopoly they need to support it, and it needs to receive the same level of support as their own product.
I'd argue the opposite. You need to be a monopoly and have basically every eyeball in the country on your website for it to be worth spending the engineering hours optimizing a browser that only delivers a fraction of a percent of your viewers.
It’s not monopolistic to not support shitty browsers with little user base. This isn’t even the basis for the current antitrust ruling against Google, for what it’s worth.
As the parent comment points out, if YouTube isn’t buggy for most of their users, why do they have to worry about it? We don’t expect either Microsoft or game devs to ensure their stuff works well with wine on Linux.
As the parent comment points out, if YouTube isn’t buggy for most of their users, why do they have to worry about it? We don’t expect either Microsoft or game devs to ensure their stuff works well with wine on Linux.
So you work at Google on Youtube then right?
The _WEB_ is a open standard. A Game running on Windows is a false equivalence.
The _WEB_ is a open standard. A Game running on Windows is a false equivalence.
Web standards are open but that doesn’t mean you can’t build on top of them. YouTube is not an open standard. If Google wanted to end web support for YouTube and force everyone to use some sort of YouTube app even on desktop, they could do that. They’re not obligated to make sure YouTube works on EVERY browser especially when an insignificant amount of their users come from there.
A game running on windows isn’t a false equivalence either. A lot of games are built on open standards and open source (e.g. OpenGL, various game engines, etc) and still won’t work on wine/linux. If a bunch of people are using windows in order to play their games, that’s not too different from a lot of people using chromium browsers to use YouTube.
Also, I work at Mozilla.
A game running on windows isn’t a false equivalence either. A lot of games are built on open standards and open source (e.g. OpenGL, various game engines, etc) and still won’t work on wine/linux. If a bunch of people are using windows in order to play their games, that’s not too different from a lot of people using chromium browsers to use YouTube.
Also, I work at Mozilla.
If they're doing it to intentionally damage firefox because they feel it is competition, that's an argument for Chrome to be severed from google.
If they're inadvertently doing it because firefox is so insignificant as not to be worth thinking about, that's an argument for Chrome to be severed from google.
If they're inadvertently doing it because firefox is so insignificant as not to be worth thinking about, that's an argument for Chrome to be severed from google.
How is Firefox having abysmal market share an argument that chrome should be severed from Google?
In a vacuum, it's not. The market is completely dominated by Google though, and they exercise that authority and mindshare brazenly, to the point that it's easy to see how it affects Firefox. Firefox functions great. It doesn't function great with Google products/services such as YouTube in this case, which has no real competition. What's someone to do? Switch to Chrome. One might even make the assumption that the repeat offenses over time, across various services, across various fields, demonstrates... malice.
> demonstrates... malice
Not demonstrates, hints at. In each of these cases, Google is very careful that you can easily come up with an alternative plausible explanation. It's hard to use the en masse argument if each of these problems can be accounted for.
These guys are not stupid - they're happy with the current status quo where they have a de facto monopoly but they can pretend they don't.
Not demonstrates, hints at. In each of these cases, Google is very careful that you can easily come up with an alternative plausible explanation. It's hard to use the en masse argument if each of these problems can be accounted for.
These guys are not stupid - they're happy with the current status quo where they have a de facto monopoly but they can pretend they don't.
Sorry, it is absolutely hard-core malice. No hinting, after we found out last year that a deliberate sleep was introduced with a user agent check. This is bald-faced murder. Its like shooting someone in public and stomping on the body. No need to dance around it.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38345858
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38345858
You should actually read the link you posted. That had nothing to do with Firefox and has everything to do with ad blockers. Looks like YouTubes goal was to bring parity between those using ad blockers and those not, as to not incentivize ad blocker usage, not to cripple Firefox.
And ? It is part of the anti-adblocker code which is clearly targeted at Firefox. What sort of extra-ordinary bar are you keeping for malice if not this ?
Considering Firefox's current situation is the result of years of abusive monopoly practice from Google, Chrome should be severed from Google.
If you knew the amount of project changes, reorgs, CEOs, products, executives, etc we’ve went through you’d realize Googles behavior had little do with it. In fact, if it weren’t for their corporate generosity we’d be finished by now.
We’re basically run by a bunch of lawyers and ex-McKinsey people now (and have been for some time). We’re not victims of Google, we’re victims of our own hiring practices.
We’re basically run by a bunch of lawyers and ex-McKinsey people now (and have been for some time). We’re not victims of Google, we’re victims of our own hiring practices.
On a side note, I have been reflecting on the impact of modern Internet contents on me for the last 12 years or so. The conclusion is, for whatever the reason, the impact is mostly negative. It would do me a great favor to simply remove Youtube, social media sites and anything similar from my life.
I probably have ADHD. I rarely completed any side projects. I'm anxious most if the time, biting my fingers all the time, a habit I formed before I reached teenage. Having access to the modern Internet makes everything above worse, a lot worse. Yes they also introduced a lot of ineresting things to me, but there are endless amount of interesting things in the world and I need to focus on a couple of them to get a deeper understanding. Reading new contents every day is my escape, not my medicine.
Maybe I should just block myself from the Internet. I taught myself Foxbase and Foxpro back in the 90s without the Internet. I taught myself C++ in 2012 without the modern Internet (SO was the only source I inquired and the experience was bad). If I really want to achieve something meaningful in the rest of my life, which is about 3 to 4 decades based on the mortality curve, I probably should just plug off from the internet.
But how do I do that? Apparently Internet is essential nowadays for day to day chores, and my family absoutely needs a high speed Internet. How can I go back to the cave? I don't have enough will power to do that.
I probably have ADHD. I rarely completed any side projects. I'm anxious most if the time, biting my fingers all the time, a habit I formed before I reached teenage. Having access to the modern Internet makes everything above worse, a lot worse. Yes they also introduced a lot of ineresting things to me, but there are endless amount of interesting things in the world and I need to focus on a couple of them to get a deeper understanding. Reading new contents every day is my escape, not my medicine.
Maybe I should just block myself from the Internet. I taught myself Foxbase and Foxpro back in the 90s without the Internet. I taught myself C++ in 2012 without the modern Internet (SO was the only source I inquired and the experience was bad). If I really want to achieve something meaningful in the rest of my life, which is about 3 to 4 decades based on the mortality curve, I probably should just plug off from the internet.
But how do I do that? Apparently Internet is essential nowadays for day to day chores, and my family absoutely needs a high speed Internet. How can I go back to the cave? I don't have enough will power to do that.
I can recommend leechblock a lot. It allows you to block websites using Regex and some time based rules.
You could for example block reddit from 0800 to 1900 but still open individual posts you found while using a search engine. For me (I have ADHD, but I don't think that makes the difference in this case) that's the perfect balance between usability and avoiding endless scrolling.
You could for example block reddit from 0800 to 1900 but still open individual posts you found while using a search engine. For me (I have ADHD, but I don't think that makes the difference in this case) that's the perfect balance between usability and avoiding endless scrolling.
Thanks. I'll give it a try. Right now I probably need to fix my flooding basement and my mood first. I kinda don't want to do anything after work.
In Plato’s allegory of the cave it isn’t the cave you want to go back to, it is your family you want to awaken to the fact that they are inside he cave being entertained by shadow puppets.
I saw a tip once from a 3D artist on how he mastered sculpting. Everyday he would force himself to just sculpt a straight line on his model. This one line was enough to engage his brain and before he knew it he would keep sculpting.
I use this in coding. Just do this one function then you can do whatever. Most of the time I won't go back to procrastinating, but end up spending an hour or so working on the project.
I also think the opposite is true. If you try to force yourself to work many hours per day on side projects by disabling the internet or netflix etc. you will burn out.
I use this in coding. Just do this one function then you can do whatever. Most of the time I won't go back to procrastinating, but end up spending an hour or so working on the project.
I also think the opposite is true. If you try to force yourself to work many hours per day on side projects by disabling the internet or netflix etc. you will burn out.
If it helps you at all - you're definitely not alone with this, I'm going through the same "existential crisis" of sorts in my 30s.
The internet and the variety of content and dopamine sources are horrible for some people who have ADHD, myself included. So much time wasted last decade going down the rabbithole on Youtube, Wikipedia, video games, etc. with deep regrets of missing out on more important things in life like networking, socializing, trying new things, etc. Not sure if you feel that way as well.
Even with long-term medication (Vyvanse)- which I have my own personal reservations about if they really "work" or not - I still struggle with this daily.
If you're looking/asking for advice - for me, I've found that taking drastic, meaningful actions help. "ripping the bandaid off", if you're familiar with that phrase.
I've unplugged my gaming PC, threw the power cord in the trash, and challenged myself to go as long as I could without it. I purchased a lower-end laptop and dock to plug into to still have dual monitors. It's not powerful enough to play the games I want to play which was the point, but I could still run VS Code to work with Python, Javascript, spin up webservers to play around, etc.
I ended up lasting a couple of weeks before purchasing a new power cord - but I did learn to remember that I do like programming/scripting.
The lack of self-control/willpower sucks. It would be nice if there were ADHD life coaches that didn't cost an arm and a leg.
