▶ No.866942>>868208
Am I the only one who sees that stupid lenny face in what's supposed to be its tooth?
▶ No.866977>>867058
a tumblrite's ripoff of chrome://dino
▶ No.867038
Dmoz dragon wants his power back on.
▶ No.867058>>867237
>>866977
The redpills damaged your brain.
▶ No.867237>>867253 >>876067
>>867058
You're obsessed with medication analogies because you're already brain-damaged and addicted, yes?
▶ No.867249>>867273
>>866941 (OP)
How DARE you ask about xer species, shitlord!?
Xe could be any kind of creature, depending on how xe is feeling on a given day, or could be transpecies, in the process of transitioning. Xe could even be aspecies, not identifying with any species at all.
Check your speciesist privilege.
t.Mozilla dev team
▶ No.867253>>867257
>>867237
I know you are but what am I?
▶ No.867257
>>867253
A mirror unto oneself.
▶ No.867264
>>866941 (OP)
>THE FUCK IS THIS CREATURE?
A Jew shutting it down.
▶ No.867273>>867481
>>867249
>rebbit spacing
>trying this hard
go back
▶ No.867336>>867343
>>866941 (OP)
Best thing Liberal arts retards can draw.
▶ No.867343>>867354
>>867336
Why did you capitalize "liberal" but not "arts"?
▶ No.867353
▶ No.867354>>867483
>>867343
you must be an english major
▶ No.867464
>>866970
Looks more like an emotional support animal for autists.
▶ No.867481
>>867273
>.t Newfag who's trying to fit in real hard with his retarded reddit spacing meme.
▶ No.867483
>>867354
I'm just asking you the significance of doing such a thing is. After all, it was you
who made the concerted effort to write that post. I don't understand how you can be so insecure that you misconstrue a post asking you an innocuous question about what you're trying to say gets with such an incendiary response.
▶ No.867547>>867554
>>866941 (OP)
Surprised it isnt a cute foxy, would relate with the name of the browser.
▶ No.867554>>867559 >>867587 >>867925 >>875987
>>867547
It's supposed to be the lizzard from Mozilla. But like all liberals do, they've turned it into a weak, soy guzzling nancy pants pussy lizard that thinks it's kawaii instead of the mean, tough, cool lizard Mozilla used to be.
Don't worry, I'm sure in due time they'll come up with some soy guzzling, nuMale fox mascot for FireFox. It's all those worthless as fuck diversity hires can do. Just searching for "Mozilla mascot" really shows they're already heading in that direction.
>hello welcome to Mozilla, we're hiring
<hi, I can draw shitty pictures on a drawing tablet on my over-priced Mac
<I can't actually code
<also, I'm a gay trans-lebsian MtF Latinx part Native American part African American my pronouns are Xi/Xer
>WELCOME TO MOZILLA YOU'RE HIRED!
▶ No.867559>>867836 >>867911
>>867554
Do you ever step back from a post before you press that New Reply button and wonder if maybe, possibly, you're getting a little more worked up over something than you ought to?
▶ No.867587
>>867554
10/10 quality post
▶ No.867836>>875501
>>867559
I know. So many people are so hypersensitive. They form outrage in their own heads over little things that have no impact in the real world. There's no sense of proportionality.
▶ No.867909
I see a one big (((nose)))-creature
▶ No.867911>>867997
>>867559
>just ignore it, it'll go away
▶ No.867916
haha- hes fat
maybe you would have longer arms if you got rid of that paunch, ya fakkin booknerd webdev slacker
go for a hike, mike
▶ No.867920
>OMG IT'S SO CUUUUUUTE
fucking normies
▶ No.867925
>>867554
Mozilla was the original internet red pill, and we'll never get back that kind of design language exuding strength and defiance against soulless corporate husks now that they've mutated into one themselves.
I hope San Francisco is levelled in an earthquake.
▶ No.867934>>867938
can someone make a fork that gets rid of all this fucked shit an replaces it with a qt2d fox girl (male)
▶ No.867938
>>867934
scrap that idea just make him a cute fox guy.
▶ No.867997>>875851
>>867911
You can ignore it because it has no meaning upon your life. It's a mascot or an icon to a web browser. It's fucking nothing.
▶ No.868208
>>866942
Tooth? I thought it was the togue. Man, whoever did this really knows how to draw stuff. it's basically a fucking Rorschach.
▶ No.868218>>875492
I guess this is the shitposting thread.
