My colleagues having a chat about their favourite tv shows in the operations channel at 7am have entered the chat.

I know, but those techniques are more likely to cause selection weirdness than flexbox/etc, which is why I mention them specifically.

On mobile: multiple top and bottom tool/nav bars that automatically show/hide themselves when you scroll. They’re invariably more irritating than if they were just pinned at the top of the page (or perhaps viewport, but ideally page - I can scroll to the top of I want it back)

On desktop: animations tied to scrolling.

Anywhere: any kind of popup, modal, etc that I didn’t click on something to get. Please fuck alllllllll the way off.

The browser implements the text selection behaviour, but how infuriating it is depends on how convoluted your page construction is.

On a simple page with no floats, overlaid elements, negative margins, absolute positioning, hidden stuff, and other css layout tomfoolery, it’s perfectly predictable. It’s only when designers do designer things does it start to break down.

“Winning” is like making it to max level in a mmorpg. It’s not the end but it is the beginning of the endgame.

Best of luck with that.

Gimme dat blowhole mod

If you’re making a mil a year in revenue there’s a good chance your profit margin is tiny and licensing fees could obliterate it.

I am not sure how Manifest V3 is relevant here?

Because they literally tout security as one of the primary reasons for forcing it onto people.

https://developer.chrome.com/docs/extensions/mv3/intro/

The first line is “A step in the direction of security, privacy, and performance.”

https://developer.chrome.com/blog/mv2-transition/

“Manifest V3 is more secure, performant, and privacy-preserving than its predecessor.”

It’s the first thing they say.

If it doesn’t prevent a malicious extension from lifting your password in perhaps the most dumb and naive way I can think of, then it seems fairly disingenuous to describe it as “secure”.

Wow.

He looks like a plastic bag full of porridge with hair plugs.

Doing the lord’s work

Ok so it’s my fault that now someone at Intel knows how much porn I look at because I clicked “next” on a beta driver?

They collect:

The categories of websites you visit, but not the URL itself

The information collected includes categorized web browsing history that shows how long and how often you visited specific categories of sites (i.e. social media, personal finance, or news). All site visits are classified into one of 30 categories. We do not collect URLs, web pages titles, or user-specific content without explicit permission from you.

Software usage: for example, frequency and duration of application usage such as Intel® Driver & Support Assistant, but not the application content itself such as specific actions or keyboard input.

Feature usage: for example, how much RAM you usually use or your laptop’s average battery life.

Other devices in your computing environment

Includes universal plug and play devices and devices that broadcast information to your computer on a local area network: for example, smart TV model and vendor information, and video streaming devices.

(the emphasis is mine, as is the minor reordering to not hide the browsing behaviour stuff at the bottom)

Yeah that’ll be a no from me there, bud.

I know. I don’t disagree. I’m just tired of everything being desperate to collect invasive amounts of information about me.

Because they invariably record way more data than they need to.

How bout just don’t install privacy-invading data collection services alongside a fucking device driver at all.

Some kind of angry potato

I mean. Sorta.

When you use some service you have some expectation that they’ll treat you fairly and predictably. Sure their Eula let’s them do whatever the fuck they want legally but that doesn’t change the fact that if they opt take certain actions (like arbitrary taking people’s usernames) then they risk losing user trust.

If the admin just took your username one day would you just quietly accept it? What if they edited or deleted your comments? Would you just shrug and say “well it’s their site they can do what they want” and just walk away?

Look what happened when Spez got caught editing posts on Reddit, for example. Massive user outcry.

Dude’s allowed to be annoyed about it.

Technically speaking, things are far more secure today than they were back in the dawn of the internet. Protocols are now almost exclusively encrypted where they almost exclusively weren’t. Private communication is (in theory) easier to achieve.

Practically speaking, however, now there’s always somebody there attempting to monetise your interactions. To mine useful information from what you say, or to sell you something while you say it. Or both.

That’s only going to get worse with the rise of AI, as companies realise the vast databases of past interactions might actually be worth something.

Best you can really hope for these days is to retain some anonymity and some separation between your public personas.

This. Websites should use standard mechanisms by default, and optionally layer user preference stuff on top.

Every time you override some default browser behaviour you risk breaking workflows, harming interoperability and accessibility, etc.

OP would be better served with a grease/tamper/violentmonkey script to alter links (or inject a base target tag, whatever) than lobbying developers to change things. (Or, yknow, learning to use the middle mouse button).