The internet and the variety of content and dopamine sources are horrible for some people who have ADHD, myself included. So much time wasted last decade going down the rabbithole on Youtube, Wikipedia, video games, etc. with deep regrets of missing out on more important things in life like networking, socializing, trying new things, etc. Not sure if you feel that way as well.
Even with long-term medication (Vyvanse)- which I have my own personal reservations about if they really "work" or not - I still struggle with this daily.
If you're looking/asking for advice - for me, I've found that taking drastic, meaningful actions help. "ripping the bandaid off", if you're familiar with that phrase.
I've unplugged my gaming PC, threw the power cord in the trash, and challenged myself to go as long as I could without it. I purchased a lower-end laptop and dock to plug into to still have dual monitors. It's not powerful enough to play the games I want to play which was the point, but I could still run VS Code to work with Python, Javascript, spin up webservers to play around, etc.
I ended up lasting a couple of weeks before purchasing a new power cord - but I did learn to remember that I do like programming/scripting.
The lack of self-control/willpower sucks. It would be nice if there were ADHD life coaches that didn't cost an arm and a leg.
Thanks. I think I'm fine with missing out on networking or other human interaction because I'm pretty awkward with that, even after getting married and a son. But yeah I get your feeling because I do regret missing out other things like growing my careers or focusing on something more meaningful.
I feel that you are not at peace with yourself yet. I can't have that too, maybe for the whole life. I hope eventually you can have peace with yourself.
Actually, the more I read your post, the more I feel that we have the same issues. I had those "ripping the Band-Aid off" moments too, but they never worked for long. I also lack self-control/willpower and fancy about a service that throws me into a prison and forces me to do what I want to focus on.
I feel that you are not at peace with yourself yet. I can't have that too, maybe for the whole life. I hope eventually you can have peace with yourself.
Actually, the more I read your post, the more I feel that we have the same issues. I had those "ripping the Band-Aid off" moments too, but they never worked for long. I also lack self-control/willpower and fancy about a service that throws me into a prison and forces me to do what I want to focus on.
I'd advise people not to self-diagnose with mental diseases, go to a doctor and get checked. Being neurodivergent became fashionable, but there's natural neural diversity among humans. Most people are easily distracted, have difficulty focusing, are unusually sad/tired or happy/energetic according to the whims of life, etc. Most people need to overcome this so they make an effort to put aside distractions, concentrate, be more resilient to uncertainty, etc.
Normal humans have a wide range of neural diversity, that's not a disease.
Normal humans have a wide range of neural diversity, that's not a disease.
Yeah I totally agree. I'm going to get it checked out. I just think that without any external help, it is hopeless for me to push away distractions for a reasonably long time. So either I find a way to increase my will power, or find a way to numb my sensitivity to the distractions.
My adhd was helped a lot by:
Reading about adhd to understand how it impacts your brain and life
Reading about coping mechanisms and actually doing them
Things everyone hears and never does but it absolutely helps: good diet, exercise, meditation
Work on any other mental health issues you have
Therapy
Lots of trial and error of management methods to see what works
Learning to be kind to myself
Stopping “I should” statements.
Realizing that if something was actually that important to me, I would work on it. If I don’t finish a side project it means it probably isn’t that important and that’s okay
And medication, which alone is at least 30% of the improvement
Reading about adhd to understand how it impacts your brain and life
Reading about coping mechanisms and actually doing them
Things everyone hears and never does but it absolutely helps: good diet, exercise, meditation
Work on any other mental health issues you have
Therapy
Lots of trial and error of management methods to see what works
Learning to be kind to myself
Stopping “I should” statements.
Realizing that if something was actually that important to me, I would work on it. If I don’t finish a side project it means it probably isn’t that important and that’s okay
And medication, which alone is at least 30% of the improvement
Thanks. I guess eventually I need to be at peace with myself, which I cannot do that. TBH I loathe myself. I can lie to others but I cannot lie to myself. I guess therapy is probably my best resort.
I really disliked myself for most of my life and even now struggle with it. The thing that helped me a lot was learning to be unconditionally kind to others both in my thoughts and actions. Once that was normalized it was easy to apply the same thought process to myself.
Thanks. I'm fine with other people. I know most people are simply controlled by fate and randomness so it's pointless to blame anyone for anything. I don't know how to make peace with myself though even though I agree it's the same story for myself.
I feel like I'm in a similar boat. Like 6 different mental disorders including constantly pulling my hair out.
I've contemplating sales calls. You can theoretically make like on the order of over $1000/hour while sitting on a bench or walking on a trail. It can be done in short bursts once you get the hang of it.
Then once you have some financial freedom in a few hours of successful work (not the first few hours), you can sell other people designs for clubhouses and build them all over the world and pay people to show up to club meetings (because sadly that is the only way).
Modern workplaces are a lot like clubhouses because everyone is friends there, but they suck because you have to be there all day. If you could just show up to any workplace for a few hours here and there whenever you wanted, the world would be a better place. Some days you could be a dishwasher, other days you could be a bulldozer operator or dig in the mines. I like to try new jobs.
That's my business idea, thanks.
I've contemplating sales calls. You can theoretically make like on the order of over $1000/hour while sitting on a bench or walking on a trail. It can be done in short bursts once you get the hang of it.
Then once you have some financial freedom in a few hours of successful work (not the first few hours), you can sell other people designs for clubhouses and build them all over the world and pay people to show up to club meetings (because sadly that is the only way).
Modern workplaces are a lot like clubhouses because everyone is friends there, but they suck because you have to be there all day. If you could just show up to any workplace for a few hours here and there whenever you wanted, the world would be a better place. Some days you could be a dishwasher, other days you could be a bulldozer operator or dig in the mines. I like to try new jobs.
That's my business idea, thanks.
I actually pushed myself into a Sales position 10 years ago. I worked as a stock broker for a few years, just for the challenge. Eventually I realized that I really hated this kind of job, so I quit the job without earning anything substantial.
I wish you good luck!
I wish you good luck!
> I probably have ADHD.
Very familiar with ADHD and anxiety which is extremely disruptive. I sometimes think its more of a autistic spectrum thing as there is a vivid world of thought in my head I retreat into and the real world. The anxiety part is where the self sabotage comes from as you get bad thoughts stuck in your head which puts fear into you and causes a feed-back loop of doom that leads to depression. That or you invent all sorts of "bad" fantasy outcomes or scenarios that become excuses to avoid anxiety causing things without ever attempting anything. That leads to depression.
I think the right answer is therapy and likely medication. I am currently looking for therapy but navigating the US medical system and insurance bullshit is triggering on every level causing anxiety, depression, and rage. I suppose I'll have to sacrifice my savings and pay out of pocket.
Good luck, stay strong, and remember - you can overcome it. It takes effort which for us is very very difficult.
Very familiar with ADHD and anxiety which is extremely disruptive. I sometimes think its more of a autistic spectrum thing as there is a vivid world of thought in my head I retreat into and the real world. The anxiety part is where the self sabotage comes from as you get bad thoughts stuck in your head which puts fear into you and causes a feed-back loop of doom that leads to depression. That or you invent all sorts of "bad" fantasy outcomes or scenarios that become excuses to avoid anxiety causing things without ever attempting anything. That leads to depression.
I think the right answer is therapy and likely medication. I am currently looking for therapy but navigating the US medical system and insurance bullshit is triggering on every level causing anxiety, depression, and rage. I suppose I'll have to sacrifice my savings and pay out of pocket.
Good luck, stay strong, and remember - you can overcome it. It takes effort which for us is very very difficult.
P.S. Youtube sucks and I avoid it like the plague. Video as a form of blog is crap IMO, especially if you have ADHD and so on. I just want to skim a text article and if I see enough interesting information I'll take the time to read it.
Thanks. I can relate. I'm making appointments for tests and therapy as I'm 100% sure whether I have ADHD. I'll also pay it out of pocket.
Thanks for the encouragement.
