
Firefox considering off-by-default preference for loading user.js files - smnthermes
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1543752
======
mrandish
I worry that this is yet another reduction in degrees of user's freedom to
tweak, tune and adjust FF. Back when FF killed all XUL extensions, it lost one
of its most uniquely valuable propositions. Yes, the change was required to
make the browser more secure but at the time we were assured that new APIs
supporting the lost functionality would come. It's been nearly three years
since the change was announced and the functionality of several of the most
popular extensions (like Tab Mix Plus) are still impossible to implement in
Firefox.

I strongly support the mission of the open web but as a heavy FF user I'm not
happy with the prevailing attitude at Mozilla that seems either against user
customization.

~~~
gowld
Mozilla is desperately trying to keep up with Google Chrome, plus also adding
privacy controls, but simply can't. One of the first victims that Chrome (and
all mass market apps) sacrificed in the service of rapid development is user
control over their experience.

This is the cost of converting from a pragmatic power user tool to a slick
Eternal September consumer product.

------
torstenvl
> _My main assumption is that 3% of users shouldn 't want/need this thing, and
> 97% of users shouldn't be paying startup costs for it._

Removing user freedom because "users shouldn't want/need this thing" seems
like a Google move.

~~~
gdulli
Firefox has definitely become synonymous to me with loss of functionality and
control.

~~~
zo1
All the major browsers are doing it.

~~~
beatgammit
Which is a great reason for Firefox to _not_ do it. Firefox sets itself apart
by being different from the other major browsers, with a focus on user control
and privacy by default.

I can understand removing features by default, but they should not be removed
entirely. If user.js is causing startup to take longer and nobody uses it,
then come up with a different way to check for it (e.g. about:config setting).
If it's causing runtime or maintenance issues, then it _might_ be worth asking
the community if it's worth keeping.

------
lousken
The biggest problem with user.js is the documentation, or rather lack thereof.
Instead, mozilla should provide full documentation on how this file works and
mainly which fuctions are available (FULL LIST) and what they do. In general,
the config in firefox is a hot mess and user.js is not the problem.

~~~
yoklov
I think it’s just pref/user_pref and such. Despite the name it is not a js
file and is not parsed like one. I think the file extension is entirely
vestigial.

~~~
lousken
But still, there's no complete list of these and only some of them are
properly documented. I've tried to look up some prefs about half a year ago
and couldn't find it anywhere. There's just a wiki that mentions some of them
and on various blogs you can find a mention of what something does here and
there, but that's about it.

------
molticrystal
There are already third party utilities that inject dlls or monitor the
mozilla windows to allow features lost when legacy extension support was
removed.

I saw on ghacks the other day about ThunderBirdTray which is a 3rd party
executable that watches Thunderbird to restore the functionality lost when
MinimizeToTray stopped working.

Improved privacy, better download managment(DownloadThemAll what it used to be
able to do), OS integration, ect have for the most part been eroded away.

Eventually things seem like they will escalate to the point you'll have to use
CheatEngine, a suite of 3rd party programs running in the background, or
special compiles of the browser made by 3rd parties like WaterFox or yourself
to get chrome or firefox to do anything in addition to loading a webpage, and
to stop it from doing a lot of unwanted things.

~~~
nzd
I'm quite happy since the day I left official Firefox. First I disabled auto-
updates at v55.0 for some long time and then switched to Waterfox. So far the
switch is a peace of mind and I don't feel disrespected when I see news like
this any more.

Mozilla is unfortunately losing its meaning since they decided to follow
Google closely. Firefox one day will be a marginal browser. Or maybe it
already is?

~~~
Polylactic_acid
I have been very happy with firefox recently. All of my extensions like script
blockers and tree tabs have been ported to the new system and the browser has
been super fast and full of great new features/privacy improvements.

~~~
smnthermes
Tree tabs is still severely limited.

~~~
Polylactic_acid
In what way? It does everything I did before (put the tabs in a tree on the
side)

------
8bitsrule
I understand the point of having the file every time I switch the FF version
or the machine I'm running it in. It's portable and keeps me away from _having
to get near_ the teeth-grindingly awkward 'about:config' interface.