What does /tech/ think of (((Brian Lunduke)))?
https://youtube.com/watch?v=V8pluLItUjI
▶ No.868779
>>866941 (OP)
the mascot of some gay webscale project hosted on github, most likely
▶ No.868979
>>866941 (OP)
the pozilla dinosaur. moving on.
▶ No.875479
>>866941 (OP)
for a moment i thought the tail was a sort of cape.
▶ No.875483
▶ No.875492>>875502 >>875943
>>868218
I currently watch his channel, but I have some mixed opinions about him. Sometimes his content is ok, and other times it is mostly click bait. For example, he somewhat recently put out a video shitting on https without really citing contreversial facts he was referencing like the NSA can decrypt all https communication. When I went into the video I personally had a list on my mind on what some problems with https were like the certificate system, but the things he chose seemed to make it seem like he had no clue on what he was talking about, like saying he shouldn't have his site use https because there is nothing private on it. After people called him out on it in the comment section, he makes a follow up video "Tech as a Religeon" where he says that people religeously follow certain accepted things in technology blindly. To me this video sounded like he was butthurt about being called out for trying to argue 2+2=5, but people not agreeing with him.
Something I do like is that he finds some good news things to report about that I would like to know. We also a share a similar sense of joy of fucking with people, it's kind of hard to explain that though.
Another thing I find annoying is that he doesn't commit 100% to this free software, privacy loving persona he gives off. For example, he made a video where he said he was going to shutdown his facebook and ragged on how bad social media was. This is a good thing, but he just recently made a facebook account again "just for the show." He caved into returning to the site, because "people were asking for a facebook page." If he was really privacy first, he wouldn't even consider making a facebook page at all. He also runs entirely free software, except for games. I know it is very tempting to want to sucumb to proprietary video games, but it is something I have personally given up as a free software enthusiest.
In total, I have a mixed relationship with Lunduke and have considered multiple times to stop watching his videos.
▶ No.875501
▶ No.875502>>875603 >>875943
>>875492
>https://www.hooktube.com/watch?v=Fn9WWVmINGg
go to around 36m
I find him obnoxious. He is just going to go with whatever is popular to feed his narcissism. "Youtubers" in general are cancer.
▶ No.875586>>875602
meatwad attempting to take human form
but srsly where did this come from?
▶ No.875602
>>875586
It's what's displayed in Firefox when the browser can't make a connection.
▶ No.875603>>875627 >>875630
>>875502
I think he makes some valid points against Stallman, who is really a bit extremist and disconnected from reality in his viewpoints.
▶ No.875627
>>875603
Stallman isn't disconnected from reality. He knows the reality very very well. What he doesn't do is compromise on his values of freedom in exchange for a bit of convenience.
▶ No.875630>>875680
>>875603
>"Think of the children" is a good argument
Let's say it is good in the sense that it will convince many (retards).
▶ No.875674
>>866941 (OP)
I want to fuck that creature.
▶ No.875680>>875757
>>875630
>Yes, high-IQ white people, don't have children or worry about the future, muslims and africans will do that for you!
is not a very enticing argument either.
▶ No.875757>>875843 >>875955
>>875680
>xenophobic fear mongering
Go back to your safe space >>>/pol/
▶ No.875759>>875938
▶ No.875843
>>875757
No, I'm tired of their shenanigans as well, but you are not enlightened for pretending people who don't value software licenses above their personal lives are idiots.
Stallman's arguments against all proprietary software are lazy, and that's not a coincidence since he's biased towards some expression of socialism and doesn't really care how people make do in our current system.
▶ No.875851
>>867997
Dude nihilism lmao
▶ No.875938
>>875759
>The idea is that while you, fellow smart technologists, will have no issues understanding
>the differences between cookies, LocalStorage and indexedDB, most users actually don't and
>thus they don't realize that websites use all three to store identifying information (we did
>user research on this). Thus the spec recommends presenting them together, which
>we now do.
Normies. It's always normies.
▶ No.875943>>875948 >>875978
>>875502
>>https://www.hooktube.com/watch?v=Fn9WWVmINGg
This thing is unbelievable and disgusting. You should honestly get killed by even uttering the idea that
>we must have freedom, unless it bothers big business and corporations
Who people who say that think they're fooling by trying to pretend they care about freedom at all? You see these fa/g/gots everywhere, and it takes two minutes talking to them to clearly understand that their whole line of reasoning is actually more like
>yeah, i think free software might bring me some commodities that would be cool to have, so i'll support as long as it doesn't interfere with these other commodities i already have with proprietary
I hope and believe Brian has gone beyond that, as I haven't seen him spouting any of these nonsense more recently, and his last interview with Stallman, as of late last year I believe, was in agreeing terms. Also his recent beefs with Mozilla show that he's given away that moderate mentality of exchanging a great good for something that's only practical.