Thanks for the encouragement.
as someone who suffers similar experiences, especially ocd related to nail-biting and rumination/adhd rabbit-holes, something i've adopted is a shift in attitude: i decided a while ago i was going to stop punishing or shaming myself for what my brain finds interesting or worth pursuing (ie: the "rabbit-hole", the fixation, the current dopamine drip).
most of the time my rabbit holes are pragmatic and related to a hobby, skill, or educational/learning.
but sometimes the rabbit holes are escapism -- and instead of telling myself this is wasted time, i've tried to develop a more cooperative relationship w my feelings and my brain --the brain, the body, perhaps the "spirit" was in need of rest, and it recuperates in ways that generally are creature comforts (maybe reading or Netflix binges or video games and chess or sleeping for me, YMMV w.r.t. "meaningless" activities).
this has mitigated a lot of the existential dread i previously would experience, especially in how i relate to perceived "wasted time".
obviously this is my experience and i do not mean to imply the above anecdote as being a prescriptive change, but the existential dilemmas i'd find myself in due to whatever neuro divergence i demonstrate, have gotten a lot less frequent, and i find myself enjoying these experiences, and therefore appreciating my rabbit-holes more and more over time. or rather, appreciating my brain, and my experiences overall.
i've tried the preventative and/or tried fighting "against the current", so to speak, and it always left me exhausted, depressed, despairing, lamenting, and floating back the way i came, so i kinda said fuck it, built myself a raft that i strengthen over time, and just navigate the waters as they come.
edit: i realize i drifted away from the original topic -- i've had the opposite experience with the internet. while it has contributed to me consuming otherwise "meaningless" content from time to time for no other reason than wanting to be a couch potate, i have benefitted from the ease of access to information in such a crazy fucking way, especially with platforms like youtube (and forums, or aggregators) -- i mean we effectively have libraries in various forms and abstractions at our fingertips. yes it means accessible vectors for distraction, but man -- it's single-handedly the one tool my life has benefitted the most from using -- and that includes some of the listed pursuits involving networking, relationship building/socializing, my career, my "real-world" interests and experiences, good, bad, and everything in between.
most of the time my rabbit holes are pragmatic and related to a hobby, skill, or educational/learning.
but sometimes the rabbit holes are escapism -- and instead of telling myself this is wasted time, i've tried to develop a more cooperative relationship w my feelings and my brain --the brain, the body, perhaps the "spirit" was in need of rest, and it recuperates in ways that generally are creature comforts (maybe reading or Netflix binges or video games and chess or sleeping for me, YMMV w.r.t. "meaningless" activities).
this has mitigated a lot of the existential dread i previously would experience, especially in how i relate to perceived "wasted time".
obviously this is my experience and i do not mean to imply the above anecdote as being a prescriptive change, but the existential dilemmas i'd find myself in due to whatever neuro divergence i demonstrate, have gotten a lot less frequent, and i find myself enjoying these experiences, and therefore appreciating my rabbit-holes more and more over time. or rather, appreciating my brain, and my experiences overall.
i've tried the preventative and/or tried fighting "against the current", so to speak, and it always left me exhausted, depressed, despairing, lamenting, and floating back the way i came, so i kinda said fuck it, built myself a raft that i strengthen over time, and just navigate the waters as they come.
edit: i realize i drifted away from the original topic -- i've had the opposite experience with the internet. while it has contributed to me consuming otherwise "meaningless" content from time to time for no other reason than wanting to be a couch potate, i have benefitted from the ease of access to information in such a crazy fucking way, especially with platforms like youtube (and forums, or aggregators) -- i mean we effectively have libraries in various forms and abstractions at our fingertips. yes it means accessible vectors for distraction, but man -- it's single-handedly the one tool my life has benefitted the most from using -- and that includes some of the listed pursuits involving networking, relationship building/socializing, my career, my "real-world" interests and experiences, good, bad, and everything in between.
Google has been degrading YouTube in Firefox for me for about six months. Where are the antitrust enforcers when you need them?
We are supposed to believe Google hires some of the most brilliant minds on the planet, but I've yet to see evidence of this. YouTube has been unusable for years and is only getting worse. When one of your flagship products is unusable for both technical people and novices alike, in my mind you have failed as a company. The front end is what the user sees and what matters. YouTube was a better product 10 years ago and they know it.
They have billions of monthly active users, many of whom are literally toddlers. I think "unusable" is a bit too much hyperbole.
While diminishing return products from hyper rich mega corporations is an issue, being as hyperbolically critical as possible only muddies the water and allows the slide to keep happening.
"Youtube has been unusable for years and is only getting worse." I only use FF on a work laptop, and I only use brave at home. No issues, ever. In fact, YTP is the one sub service i've paid for uninterrupted over my adult life. (shill post over.)
How can I help you get back to using youtube, and what about is getting worse that I can keep an eye on?
"Youtube has been unusable for years and is only getting worse." I only use FF on a work laptop, and I only use brave at home. No issues, ever. In fact, YTP is the one sub service i've paid for uninterrupted over my adult life. (shill post over.)
How can I help you get back to using youtube, and what about is getting worse that I can keep an eye on?
Can you say what in particular? Maybe you’re using it in a different way than me. tI never seem to have any issues with YouTube, albeit I’m not a heavy user, and I never post videos and I use block origin to block ads; I just consume video content. The DMCA limitations on high Rez stuff is annoying but that’s a licensing issue. It’s not exactly the fastest website on the planet, but it works fine
Google may yet be forced to divest from Chrome as a result of the recent judgement.
Would that force them not to give Chrome preferential treatment? Even if Chrome becomes independent, it will still likely be the most used browser. Google could just do what other companies already do, and never test on Firefox anyway.
It would remove any incentive to intentionally worsen the non-Chrome(ium) experience. Relevant if you suspect they are deliberately sabotaging Firefox. (That would be a foolish move to make while they are in the middle of multiple antitrust cases and already lost one, but companies aren't immune to acting like idiots)
Depends on how the ownership works. If the same individuals own both google and an independent Chrome, it won't remove anything. If it's legal for google to pay firefox a half-billion a year to be the default search engine for a 5% marketshare, why wouldn't it be legal for google to pay an independent Chrome 9.5B for the same right?
The ruling I referred to above was in fact that it is not legal to purchase the default search engine as this is de-facto anti-competitive behavior for a clear monopoly (which is, itself, not illegal—sometimes products dominate markets because they're genuinely better). Interestingly this means that what they've paid out (something on the order of a hundred billion, I think, all things told) is likely the floor for whatever is necessary to remediate the anti-competitive behavior.
There's also a possibility the DOJ will fumble this and make them offer alternative engines in a more aggressive manner and fine them, which will change nothing. I think the judge indicated such, so hopefully they take this opportunity seriously.
There's also a possibility the DOJ will fumble this and make them offer alternative engines in a more aggressive manner and fine them, which will change nothing. I think the judge indicated such, so hopefully they take this opportunity seriously.
.
How so? The parent comment is about Chrome separating from Google, not YouTube.
YouTube would be fine without Chrome.
YouTube would be fine without Chrome.
why? yt as standalone service does not need specific browser to exist... or at least it should not need one, just good business plan
Forests must burn so that new life can thrive.
[deleted]
Have you reported it to them? I have nothing but praise for the EC on the way they have handled the few complaints I have registered regarding such things.
I complained about Chrome Web Store but they said it's not a gateekeper even though everything applies... They aren't very competent it seems
I wholeheartedly disagree. Just because you think they meet the criteria doesn't make it true. What are the metrics on chrome web store usage that make you believe it meets the criteria? The figures I can see mentioned online would reflect only a minority of chrome users even using plugins.
I dont disagree with your thoughts on the chrome web store being unfair and anticompetitive, but the DMA is VERY specific in its reach. You can still approach them with complaints unrelated to the DMA of course - but if your complaint was "they should be a gatekeeper", then you will likely be out of luck.
I dont disagree with your thoughts on the chrome web store being unfair and anticompetitive, but the DMA is VERY specific in its reach. You can still approach them with complaints unrelated to the DMA of course - but if your complaint was "they should be a gatekeeper", then you will likely be out of luck.
Chrome is a gatekeeper and for that gatekeeper they have another gatekeeping service where they gatekeep what add-ons are allowed and which are removed (as happened with AdNauseam). There are no seperate distribution channels for users. If this is not a gatekeeper, then the App Store can't also be a gatekeeper.
I thought support from Google was "talk to the hand"; all the time I see posts where people got no satisfaction from Google make it to the HN front page.
I was referring to reporting to the European Commission - an example of the “antitrust enforcers” you were looking for. They need to know of issues to investigate them. The more reports they get the more likely it will be raised for investigation quickly.
I am in the US, I don't think I can report to the European Commission but I did find
https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement/report-antitrust-violation
which I will do right now. Thanks!
https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement/report-antitrust-violation
which I will do right now. Thanks!
I'm pretty sure GP was not suggesting reporting it to Google.
Well, um, er.
As a matter of fact the antitrust enforcers just won their case against Google.
They are in the remedy phase now. Figuring out what Google's punishment is going to be.
Google no longer being allowed to pay Firefox for its default search placement is most certainly in play as part of the possible remedies.
https://www.thebignewsletter.com/p/boom-judge-rules-google-i...
If you follow the money the idea that Google would sabotage Firefox doesn't make a lot of sense.
It's more likely that Google kept Firefox on life support so they could plausibly deny that they had a browser monopoly. Firefox blew that by mismanaging its market share into oblivion though.
As a matter of fact the antitrust enforcers just won their case against Google.
They are in the remedy phase now. Figuring out what Google's punishment is going to be.
Google no longer being allowed to pay Firefox for its default search placement is most certainly in play as part of the possible remedies.
https://www.thebignewsletter.com/p/boom-judge-rules-google-i...
If you follow the money the idea that Google would sabotage Firefox doesn't make a lot of sense.
It's more likely that Google kept Firefox on life support so they could plausibly deny that they had a browser monopoly. Firefox blew that by mismanaging its market share into oblivion though.
AFAIU that case is about Google's search engine monopoly, not about their browser engine monopoly, so I'm not sure how it's relevant.
(Except that it might dry up Firefox's funding if Google won't pay Mozilla to be the default browser engine anymore...)
