java not working

[Xen]

Liam Proven schreef op 17-03-2017 12:34:
> On 16 March 2017 at 19:49, Jim <jf_byrnes at comcast.net> wrote:
>> I don't know about the other browsers, but Firefox 52.0 has removed 
>> the java
>> plugin so it will no longer work with java. I think there is a version 
>> of
>> Firefox called ESR that will still allow the java pluigin.
> 
> 
> That's almost  right. :-)
> 
> Firefox (and Chrome AFAIK) have removed support for external plugins.
> All plugins, except Flash in Firefox. (Chrome has its own internal
> Flash player.)
> 
> https://blog.mozilla.org/futurereleases/2015/10/08/npapi-plugins-in-firefox/
> 
> http://www.ghacks.net/2017/01/29/google-removes-plugin-controls-from-chrome/
> 
> It's going away & there is nothing you can do to alter that. Move away
> from any content that requires plugins. They are insecure and cause
> browser crashes. It's time to let go.

Personally I just want to say that I consider this dictatorship.

Chrome does the same with the checking of certificates.

Because of the very strict checking these days loads of people get in 
trouble with the checking of these certicates that may just be using a 
slightly older codec or whatnot.

Meanwhile I have *never* encountered a potential man in the middle 
attack in my life. Maybe you say that's because the checking is so 
strict so they don't even try. I doubt it.

People are just mal-educated as well. This connection is not secure. 
Wait a minute. Just because the endpoint is not verified, by some random 
authoritarian authority, I might add, but the connection is still 
encrypted, doesn't directly make it "insecure". You are being lied to, 
or ordinary people are, that cannot see the difference.

So now encrypted but unverified connections are "insecure", but regular 
http:// connections are not.

Great world we live in.

The only false positives I've ever had was when the computer date was 
wrong.

I have never been bothered by the idea of insecure browsers, I just 
didn't use Microsoft Internet Explorer, that cleared 90% of the risk 
back in the day,

and Linux shouldn't be particularly prone to such things anyway as of 
today, but that is of course not something Firefox (or Mozilla) can 
really design about, or for, but still.

I just think there is a long chain of tradition now in taking freedom 
away from users for their own good. Microsoft does it a LOT and 
compulsory updates are now mandatory everywhere to the point of 
disaster.

I feel like a tool often instead of the computer being my tool, anymore.

A video editor like YouTube's can't be done without Flash, I'm sure.

Why should security trump usability in every case? I don't care about 
security in that sense, I have never been hacked, never had a virus 
since the days of MS-DOS I believe, the only thing I've ever wanted is 
to sandbox things properly, and they have never given us that.

And I feel that on Linux the ability to clean up after (ie. by veryfying 
checksums of all files, etc.) would be a bigger boon than preventing 
individual leaks from occuring.

I just mean to say that management capability of a user should be a 
higher concern than paranoia about browser leaks that, in our case, do 
not even target our systems most of the time, yet, but which does render 
use cases impossible for several users out here, including myself 
perhaps, but I just haven't run into it yet myself, because I use Java 
so scarcely etc., but I was greatly offended by the inability to run it, 
even on Windows, myself, becoming more strict and more strict every 
passing year.

In the end my own Wiki that I used, TiddlyWiki, I couldn't operate, 
anymore.





And for what? Security that I never needed and never got bitten by (in 
reverse).