Re: Firefox resource utilization (was Re: A case for supporting antiquated hardware, was Re: A hypervisor for a headless server?)

[Oliver Schoede <oliver.schode@online.de>]

On Tue, 6 Jun 2023 06:05:18 +0200
<tomas@tuxteam.de> wrote:

>On Mon, Jun 05, 2023 at 05:59:11PM -0400, Celejar wrote:
>
>[...]
>
>> The only case I can see in which such offloading would
>> be unethical is where the website operator is somehow engaging in
>> deceptive behavior, but assuming it is not [...]
>
>A pretty strong assumption given that the crushing maturity of
>the internet is fuelled by the ad industry, which, barred some
>exceptions, can be characterised as "deception for hire".
>
>Cheers

So somehow there still is no such thing as free lunch. You could just
as well "blame" a cable TV network for running all those ads, your TV
set after all won't eat less power. No profit means no fancy
shows,  sports, nor fancy websites. On the web things get quickly fuzzy
of course, but in general neither is exactly deceptive. We know what
we're doing and what we're doing is voluntary and the catches, if not
obvious, are obviously well known. Know a workaround or work without
it. I'm still a (somewhat) regular terminal links user, a text browser
that is, no javascript not to mention anything more demanding, find it
quite comfortable for text-dominated sites, like docs or Wikepedia,
doesn't go well with physics/math content though. Also ok for a quick
brush-up on news sites, where there's still a need, most don't work
anymore but some do, not the ads. After all those years uBlock
Origin probably saved me tangible money too, especially with German
electricity costs (who's to blame?), but then what's cheating?

Greetings,
Oliver