(Except that it might dry up Firefox's funding if Google won't pay Mozilla to be the default browser engine anymore...)
I'm always hearing that, but I've yet to see a single video load slow enough to notice. And I'm using YouTube quite a lot.
Happens to me all the time. I switched to Chrome just due to the way Firefox sucks with YouTube. This is on Linux, 5k display, YT premium, highest quality available.
Not to WOMM, but as a data point, it's working perfectly for me in Firefox on Windows with uBlock Origin. Is this one of those A/B test things where I'll get it eventually? I know the ad bomb rolled out slowly[0] and we know they're looking for a way to foil ad blocking without drawing bad press and regulatory scrutiny.
[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23769291
[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23769291
I just checked and YT is normal for me in FF 129.0.2 (64-bit). YT specific add-ons: uBlock Origin, Nova YouTube (userscript with dozens of modules to fix various YT behaviors and UI annoyances), and Enhancer for YouTube (adds more playback speeds, fixes default player size & volume levels).
Since YT in my FF is heavily modified to be not awful, maybe the regression is in something my add-on stack is blocking.
Since YT in my FF is heavily modified to be not awful, maybe the regression is in something my add-on stack is blocking.
> Nova YouTube
looked this up out of curiosity. the only thing resembling a description is "Combine small plugins, expanding the possibilities of YouTube." which is pretty useless.
what all does this do?
looked this up out of curiosity. the only thing resembling a description is "Combine small plugins, expanding the possibilities of YouTube." which is pretty useless.
what all does this do?
Here is what the Nova YT interface looks like on my Firefox. Each section is a separate module. Modules don't do anything if not activated so you can choose how you want YT to behave/appear.
https://i.imgur.com/lMKaJ5t.jpeg
After putting the number of videos in a grid row back to a useful number, things I especially like are changing video thumbnails back to a still that's actually from the fucking video, instead of a misleading click-bait image. I also like the option of changing all caps and removing emojis from video titles. It also has options to automatically remove a bunch of the stupid shit YT pushes in the UI I don't want to see.
After I got it set up, I found it literally shocking how much better YT is - yet in many ways, it's just restoring YT to the way it used to appear and work when its focus was user-centric instead of user manipulative. Since about ~2016 we've all been slowly frog-boiled by YT making the site slightly more annoying every month through iterative A/B testing optimizing for ad revenue. I literally can't go back to using stock YT now.
Each module has an info link which points to its entry in the wiki: https://github.com/raingart/Nova-YouTube-extension/wiki/plug.... Since I'm not familiar with YT's terminology for labeling all their UI elements, it initially took a little experimentation to see what some of the module options do but it's quick to change a setting, tab back to YT, refresh and see the result.
https://i.imgur.com/lMKaJ5t.jpeg
After putting the number of videos in a grid row back to a useful number, things I especially like are changing video thumbnails back to a still that's actually from the fucking video, instead of a misleading click-bait image. I also like the option of changing all caps and removing emojis from video titles. It also has options to automatically remove a bunch of the stupid shit YT pushes in the UI I don't want to see.
After I got it set up, I found it literally shocking how much better YT is - yet in many ways, it's just restoring YT to the way it used to appear and work when its focus was user-centric instead of user manipulative. Since about ~2016 we've all been slowly frog-boiled by YT making the site slightly more annoying every month through iterative A/B testing optimizing for ad revenue. I literally can't go back to using stock YT now.
Each module has an info link which points to its entry in the wiki: https://github.com/raingart/Nova-YouTube-extension/wiki/plug.... Since I'm not familiar with YT's terminology for labeling all their UI elements, it initially took a little experimentation to see what some of the module options do but it's quick to change a setting, tab back to YT, refresh and see the result.
I like the clickbait thumbnails and capitalised titles, it is a useful signal for what videos to avoid.
That used to be the case for me too, however recently some actually valuable channels I follow have started to clown themselves with stupid thumbnails just to get views. Also, I don't really need that signal since I already block all YT recommendations and global feeds so I only ever see channels I already subscribe to. And I only subscribe to small channels in relatively obscure niches of science, technology and hobbies like pre-90s vintage computing. Most channels I follow only have a few thousand subs and I don't think any of them even approaches 100k subs.
This Nova YT addon is outside Firefox Addons page for some a specific reason? Seems a little cumbersome to install
Same here, using Firefox 129.0.2 on Windows 10. uBlock running and I also have Firefox's "Enhanced Tracking Protection" turned up to max.
I did have issues with YouTube recently - I was getting some of the same symptoms described in the Reddit post. But tracked it down to me changing my user-agent to Chrome, which I had forgotten about. This was also causing issues with reCaptcha and Cloudflare-protected sites.
I did have issues with YouTube recently - I was getting some of the same symptoms described in the Reddit post. But tracked it down to me changing my user-agent to Chrome, which I had forgotten about. This was also causing issues with reCaptcha and Cloudflare-protected sites.
going by Hanlon's Razor, i would guess that this is merely the result of an engineering update that nobody bothered to QA on Firefox rather than a malicious attack on a single browser that isn't _really_ winning market share
let's not assume Google malice is _too_ competent
let's not assume Google malice is _too_ competent
That's totally true, but it's still Google's fault.
I found a nice article on exactly this from a former Mozilla exec: https://www.zdnet.com/article/former-mozilla-exec-google-has...
> Gmail & [Google] Docs started to experience selective performance issues and bugs on Firefox. Demo sites would falsely block Firefox as 'incompatible' […] All of this is stuff you're allowed to do to compete, of course. But we were still a search partner, so we'd say 'hey what gives?' And every time, they'd say, 'oops. That was accidental. We'll fix it in the next push in 2 weeks.' […] Over and over. Oops. Another accident. We'll fix it soon. We want the same things. We're on the same team. There were dozens of oopses. Hundreds maybe?
This latest article is basically the same thing again. Google would tell Mozilla it's a genuine bug; they would fix it soon; but Mozilla loses some users and Chrome gains some. Nothing new.
I found a nice article on exactly this from a former Mozilla exec: https://www.zdnet.com/article/former-mozilla-exec-google-has...
> Gmail & [Google] Docs started to experience selective performance issues and bugs on Firefox. Demo sites would falsely block Firefox as 'incompatible' […] All of this is stuff you're allowed to do to compete, of course. But we were still a search partner, so we'd say 'hey what gives?' And every time, they'd say, 'oops. That was accidental. We'll fix it in the next push in 2 weeks.' […] Over and over. Oops. Another accident. We'll fix it soon. We want the same things. We're on the same team. There were dozens of oopses. Hundreds maybe?
This latest article is basically the same thing again. Google would tell Mozilla it's a genuine bug; they would fix it soon; but Mozilla loses some users and Chrome gains some. Nothing new.
No one bothered to QA the browser with the 4th largest market share? The willful negligence is the malicious.
Wouldn't be surprised. The 4th largest browser is a mere 2.7% of the market. What about the fifth and sixth? If I had to decide how to allocate testing hours, I probably wouldn't put much into the 2.7% vs the top 3 with 88%.
Google is a megacorp - Hanlon's razor doesn't apply.
Just because there's no one person twirling their mustache and mwahahaha-ing doesn't mean this isn't malicious and hostile behavior by Google. It doesn't matter even if there's no individual human at Google that intended this.
What does matter is that the leadership at Google clearly doesn't do what is necessary in preventing hostile behavior as a consequence of negligence. They know that if they don't put in the effort to ensure compatibility, side effects will degrade competitor performance. It's an inevitable consequence; they've done, and been forced to do, the right thing, and provide quality assurance and compatibility review in complex systems. There are people that know the consequences of not being proactive. Hell, they probably have lawyers that know the exact numbers - they probably make some tens of millions of dollars more revenue by "slacking off" and not being proactive about compatibility.
Just because there's no one person twirling their mustache and mwahahaha-ing doesn't mean this isn't malicious and hostile behavior by Google. It doesn't matter even if there's no individual human at Google that intended this.
What does matter is that the leadership at Google clearly doesn't do what is necessary in preventing hostile behavior as a consequence of negligence. They know that if they don't put in the effort to ensure compatibility, side effects will degrade competitor performance. It's an inevitable consequence; they've done, and been forced to do, the right thing, and provide quality assurance and compatibility review in complex systems. There are people that know the consequences of not being proactive. Hell, they probably have lawyers that know the exact numbers - they probably make some tens of millions of dollars more revenue by "slacking off" and not being proactive about compatibility.
> Google is a megacorp - Hanlon's razor doesn't apply.
On the contrary, i think it applies more. The larger the group, the more stupid stuff it does.
On the contrary, i think it applies more. The larger the group, the more stupid stuff it does.
I bet this falls into a gray area though. Maybe they’re not exactly trying to kill Firefox, they just don’t mind too much if it dies. Some programmer makes a mistake that affects Firefox and they don’t instantly revert the change because someone higher sees that the mistake is not necessarily bad for Google. Similarly testing is more lax for Firefox. If it had been Chrome, the managers would have paged 50 people to fix it ASAP, and there would be retrospectives about how their testing failed to prevent a future occurrence.