"checking for this file needlessly causes additional IO early on startup" is
probably the lamest reason to get rid of it.

~~~
zo1
This is how user-control enabling features get removed, with barely a whimper.
And it appears to be done by people that are looking for easy-hanging fruit to
promote their brand from the look of it.

~~~
A_Parr
I've lost my voice from all the other features they've dropped over the last
decade plus. It's all fallen on deaf ears, anyway.

They don't care about Firefox users, because they're not Chrome users.

~~~
gowld
They're going to be Chrome users now. Everyone has their limit.

~~~
rasz
or MSblink, Vivaldi, Opera, Brave.

------
humaid
I am using ghacks user.js[1], which makes fingerprinting harder and improves
my privacy online. Removing user.js would mean less privacy for me.

[1]: [https://github.com/ghacksuserjs/ghacks-
user.js](https://github.com/ghacksuserjs/ghacks-user.js)

~~~
rasz
I inject this into Chrome to hopefully achieve something similar:

    
    
        window.AudioContext = undefined;
        window.OfflineAudioContext = undefined;
        window.BaseAudioContext = undefined;
        navigator.getUserMedia = undefined;
        navigator.webkitGetUserMedia = undefined;
        window.MediaStreamTrack = undefined;
        window.RTCPeerConnection = undefined;
        window.RTCSessionDescription = undefined;
        window.webkitMediaStreamTrack = undefined;
        window.webkitRTCPeerConnection = undefined;
        window.webkitRTCSessionDescription = undefined;
        if (navigator.mediaDevices) navigator.mediaDevices.enumerateDevices = undefined;
        
        //https://googlechrome.github.io/samples/beacon/
        navigator.sendBeacon = undefined;
        //https://mathiasbynens.github.io/rel-noopener/
        window.opener = undefined;
        
        //https://demo.agektmr.com/storage/
        unsafeWindow.window.openDatabase = undefined;
        Object.defineProperty(unsafeWindow.window, "indexedDB", { value: undefined });
        
        
        //https://browserleaks.com/canvas
        //https://panopticlick.eff.org
        HTMLCanvasElement.prototype.toDataURL = undefined;
        HTMLCanvasElement.prototype.toBlob = undefined;
        CanvasRenderingContext2D.prototype.getImageData = undefined;

~~~
zamadatix
You create your own customized identity to avoid being unique? Seems unique in
itself.

~~~
rasz
most of tracking/fingerprinting scripts lack any error trapping and simply
crash when encountering undefined functions.

------
gray_-_wolf
I doubt that it's 3% of users, I have user.js and also disabled telemetry. I
would suspect there is not small amount of people who have both user.js and
telemetry disabled same as me...

~~~
Polylactic_acid
Tbh if you disable telemetry you don't really get to complain that your usage
didn't get considered when you explicitly refused to tell Mozilla which
features you use.

~~~
CamJN
In that case Mozilla doesn't get to market themselves as giving a shit about
privacy.

~~~
Polylactic_acid
Telemetry done right is not privacy invasive. There is nothing wrong with them
seeing a count saying x% of users use this feature.

------
zamadatix
I'm never sure what base Firefox is targeting. Sometimes with changes like
these it seems like the casual user base but then you look at the changes they
advertise (e.g. built in privacy) it's not stuff casual users care about. In
the end the statistics show it's not attracting either side.

It's gotten to the point non-Google Chromium based browsers have higher usage
share than Firefox. It makes me wonder how much longer Google will keep
shoveling cash over to Mozilla as the numbers drop.

------
Wowfunhappy
The way I configure Firefox is, I have two files in Firefox's installation
directory: (1) /pref/local-settings.js, which tells Firefox to load (2)
/firefox.cfg, where all my actual settings are.

Is this what they're thinking of removing, or something else? I'll be pretty
pissed off if they remove that. It's the only way I was able to switch the
Firefox—the browser has far too much cruft by default, I need a very easy way
to take it all out on any new machine.

------
benibela
The scratchpad, too

------
LordLestat
Just saying the following...

