Well, at least for me it has worked within a few hours.

Well, about these messages I have to agree with you, but I can’t simply agree with absolutely anything else.

Let’s see, I’m not from the United States so I don’t know their situation well (although I must say that I HATE Trump anyway), but I’m from Venezuela, which is really much, MUCH worse; Nicolás Maduro was literally a fucking dictator who killed anyone who dared to mock him (if you’ve never heard of Helicoide, I recommend looking it up), and now that they took Maduro they left us with Delcys Rodríguez, who is another fucking harpy. I really cannot understand how someone who has not experienced a true dictatorship and who has not faced offense and repression for ideological reasons can say so calmly that freedom of expression should be limited; What blissful ignorance of yours to live in a bubble like that, you make me sick (with every intention to offend :3). It really seems absurd to me how you think that “emotional harm” is a valid criterion or is in any way different from offense; No, they can apply in different areas, but epistemically and ontologically they are the same: pure subjective whim, and an ideology that the world revolves around you and your problems.

I’ll put it to you this other way:

1. Or only some speeches are prohibited (therefore falling into totalitarian arbitrariness).
2. Or all speeches are prohibited (and therefore language and existence themselves are also prohibited, in a non-metaphorical, non-figurative and non-hyperbolic, but literal sense).
3. Or no speech is prohibited, but only real and concrete actions (a defamation, a social lynching, a false denunciation, a fraud, a robbery, a coup or a murder), and, at most, imperative speeches (not a mere “hatred of X” but an explicit “X should die”).

Strict logic is the only reasonable law, and your ideology falls under the above reductio ad absurdum.

Oh, also straw-man fallacy.

​I will restate what I mentioned in a previous comment:

​Offense (or being offended) is simply not a valid criterion for determining what constitutes hate or violent speech.

​Because at least one thing will always offend at least one person, if we attempt to regulate offenses, we will have to choose between regulating only some of them — thus becoming arbitrary — or regulating all offenses, which would kill not only speech, but also expression and, furthermore, existence itself, as the mere existence of certain people might be offensive to others.

​When LGBTQ+ people fought for their rights, when Black people did the same, or when abolitionists fought against slavery, all of these individuals were viewed as “hate groups” (in the terms of their respective eras), “violent groups,” or “dangerous groups” because they were challenging the status quo and the power structures that oppressed them.

deleted by creator

Ad hominem fallacy.

​He isn’t saying that spreading hate is something that should be done or that it is good; rather, he is merely stating that there is a huge logical, epistemological, and ontological leap between “I hate X” (whatever that X represents) and “we should kill X” or “X should die.”

​Moreover, offense ( or being offended) is simply not a valid criterion for determining what constitutes hate or violent speech. Because at least one thing will always offend at least one person, if we attempt to regulate offenses, we will have to choose between regulating only some of them — thus becoming arbitrary — or regulating all offenses, which would kill not only speech, but also expression and, furthermore, existence itself, as the mere existence of certain people might be offensive to others.

Freedom of speech SHOULD be an ABSOLUTE and UNRESTRICTED right, even over any other right.

Bro, I’m just joking, relax yourself, don’t take everythijg that seriously.

Yeah, at least they seemed to repair it fast, though

It may be a matter of hardware compatibility, a bug, or an issue during compilation or installation — I am not entirely sure. However, at least in my case, it runs significantly faster than virtually any other Firefox-based browser, including vanilla Firefox. It reduces CPU and GPU load by approximately 5–10%, which is substantial given my setup: an Intel Xeon v4 (Broadwell-EP, v3 SIMD) clocked at just 2.20 GHz (base, up to 2.90 GHz with Turbo Boost), featuring 12 cores and 24 threads, paired with an NVIDIA GTX 1060 (3 GB VRAM).

​Regarding memory consumption, RAM usage does not exceed 4–5 GB, even under a heavy extension load of nearly 100 installed add-ons. That said, this performance might be achieved in part by my custom about:config flags, the use of CachyOS repositories (optimized up to v3), and forced optimized compilation utilizing Mold, LLVM/Clang, Ananicy, and full LTO, among other tweaks, inside of my makepkg.conf (I use Arch, btw 🤪).

Removed by mod

GNOME hater here too

GNOME = macOS

• Made in Abyss
• Shibou Yuugi de Meshi wo Kuu
• Needy Girl Overdose

I do use Floorp.

It is, by far, the most customizable and power-user friendly Firefox fork, and it has zero telemetry by default, so I do prefer it over vanilla Firefox because of that.

I also value its focus in performance.