It’s like saying evolution has no purpose, it’s just random mutations, but then there is a selection process that picks non harmful and beneficial mutations, so it does go in a predictable direction.
It’s like saying evolution has no purpose, it’s just random mutations, but then there is a selection process that picks non harmful and beneficial mutations, so it does go in a predictable direction.
This this this.
Megacorporations aren't more competent,they're able to get away with more incompetence and tell whoever complains to shove it.
Megacorporations aren't more competent,they're able to get away with more incompetence and tell whoever complains to shove it.
But knowing you can repeatedly get away with incompetence is malice. Hanlon's razor is used as an excuse for moral culpability, as if who is merely incompetent isn't evil; but, once you point out how that level of incompetence is hurting others, if they choose to not merely prevent such incompetence going forward, but recognize when they make mistakes and take steps to make it right--yes: after the fact; not merely fixing a bug, for example, and not merely apologizing for their incompetence, but making some kind of reparation to those harmed--that must be understood as malicious behavior.
Malice vs incompetence is about intent. It doesn't say anything about if its reasonable. Gross negligence is unacceptable incompetence, but that doesn't imply its intentional.
The idea that Youtube wouldn't QA test on Firefox is ludicrous.
Yes, it's not a massive browser share these days, but it's basically the only major browser left that doesn't share any lineage for the rendering engine.
I agree it'll be incompetence, but they'll definitely have Firefox QA testing.
Yes, it's not a massive browser share these days, but it's basically the only major browser left that doesn't share any lineage for the rendering engine.
I agree it'll be incompetence, but they'll definitely have Firefox QA testing.
Still they shouldn't let this happen considering their antitrust scrutiny
Yeah no, this has happened too many times to be just incompetence. It's malicious, plain and simple.
Everybody knows a company can’t be incompetent a bunch of times in a row.
Incompetence isn't an acceptable excuse for anti-competitive behavior by a company the size of Google. It's their responsibility to ensure that incompetence can't result in things like this. This isn't something that should just be shrugged away.
An explanation is not an excuse.
It's tiring seeing people be so, so confident they know what's going on behind the scenes. In reality, they know just as much as everyone else.
It's tiring seeing people be so, so confident they know what's going on behind the scenes. In reality, they know just as much as everyone else.
Yeah, I'm baffled that people on HN will happily accept pretty damning conspiracy theories at face value when there are much more plausible explanations available.
My app is also having performance issues with WebGL on Firefox so I guess I'm part of the conspiracy?
My app is also having performance issues with WebGL on Firefox so I guess I'm part of the conspiracy?
These are glaringly obvious flaws that even a basic rudimentary QA test will uncover.
Glad I saw this - I thought it was some local issue.
Amazingly laggy for me with firefox/Debian 12.
I restarted firefox thinking it was the problem, apparently not.
Very high CPU usage as well.
Just now, I soon saw excessive delays on Debian 12 with `firefox-esr`, more than the occasional usual-of-late several-second blank video area spinner, though the videos otherwise play OK.
The noticeable first delay this session, they displayed a still image of the Chrome logo in the video area, with text saying that they recommend Chrome, and maybe a button to get Chrome.
(Edit: Screenshot from reproducing this in new browser session; again, it was the first ad, blocking before playing any content video: https://i.imgur.com/GkasyRX.png )
(I'm wondering why they bother with this, if under antitrust scrutiny, when they have more subtle and deniable ways of leveraging their platform control.)
Though, I should mention that YouTube is not showing ad videos when it seems to be trying to, which could explain some of these delays. It will overlay white text in upper left of video area, identifying an advertiser (e.g., Old Spice, Liberty Mutual?), but then not run the ad at all, and move on after several seconds. I suppose that my uBlock Origin rules might be blocking something for ad display now, though that's not my intent (and I normally see YouTube videos without having consciously changed something since then), or the ad-showing failure might be the fault of YouTube.
The noticeable first delay this session, they displayed a still image of the Chrome logo in the video area, with text saying that they recommend Chrome, and maybe a button to get Chrome.
(Edit: Screenshot from reproducing this in new browser session; again, it was the first ad, blocking before playing any content video: https://i.imgur.com/GkasyRX.png )
(I'm wondering why they bother with this, if under antitrust scrutiny, when they have more subtle and deniable ways of leveraging their platform control.)
Though, I should mention that YouTube is not showing ad videos when it seems to be trying to, which could explain some of these delays. It will overlay white text in upper left of video area, identifying an advertiser (e.g., Old Spice, Liberty Mutual?), but then not run the ad at all, and move on after several seconds. I suppose that my uBlock Origin rules might be blocking something for ad display now, though that's not my intent (and I normally see YouTube videos without having consciously changed something since then), or the ad-showing failure might be the fault of YouTube.
I found it freezes every 60 seconds, and I just click the "Share" button and "Starting at", and copied the time into the URL and reload the page... then it works.
After a few times I got into the habit of "increment seconds by 60, reload page".
I don't know why it has to be so hard, I seldom to never go to YouTube now because of how badly it works.
Feels super anti-competitive to own YouTube and Chrome, and to punish Firefox users so aggressively.
After a few times I got into the habit of "increment seconds by 60, reload page".
I don't know why it has to be so hard, I seldom to never go to YouTube now because of how badly it works.
Feels super anti-competitive to own YouTube and Chrome, and to punish Firefox users so aggressively.
Might as well just download videos and watch them later.
The one thing you lose I guess is discovery, but the algorithm is so volatile that maybe that's not the worst thing in the world.
Yeah, i've used tampermonkey and various other scripts to remove all discovery/suggestions from youtube, and I've never regretted it. It's great. But that's just my personal style, if you sit down and watch it like TV then I can see how that would be a sacrifice.
I don't, but I like the recommendations on the home screen to find stuff I might like...again though, like 75% of the time, I don't.
This is actually what I do most of the time. I feel like that anecdote of RMS where he says he wgets web pages and e-mails them to himself.
Can confirm.
Google is a new Microsoft, they leverage their position to cross promote their shit browser and their shit data stealing services.
Sorry guys, if your data collection website doesn't work well with Firefox and uBlock Origin, I just won't use it.
Google is a new Microsoft, they leverage their position to cross promote their shit browser and their shit data stealing services.
Sorry guys, if your data collection website doesn't work well with Firefox and uBlock Origin, I just won't use it.
Not only YouTube, but even Google Meet is completely unusable on Firefox. I've noticed memory usage spikes on Firefox, while all other video conferencing platforms work fine. On Chrome, it works perfectly.
It'll also randomly bug out and drop the network connection. Although it is so far the only videoconferencing platform that actually works with Pipewire.
Thank heavens there is https://github.com/yt-dlp/yt-dlp
And on mobile, things like https://grayjay.app/
if only this existed for meetings
It does, its called Jitsi https://jitsi.org/
"Jitsi is a set of open-source projects that allows you to easily build and deploy secure video conferencing solutions. At the heart of Jitsi are Jitsi Videobridge and Jitsi Meet, which let you have conferences on the internet, while other projects in the community enable other features such as audio, dial-in, recording, and simulcasting."
"Jitsi is a set of open-source projects that allows you to easily build and deploy secure video conferencing solutions. At the heart of Jitsi are Jitsi Videobridge and Jitsi Meet, which let you have conferences on the internet, while other projects in the community enable other features such as audio, dial-in, recording, and simulcasting."
Promoting Chrome may have gotten more people to install it and give it a try, but it didn't force those people to continue using Chrome. It didn't force them to keep using Chrome for years and years, in many cases.
Most people, including a great many former Firefox users, simply chose to keep on using Chrome because it offered (and still offers) a superior web browsing experience compared to its competitors.
This isn't specifically tied to the performance of Google's various web sites, either. Firefox still feels slow and bloated even on non-Google web sites. A lot of people who don't even use Google's web sites or services still choose to use Chrome anyway.
Many of Chrome's users could easily switch to Firefox at any time, yet they choose not to.
Firefox's developers simply haven't given people a compelling reason to start (or to switch back to) using Firefox.
Most people, including a great many former Firefox users, simply chose to keep on using Chrome because it offered (and still offers) a superior web browsing experience compared to its competitors.
This isn't specifically tied to the performance of Google's various web sites, either. Firefox still feels slow and bloated even on non-Google web sites. A lot of people who don't even use Google's web sites or services still choose to use Chrome anyway.
Many of Chrome's users could easily switch to Firefox at any time, yet they choose not to.
Firefox's developers simply haven't given people a compelling reason to start (or to switch back to) using Firefox.
> Promoting Chrome may have gotten more people to install it and give it a try, but it didn't force those people to continue using Chrome. It didn't force them to keep using Chrome for years and years, in many cases.
Isnt a huge reason Google just lost its anti trust case exactly this? Google search is the default on iphones and studies, and the court, found that that was enough to make a huge majority of users stay with google search for years and years.
Isnt a huge reason Google just lost its anti trust case exactly this? Google search is the default on iphones and studies, and the court, found that that was enough to make a huge majority of users stay with google search for years and years.
We're discussing Chrome here, not Google's search offerings.