Only someone who is either in support for Mozilla's constant moves AGAINST
power-users and in benefit ONLY for Chrome/simple-users and
diversity/intelligent-features-hating-leftists - or falling for Mozilla using
their usual trendy buzz-words like speed... or security... can still put a bit
value into that team of losers over there at Moz-HQ!

Mozilla... fully living anti-feature fascism since 2013!

\-----------------------------

Why has Mozilla-new and their new user group of “progressive/leftists” a
general problem with browsers like Vivaldi/Brave/Waterfox/Seamonkey or Pale
Moon and customization and choice in general? No matter how hard people try to
ignore that very simple issue and constantly are in denial it has anything to
do with politics… it is in direct correlation towards the change of the
mentality of what is considered “politically correct” today! First the public
shared oversimplfied reasoning… Mozilla-new removed most power user features
(and they will also remove userchrome.css in the future) to be attractive to
Chrome users, to make Chrome users switch away from Googles product. The point
is that Chrome users or general simple users do not accept and like “bloat” –
so it was decided that all the “conservative features” had to go to enable
Firefox more compatible with their needs.

\-----------------------------

Now here is where politics are kicking in, and things get a LOT MORE messier…
Mozilla-new has turned into a fully customization/choice and politically-
moderates and conservatives hating “heavily left leaning developer” – as that
would (at least also theoretically) appeal to the majority of Google Chrome
users or general people with the same opinion – which have because of their
ideology and believe much less tolerance and understanding for everything
which provides choice/which is more conservative aligned. Mozilla-new has
fully turned into a company which just betrayed their own creation and origin
user-base as it was not compatible with “leftist/progressive visions/ideas”
and their world-view! But there is a major problem with Mozillas way of
thinking… No matter how much they try to appeal to “leftist/progressive”
simple/Chrome users with ongoing feature removals and morality adjustments –
The majority of this user base will stay loyal to Google and Chrome – no
matter how much Mozilla tries to persuade that kind of users to use Firefox
instead. Mozilla-new will only be seen as an imitation facility who
additionally got greedy and jealous – who tried to adopt Chromes simple add-on
system, it’s development mentality and political mentality for the sake of
broadening Mozillas shrinking user-base!

\-----------------------------

Mozilla-new is humiliating everything which is true and honest FOSS with their
actions. Real Open-Source developers have standards, morals, loyalty… all that
what Mozilla-new is missing. They abuse the legacy of a real unique and once
amazing past – which just was discarded for being “non-inclusive and non-
liberal”

\-----------------------------

What they forget is that a honest and real liberal and inclusive concept would
mean also to keep features of users who have a different opinion, mentality
and especially skill level! As i see it this is a common problem with this new
kind of “leftist/progressive” opinion of so many developers and it’s
management today – which also affects the users they gain – they make use of
concepts they do not at all understand and honor. While the users of such
groups are wildly attacking people and organizations who go a different way –
and not wanting to become simple and minimalist just for the majorities sake.
If something is swimming into another direction it is seen as threat and
danger seen as mortal enemy to the today established system what is seen as
“the only correct and acceptable one” – this has direct influence on the
vision how a product is developed!

\-----------------------------

Nobody with a sane mind would want to support radical right-wing visions – but
the issue is that today everything is getting attacked and in conclusion
removed just because there is the chance that it could point to a very small
degree towards a moderate middle-ground or even moderate conservative ground –
all what is moving away from your typical “leftist/progressive” concept.
Mozilla is supporting an excluding concept – which may be nicely wrapped as
“inclusive and socially correct” but in reality fully excluding a minority who
also has rights – the group of users who are sitting in the already mentioned
middle-ground/moderate-conservative-ground and do not like that everything
gets intentionally dumbed-down or removed to put everything out of the way for
a less tolerating/accepting and rather aggressive/dismissive user group –
which Mozilla wants on board.

\-----------------------------

And that is in the end the ultimate reason why people and software which are
sticking out from the crowd do get so much despised and demonized – or even
receiving threats (Classic add-on archive) or getting in an active way
monitored and even the smallest mistake is recorded and used in time to
blacklist the projects or people which refuse to play the established and
discriminating game of today.