>>875492
>I personally had a list on my mind on what some problems with https were like the certificate system, but the things he chose seemed to make it seem like he had no clue on what he was talking about
That video had a terrible formatting, but you must have missed when he did mention the issues you're bringing up, although not as strongly as it'd be expected. Besides the total shitshow of saying he won't even use https, and his pseudo-argument for that, pointing out the NSA connection and taking the stance that https is ultimately a good but that being calm about it instead of just a little less desperate is the correct one.
Also, bringing up that the fact that when Google and their ilk like and promote something, you should automatically suspect and become less comfortable with the thing, puts him right into the best side of many discussions.
▶ No.875948>>875985
>>875943
>leftypol enters the thread
>first sentence is suggesting death for wrong think
lmfao
▶ No.875955
>>875757
Very compelling boomer-tier argument, piggy. Perhaps if you articulated your statements better, people would actually listen.
▶ No.875978>>875983 >>875988
>>875943
>when Google and their ilk like and promote something
It's a logical unsound to think a security practice is bad because one of the many entities recommending it is Google. From what I've seen, Google is very good in the security department.
▶ No.875983>>876039
>>875978
Their OS is terrible. There is RCE exploit in their media framework like every month. The point is that it is naive to think that google's interests align with yours, their security might mean no youtube-dl for us.
▶ No.875985>>875988 >>876005 >>876039 >>876052 >>876063
>>875948
>implying being against corporations makes you a leftist, when the left is the biggest lapdog they ever had
>implying collaborating with those who exploit the nation-state for profit should not be punishable by death
Spotted the liberal, go back to watch your Sargon videos, child.
>It's a logical unsound to think a security practice is bad because one of the many entities recommending it is Google
First learn to read a fucking sentence before you want to call others on their logic. Being wary of something is not the same as going all out and saying it is bad unless you're a retarded dyslexic incapable of any decent mental process.
>Google is very good in the security department.
He believes what google suggests for others is what they actually use. You take candy from strangers also?
You offend /g/ in a post on /tech/ nowadays and some clearly underaged b& start jumping on your throat without even reading the post fully. Wonder what could be the reason for that?
▶ No.875987>>876001
>>867554
DAE LIBERALS???!?!!1?1
>>>/pol/
▶ No.875988
>>875985
One of the posts I was linking didn't went through, shit. It was also for
>>875978
▶ No.876001
▶ No.876005
>>875985
>child, candy from strangers, underaged
ah now I get why you like Stallman so much.
▶ No.876038
>>866941 (OP)
Actually to me it looks cute, weak and kind. It makes me feel. I actually saved a screenshot of it named "Was making me feel part of your plan?.png"
▶ No.876039>>876054 >>876061
>>875983
>Their OS is terrible
Chromebooks are one of the most secure laptops on the market and they pay extremely well for bug bounties for it. I'd agree that the ON is terrible, but the security for it is good.
<You're just a Google shill
The only Google service I use is gmail, which is used only for sites that still have my old email. The only Google protect I use is Android. I'd very much prefer to use GNU/Linux if that was feasible.
>>875985
First off, Lunduke is not consistent with being wary. Just a few weeks ago he was praising Google for phasing out CPUs with Intel's Management Engine and UEFI for a regular BIOS. Why didn't he say we should be wary about this and maybe it isn't botnet and we should all use the IME?
>>875985
>You take candy from strangers also?
Only if it's from a loli
>/g/
Wrong
>an underage b&
Nope
▶ No.876052
>>875985
Is this what a normalshit newfag trying too hard to fit in looks like, or is it just the JewTube gypsy trying to falseflag retardation after ending up on /cow/?
▶ No.876054
>>876039
s/ON/OS/ N is right by S on dvorak
▶ No.876061>>876073
>>876039
>I'd very much prefer to use GNU/Linux if that was feasible.
buy an x200 or an acer ZG5 moron.
▶ No.876063
>>875985
> is not the same as going all out and saying it is bad unless you're a retarded dyslexic incapable of any decent mental process.
even if anon was a "a retarded dyslexic incapable of any decent mental process" I't wouldn't change the fact that being wary of something is not the same as flat-out saying it is bad.
▶ No.876067
>>867237
You're obsessed with brain damage analogies because you are already fried and basically retarded, yes?
▶ No.876073
>>876061
I already have a laptop for when I need freedom while on the go. I'd probably be better off just taking a sledgehammer to my "Stalin's dream."