Aside from Google-produced products like Android and ChromeOS, I can't remember ever using a computer or device where Chrome was installed by default.
Even for the Android devices I've used, the earlier ones didn't come with Chrome. Recent Samsung phones I've used have also included Samsung's browser as an alternative.
It's conceivable that some Windows desktop or laptop vendors might have opted to install Chrome by default, but I've never seen that with any of the systems I've used. Even then, presumably IE and/or Edge would've still been installed, too.
Having dealt with a lot of Linux systems over the years, Firefox is actually the most pre-installed browser I've encountered.
I've almost always had to go out of my way to install Chrome any time I've wanted to use it.
Any sort of notice, recommendation, banner, or other ad I've seen on Google properties while using a non-Chrome browser has never resulted in Chrome automatically being installed on my systems.
I know my experience isn't unique.
People go out of their way to download and install Chrome. They go out of their way to continue using it, too.
A lot of people simply want to use Chrome, even if doing so requires some effort on their part.
Aside from Google-produced products like Android and ChromeOS, I can't remember ever using a computer or device where Chrome was installed by default.
Even for the Android devices I've used, the earlier ones didn't come with Chrome. Recent Samsung phones I've used have also included Samsung's browser as an alternative.
It's conceivable that some Windows desktop or laptop vendors might have opted to install Chrome by default, but I've never seen that with any of the systems I've used. Even then, presumably IE and/or Edge would've still been installed, too.
Having dealt with a lot of Linux systems over the years, Firefox is actually the most pre-installed browser I've encountered.
I've almost always had to go out of my way to install Chrome any time I've wanted to use it.
Any sort of notice, recommendation, banner, or other ad I've seen on Google properties while using a non-Chrome browser has never resulted in Chrome automatically being installed on my systems.
I know my experience isn't unique.
People go out of their way to download and install Chrome. They go out of their way to continue using it, too.
A lot of people simply want to use Chrome, even if doing so requires some effort on their part.
Bundling IE may have gotten more people to give it a try, but it didn't force those people to continue using IE. It didn't force them to keep using IE for years and years, in many cases.
Most people, including a great many former Netscape users, simply chose to keep on using IE because it offered (and still offers) a superior web browsing experience compared to its competitors.
Most people, including a great many former Netscape users, simply chose to keep on using IE because it offered (and still offers) a superior web browsing experience compared to its competitors.
DEVO got America so right:
Freedom of choice
Is what you got
Freedom from choice
Is what you want
Freedom of choice
Is what you got
Freedom from choice
Is what you want
Frontend devs usually know exactly what browsers they support and to what level. I wonder if at Google the list is just Chrome and other browsers can deal with it.
And to think Chrome was such a savior from the IE hell we all were in back in the day. It's almost like all the MS execs ended up at (do no) Evil Corp.
Your version of history is bizarre. Firefox was the one that stole the market from IE. Chrome saved us from a (at the time) very sluggish Firefox.
Firefox was never #1. It had a very slow adoption curve driven by organic growth, and just when it started being a significant competitor, at about 25-30% of market share, Chrome got released and advertised to death (and also bundled in so many unrelated stuff like a malware), and its adoption skyrocketed.
Still, when Chrome released, IE was at about 65% market share.
Still, when Chrome released, IE was at about 65% market share.
Yup, it felt like overnight we could use the excuse "just use Chrome" to avoid those nasty IE workarounds.
You really think Google is trying to steal the 5% market share that Firefox has held on to?
I doubt they think about Firefox much at all.
I doubt they think about Firefox much at all.
I think putting Firefox's share of the market at 5% is being quite generous.
All of the metrics I've seen lately for a variety of web sites indicate that Firefox has less than 3% of the overall market.
The mobile situation is particularly bleak, where I've yet to see it even get close to breaking 1%.
At this point, Firefox's share of the market is closer to that of Mosaic, Navigator, and IE than it is to Chrome, Safari, and Edge.
All of the metrics I've seen lately for a variety of web sites indicate that Firefox has less than 3% of the overall market.
The mobile situation is particularly bleak, where I've yet to see it even get close to breaking 1%.
At this point, Firefox's share of the market is closer to that of Mosaic, Navigator, and IE than it is to Chrome, Safari, and Edge.
The behavior is awful, but I wouldn’t call chrome shit. I keep trying to switch away and keep ending back up on it because everything else has inferior performance, or is just a clone of chrome and its rendering engine.
I still develop some rather complex React applications on Firefox at work and let the tester see if it works on Chrome. There is one page in our admin interface that loads 40,000 records that is much worse on Firefox than Chrome.
I am noticing an increasing number of sites that just plain don't work on Firefox including the one I use to pay my credit card.
I am noticing an increasing number of sites that just plain don't work on Firefox including the one I use to pay my credit card.
[deleted]
There's a lot of important stuff on YouTube. Google doesn't really feel trustworthy enough to be in charge of it. What options do we have to ensure that people can still access that information or whatever if the degradation gets to a point where it's literally unusable? Is the internet archive sufficient? I feel like I should be participating somehow...
If there's something I value, I keep my own copy.
Do you get much value out of a youtube video the second time around? If I need to figure out which screws to remove or something like that, it's probably the first and last time I'll need that particular information.
If you're not also ensuring that others can access that copy then I don't really see the point.
If you're not also ensuring that others can access that copy then I don't really see the point.
Many universities have lecture series posted on youtube that I watch repeatedly. I'm definitely going to be backing them up.
Of the top of my head I can think of 5-10 youtube videos that have had such a profound effect on me, or I enjoyed so much, that I want them forever. This isn't counting for example videos like "how to remove a 2012 mazda 3 wheel bearing" that I have watched 4x over the last 10 years.
Like anyone else though... I won't put that into effect until it's too late, because I'm used to youtube "being there." Additionally, that's not my content to download. Even if I feel it's legally and ethically not google's....it certainly isn't legally mine.
The idea of asking individual youtubers for licenses to download their work, which by proxy is essentially Google's property, is too much for a well-meaning concious person to deal with. SO it's either youtube or uhhhhh another platform.
Like anyone else though... I won't put that into effect until it's too late, because I'm used to youtube "being there." Additionally, that's not my content to download. Even if I feel it's legally and ethically not google's....it certainly isn't legally mine.
The idea of asking individual youtubers for licenses to download their work, which by proxy is essentially Google's property, is too much for a well-meaning concious person to deal with. SO it's either youtube or uhhhhh another platform.
Just curious, could you share any memorable video(s) that you saved locally to rewatch?
I occasionally save audio, like a song or album, so I can listen without the browser, but rarely video. Last time I did that, it was a Czech animation series from the 1960's called Krtek (The Little Mole). https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLpaZrUayzSZmHWvtFR7n3...
I occasionally save audio, like a song or album, so I can listen without the browser, but rarely video. Last time I did that, it was a Czech animation series from the 1960's called Krtek (The Little Mole). https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLpaZrUayzSZmHWvtFR7n3...
Sure, thanks for asking. Mainly hobby things
Disney's FastPass, a complicated history -Defunctland: I've shown this one to many many people, K. Perjurer is great great great at storytelling, and the data/analytics behind the FastPass process may get you interested in Theme Parks.
The Ultimate Guide To Nuclear Weapons - HypotheticalHistory: He's a credited milblogger who can make a 5 hour video on the logistics of paperclip shipping.
All Miata Videos - Saveageeese: I own one and the docuseries is a wealth of knowledge, interviews with designers, etc.
PETSCOP: The darkest Game you can not play - Nexpo, just take a peek :p "wendigoon" is similar in that it's well reseeearched, well edited, long form content.
There is a youtuber named Bald and Bankrupt. He is a travel vlogger and I greatly enjoy his personality/exposure to the greater world. I've "folowed" him on some trips, IE India.
I more so do this because it's hard to remember/reflect on "profound youtube videos". I don't realllly ever go back and rewatch except maybe the Defunctland one, and it's easier to just go to the web.
Disney's FastPass, a complicated history -Defunctland: I've shown this one to many many people, K. Perjurer is great great great at storytelling, and the data/analytics behind the FastPass process may get you interested in Theme Parks.
The Ultimate Guide To Nuclear Weapons - HypotheticalHistory: He's a credited milblogger who can make a 5 hour video on the logistics of paperclip shipping.
All Miata Videos - Saveageeese: I own one and the docuseries is a wealth of knowledge, interviews with designers, etc.
PETSCOP: The darkest Game you can not play - Nexpo, just take a peek :p "wendigoon" is similar in that it's well reseeearched, well edited, long form content.
There is a youtuber named Bald and Bankrupt. He is a travel vlogger and I greatly enjoy his personality/exposure to the greater world. I've "folowed" him on some trips, IE India.
I more so do this because it's hard to remember/reflect on "profound youtube videos". I don't realllly ever go back and rewatch except maybe the Defunctland one, and it's easier to just go to the web.
Thanks! That looks interesting, I made a note of your list and will check them out.
I collect a lot of random demo videos from a lot of fields - every time I fancy honing one skill in particular, there's usually 5-10 videos in my collection that will give me something to work on.
> If you're not also ensuring that others can access that copy then I don't really see the point.
happy to share them if you can buy me a competent enough lawyer to run interference with the litigious copyright overlords.
> If you're not also ensuring that others can access that copy then I don't really see the point.
happy to share them if you can buy me a competent enough lawyer to run interference with the litigious copyright overlords.
I rewatch home/car fix videos whenever I need to eventually do some task again.
It works perfectly fine (everything loads instantly) when I'm logged in with an account that has YouTube Premium.
But when I try using it with an account that doesn't have YouTube Premium, on the same browser, on the same hardware, everything hangs for 30+ seconds.
Hmmmmmmmmm?
But when I try using it with an account that doesn't have YouTube Premium, on the same browser, on the same hardware, everything hangs for 30+ seconds.
Hmmmmmmmmm?
Adtech bloatware causing issues, maybe?
I have the latest Firefox on Mac OS, and no problems for me. I pay for Youtube Premium, though. I wonder if that makes a difference.
I have the latest Firefox on macOS and do not pay for Premium, and I have been having no problems with YouTube.
Same here, macOS and premium and can't tell any difference to using YouTube on Chrome.
I use MacOS, Youtube Premium and I can tell a difference in general usability since switching from Chrome to Firefox.
Skipping 10 seconds using left and right keys is much slower in Firefox vs Chrome.
Even with ubo I’ve been getting a flash of ads on youtube website. I might not see the ad but I will see the keyframe as well as a black loading screen for about as long as it takes for the skip button to appear on that ad. The solution was to of course pull the video directly.
I've got premium and am using MacOS and I've had to kill my browser several times in the last couple days because it froze up. I'm using M3s if it makes a difference.
Working fine for me over here. Firefox on M1 Pro Mac, also YT Premium. I'll check on my gaming PC (Linux Mint 22, Firefox)
Seems to be okay for me on FF 129.0.2 + uBlock Origin, running on Windows 11.
Looking through the Reddit comments, users running older versions of FF may be affected? Seeing a few people commenting that they're seeing this YT issue with v88, 110, 115 ESR and 121.
Looking through the Reddit comments, users running older versions of FF may be affected? Seeing a few people commenting that they're seeing this YT issue with v88, 110, 115 ESR and 121.
i am using the ESR version and the slowness definitely exists here.
The slowness accumulates after the infinite scroll loads a lot (e.g., the subscriptions page or the home page, or comments). Refreshing fixes it, but now you've lost the old position and have to re-scroll back (which, causes the slowness once again).
The slowness accumulates after the infinite scroll loads a lot (e.g., the subscriptions page or the home page, or comments). Refreshing fixes it, but now you've lost the old position and have to re-scroll back (which, causes the slowness once again).
Same here, with the caveat that Google has managed to successfully bully me into paying for Premium some time ago. Not sure if any Premium users are affected.
Same setup here, but without premium. I'm seeing no issues.
Doing a quick test (Windows 10, Firefox, NoScript, Privacy Badger) - it seems to work fine for me.
FWIW, I've got NoScript blocking most of the sites that YouTube wants to use js from.
FWIW, I've got NoScript blocking most of the sites that YouTube wants to use js from.
I have the "DF YouTube (Distraction Free)" Firefox extension installed, hiding anything to do with suggested videos. YouTube is working for me with Firefox on Windows 11 about the same way it has all month.
I don't know what the solution is to private/shareholder corporations that own a defacto public space like YouTube and Twitter.
Maybe we're still in the big bang of the Internet and this will fix itself over time. Although I'd really like a public organization like the Library of Congress to support archival of public spaces.
Which makes me wonder: If society decides that viewing information is a right, does that lead to government sponsorship of browsers? i.e. if viewing information is a right, then an information viewer is an important thing that must be open and unfettered by monetary interests. Considering how much gets pumped into Congressional jobs programs, a few million to hire some good software engineers seems easy to support.
Maybe we're still in the big bang of the Internet and this will fix itself over time. Although I'd really like a public organization like the Library of Congress to support archival of public spaces.
Which makes me wonder: If society decides that viewing information is a right, does that lead to government sponsorship of browsers? i.e. if viewing information is a right, then an information viewer is an important thing that must be open and unfettered by monetary interests. Considering how much gets pumped into Congressional jobs programs, a few million to hire some good software engineers seems easy to support.
Coincidentally, today I tried to log in to Google AdSense for the first time in months using Firefox. Google simply will not permit it.
Surprisingly, to me, it had no problem with Duck's browser. I thought that would be on the forbidden-by-Google list, too.
Couldn’t sign you in
This browser or app may not be secure. Learn more
Try using a different browser. If you’re already using a supported browser, you can try again to sign in.
Surprisingly, to me, it had no problem with Duck's browser. I thought that would be on the forbidden-by-Google list, too.
There seems to be two bugs here, one that YouTube seems to have regressed on a popular browser choice, but also that Firefox allows any website to claim enough resources to make the entire browser inoperable.
Everyone is talking about Google breaking something, but what if this is something Firefox has to fix? If it works in Chrome and not Firefox, it should be a browser bug, not website bug.
Google Flights has been broken on Firefox for as long as I can remember.
[deleted]
Works fine for me. Firefox on Linux.
No, it happens for me on Linux too. Yesterday it crashed the page on my new laptop.
Starting yesterday afternoon, YouTube doesn't play anything in Firefox (+ublock +sponserblock on Linux) for me. Thankfully, youtube-dlp still works just fine, so it's a minor inconvenience.
Google docs blocks the ability to print in firefox, it will instead always save as pdf. Google doesnt even try to hide its anticompetitive practices at this point.
Starting today, almost everything is unusable on Firefox. Seems like there’s been some change in DNS or maybe it’s just my ISP but Safari is fine.
with ublock i never had problems and no ads either
Same it has worked fine for me for ages with Ublock, but this week it has been _bad_. I recently switched to 5g for home internet (i live in the woods), and thought that was the cause. But seeing others complain about it leaves me to believe some Google Manager is upset that people are A. blocking ads, and B. using Firefox.
I have occasionally run into a weird issue when I jump from one video to another - Video 1's title, comments and description (and maybe its recommendations?) will be displayed but Video 2 will play in the container. Load times are also wonky, but that's about it.
I think I only have problems when there's a chat channel.
Became unusable for me (Firefox/Win) a few months back on my laptop with integrated intel graphics. Fine on other computers with more capable hardware. The solution was an extension called h264ify. There was something about the vp8/9 codec that was bringing Firefox to its knees. h264ify avoids those codecs altogether on Youtube.
I havent had performance issues, but I did have a very annoying issue recently where it would only show 3 videos per row.
I tried a bunch of potential fixes but the one that worked for me was actually adding this custom filter to ublock origin...
youtube.com##ytd-rich-grid-renderer:style(--ytd-rich-grid-items-per-row: 5 !important)
youtube.com##ytd-rich-grid-renderer:style(--ytd-rich-grid-items-per-row: 5 !important)
Just tried it out and ... it works fine?
The iPhone app sucks too, am I the only one who force quits the app to get back to the search screen ?
This is all browsers that aren't Safari in iPhone. I have to do this too with Chrome on my iPhone too.
Just have two browsers. Use Chrome for only youtube and google apps. And Firefox for rest of web use.
Works for me, but the settings cog hasn't been OK for a long time, the settings menu doesn't have any text.
But all my Firefox problems happen on Google owned sites. Maps navigation doesn't highlight the route (desktop). Google image search doesn't work (desktop).
But all my Firefox problems happen on Google owned sites. Maps navigation doesn't highlight the route (desktop). Google image search doesn't work (desktop).
Works fine for me?
[edit]
Just ran into the issue when clicking on a video someone else linked; yt homepage was fine though; weird.
[edit]
Just ran into the issue when clicking on a video someone else linked; yt homepage was fine though; weird.
Never assume as malice what can more easily be explained by incompetence or accident.
[deleted]
Everyone is talking about Google breaking something, but what if this is something Firefox has to fix? If it works in Chrome and not Firefox, it should be a browser bug, not website bug.
Because it did not happen after a Firefox update?
Weird. Works just fine for me, in that my CPU skyrockets in usage on that process and stays pegged at 100% or higher for about 5 mins before calming down.
Just a normal day on YouTube for me.
Just a normal day on YouTube for me.
NAS with lots of storage + tubesync + jellyfin. problem solved.
I use zen. Ditched firefox and brave irrationally last week because youtube runs so much better and page loading is fast. Let's see how long this change lasts
YouTube is barely usable on Google’s YouTube app on Google’s Pixel phones running Google’s Android OS at the moment.
It used to be that if one were watching one YouTube video and followed a YouTube link to another, that one would be prompted to either enqueue that video or go to it immediately. I used that all the time to enqueue an evening’s worth of videos.
Now, each link interrupts the current video and starts playing. Which means that I instead have to watch the video, then go back to my list of videos to watch, then select another one.
Also, it used to be that YouTube links would just open in the YouTube app. This was nice. Now, they open in an embedded version of the app, which means that my current app (say, an RSS reader) is blocked until I finish watching.
It’s all so annoying. Why does Google make the experience of using its own products worse?
Oh, yeah: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41337899
It used to be that if one were watching one YouTube video and followed a YouTube link to another, that one would be prompted to either enqueue that video or go to it immediately. I used that all the time to enqueue an evening’s worth of videos.
Now, each link interrupts the current video and starts playing. Which means that I instead have to watch the video, then go back to my list of videos to watch, then select another one.
Also, it used to be that YouTube links would just open in the YouTube app. This was nice. Now, they open in an embedded version of the app, which means that my current app (say, an RSS reader) is blocked until I finish watching.
It’s all so annoying. Why does Google make the experience of using its own products worse?
Oh, yeah: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41337899
There are significantly less bugs on the IOS version of YouTube which pretty much sums up the whole situation.
My take is that Google products have always punished people who have bad internet connections. 10 years ago I had a crappy DSL connection which could usually handle Netflix, Amazon Video, etc. YouTube was unreliable.
Google Meet never worked well for me, even after I got my ADSL upgraded to a more reasonable 20Mbps. Zoom works fine. Skype works fine. Discord works fine. The chat built into Slack... works fine. Google is a standout.
Google Meet never worked well for me, even after I got my ADSL upgraded to a more reasonable 20Mbps. Zoom works fine. Skype works fine. Discord works fine. The chat built into Slack... works fine. Google is a standout.
Your take directly contradicts my personal experience. 10 years ago I had a crappy internet connection that went down to as little as 10KB/s (severe network congestion and building management didn't care). YouTube served 144p video when every other video site went down only to 240p or even 320p, which was unusable on this connection.
Seems like they have reverted whatever update from yesterday that caused this. It's back to normal for me on Firefox ESR.
It's not only windows, it's happening to me on arch linux with firefox as well. Has been for a few days now.
I've noticed background Youtube Tabs, seem to eat memory like crazy. At one point I swear it went to 20GiB of RAM.
It works for me on Windows 10, Firefox Developer Edition, no addon that touches youtube.
Logged in, not premium
Try scrolling through comments or watch a video with chat. It seems the slowdowns happen in those components.
Oops.
(context: https://archive.is/tgIH9)
(context: https://archive.is/tgIH9)
if it is indeed an intended user experience, then i expect non-chrome users to only prosper by either paying for premium or by turning to browser extensions to improve youtube.
i'd wager that those choosing to installing firefox are more likely to go to this route themselves.
i'd wager that those choosing to installing firefox are more likely to go to this route themselves.
Still working fine for me, Firefox/Linux.
Conspiracy theorists on top already even though this also happened on Chrome multiple times in history. Sometimes software can be a bitch, there's no reason to believe this is intentional
"Our mission is to organize the world's information and make it universally accessible and useful."
Yeah, it's time for Google to be broken up into pieces because of anti-competitive laws and really get back to making America into a capitalistic society once again.
It's hard to get more capitalistic that the owners of capital trying to build monopolies since that's what maximizes value for shareholders.
Turns out "free markets" (by the econ 101 definition) are bad for capital owners so they try to have the markets be as not free as possible, I'm shocked they would do this (well, not that shocked)
Turns out "free markets" (by the econ 101 definition) are bad for capital owners so they try to have the markets be as not free as possible, I'm shocked they would do this (well, not that shocked)
See
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalism#Definition
to note that "Capitalism" is really a technical term from Marxist theory. Advocates of capitalism will never find a definition they accept because they want to have one that encompasses all the good (of which there is plenty) and rejects the bad (of which there is also plenty)
Positing such as thing as "Capitalism" is positing that there could be some other system or that the current system could have an end. Advocates of the status quo really believe
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/There_is_no_alternative
want to treat prosystemic economics as a science like physics or chemistry, etc.
If there is a way our system can claim to be better than others it is because we have competition in markets, politically, etc.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalism#Definition
to note that "Capitalism" is really a technical term from Marxist theory. Advocates of capitalism will never find a definition they accept because they want to have one that encompasses all the good (of which there is plenty) and rejects the bad (of which there is also plenty)
Positing such as thing as "Capitalism" is positing that there could be some other system or that the current system could have an end. Advocates of the status quo really believe
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/There_is_no_alternative
want to treat prosystemic economics as a science like physics or chemistry, etc.
If there is a way our system can claim to be better than others it is because we have competition in markets, politically, etc.
Capitalism, an undeniable driver of innovation, incentivizes firms to endlessly innovate ways to avoid competition. The only question is whether the anti-competitive innovation is more or less expensive than the innovation they'll have to do to compete.
It's not even really a question, it's a collective action problem, nominally hampered by price-fixing laws. Price-fixing laws are an indication that the desire to avoid competition is so strong and so dangerous that to slow it down we're willing to abridge the supposedly universal freedoms of speech and of association.
It's not even really a question, it's a collective action problem, nominally hampered by price-fixing laws. Price-fixing laws are an indication that the desire to avoid competition is so strong and so dangerous that to slow it down we're willing to abridge the supposedly universal freedoms of speech and of association.
> Yeah, it's time for Google to be broken up into pieces because of anti-competitive laws and really get back to making America into a capitalistic society once again.
Isn't that what got us into this mess in the first place? Seems to me that anti-competitive practices are the logical conclusion of privately-owned enterprise.
EDIT: to be clear, I'm very pro breaking up google. I'm just surprised that people are coming back around to the idea that government intervention is necessary to balance a stable economy with a private one.
Isn't that what got us into this mess in the first place? Seems to me that anti-competitive practices are the logical conclusion of privately-owned enterprise.
EDIT: to be clear, I'm very pro breaking up google. I'm just surprised that people are coming back around to the idea that government intervention is necessary to balance a stable economy with a private one.
There’s a balance between allowing for the freedom to encourage innovative growth and regulatory regimes to govern behavior in more stable markets.
We’d be using AT&T’s version of AOL for $150/mo without breakup of that company.
We’d be using AT&T’s version of AOL for $150/mo without breakup of that company.
What got us here is a capitalistic society where antitrust laws are not implemented in practice. Time to go back to square one and change that
Exactly this.
Why are you even allowing satanic Google access to your Firefox?
Keep YouTube corralled in Chrome. No sense in consorting with satan anymore than we need to.
Imo, it's just too difficult to maintain compatibility through a natural language specification.
Things like browsers need some kind of open source reference implementation to act as a spec to maintain interoperability.
https://benoitessiambre.com/specification.html
Things like browsers need some kind of open source reference implementation to act as a spec to maintain interoperability.
https://benoitessiambre.com/specification.html
1) I'm reasonably confident that this issue is not an accident. Better compatibility / better specs won't help here, I'm afraid.
2) A reference implementation for browser-features is an insanely complex project. Already there are effectively only two entities on the entire planet who can produce a browser that is reasonably close to the current spec. If you forced a reference implementation to exist, it'd probably just end up being Chrome(ium), which is arguably an even worse situation than where we are now.
2) A reference implementation for browser-features is an insanely complex project. Already there are effectively only two entities on the entire planet who can produce a browser that is reasonably close to the current spec. If you forced a reference implementation to exist, it'd probably just end up being Chrome(ium), which is arguably an even worse situation than where we are now.
You don't think Mozilla adopting chromium or a fork of it would fix a lot of their problems?
It existed and was called Amaya.[1] Unfortunately it was way too expensive to keep it up to date with the ever-evolving specifications, and slowing down spec development was a non-starter. So it was canned.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amaya_(web_editor)
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amaya_(web_editor)
WSYIWYG web editing seems to be impossible. CMS systems seem to have mostly given up on interactive HTML editors and switched to things like markdown.
I want to like Dreamweaver but whenever I try to use it there is a 1-2 sec delay between me typing text in and it appearing on the screen.
Most HTML editors behave like they are possessed by the devil: try to select the text in an <h1> and somehow it either selects everything but the first character or it selects all the text before the <h1> and also the <h1>.
I want to like Dreamweaver but whenever I try to use it there is a 1-2 sec delay between me typing text in and it appearing on the screen.
Most HTML editors behave like they are possessed by the devil: try to select the text in an <h1> and somehow it either selects everything but the first character or it selects all the text before the <h1> and also the <h1>.
A reference implementation isn't really enough either though. Think about Perl, which is implementation defined, vs Python, which is specification defined.
Python is much more successful (it really ate Perl's lunch), and less of a moving target, because of this. Alternate implementations of don't really exist, because they're always having to play catch-up. Python's specifications level the field a bit.
Python is much more successful (it really ate Perl's lunch), and less of a moving target, because of this. Alternate implementations of don't really exist, because they're always having to play catch-up. Python's specifications level the field a bit.
Python has open source implementations that act as defacto standard, as specification of the details.
My guess is that a Polymer update made Youtube slower for everyone, but SpiderMonkey isn't particularly great at the kind of excess operations that have been added. Firefox in particular seems to suffer from complete UI freezes whereas Chromium browsers seem to just have slow tabs when the browser is overwhelmed.
While I certainly wouldn't be surprised if this is part of an anti-adblocker mechanism, not every slowdown on Google's websites is done out of malice. Some of it is just caused by bugs.