Mozilla Fixed a 14-Year-Old Bug In Firefox, Now Adblock Plus Uses Less Memory 410
An anonymous reader writes: Mozilla launched Firefox 41 yesterday. Today, Adblock Plus confirmed the update "massively improves" the memory usage of its Firefox add-on. This particular memory issue was brought up in May 2014 by Mozilla and by Adblock Plus. But one of the bugs that contributed to the problem was actually first reported on Bugzilla in April 2001 (bug 77999).
Why use ABP (Score:5, Informative)
When you can use ublock Origin, which uses even less ram.
Re:Ublock = inferior & inefficient vs. hosts (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Been there/done that (ALL that) (Score:4)
I actually ENJOY watching these troll worms flail all over, blowing all their modpoints (& I just run them dry of them eventually via my UNLIMITED posting abilities here, unlike other ac posters).
So you you put some effort into being a spammer (boast about it in fact) and you admit that you like disrupting the normal functioning of this site.
Did you ever ask yourself, "are these the actions of a happy, fulfilled person who has a meaningful life?" You're a pest and you like being a pest. The irony? You have done more to give your hosts program a bad name than anything anyone else could have possibly said.
Re:Been there/done that (ALL that) (Score:5, Funny)
Get on topic. Do something useful like apk has in his program. You can't prove his points on hosts wrong either. I suppose I for one expect too much from you slashdot trolls. You don't possess the skills to do either one, so go away troll, shoo. I think it's hilarious how apk makes you fools go nuts but you never ever prove him validly technically wrong. Not ever.
That's the amazing thing about APK and his bootlicking myrmidons (like you). You just can't actually respond to what someone is saying. You read what they said, but you lack the argumentation skill to actually rebut it. Being childish, that causes you to feel like you really don't like that person. Unable to meaingfully respond and filled with your vitriol, all you can do is hand-wave, call names, and change the subject.
If (for some strange reason) I wanted to, I could do that, too. What I couldn't do is act that way, and then convince myself that I am right and the other guy is a big dummy. That is a true masterwork of functional self-deception.
Re:Ublock = inferior & inefficient vs. hosts (Score:5, Funny)
On behalf of all other AC's I apologize for this piece of unintelligible tripe.
I realize we do not have a very good reputation, but this is below even our standards. And that includes goatse, GNAA and even DICE editing standards.
Again, on behalf of all AC's, our sincerest apologies.
Re:Ublock = inferior & inefficient vs. hosts (Score:5, Interesting)
Here comes Slashdot's resident spammer to tell us why browser extensions are bad, but some bullshit software he wrote (which just rides the coattails of other people) is good.
Notice he never addresses how advertising companies spin up new servers day in and day out, but no operating system's implementation of /etc/hosts will support wildcards on a domain. Blocking foo.adserver.com is useless when they create bar.adserver.com and baz.adserver.com an hour from now. Instead, he will ad-hominem attack anyone mentioning this.
Notice he never addresses the fact that advertising companies have begun serving their ads directly from IP addresses, bypassing DNS altogether. Instead, he will ad-hominem attack anyone mentioning this.
Notice he never addresses the fact that browser extensions can recognize and block certain DOM elements no matter where they come from, whereas a hosts file is completely incapable of assisting in this manner. Instead, he will ad-hominem attack anyone mentioning this.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
You're welcome. I think it's funny when apk makes trolls go nuts when they can't prove him wrong.
If by "go nuts" you mean laugh at how pathetic apk is, then yes, you've driven us stark raving mad. Of course "troll" is "anyone who doesn't agree with apk".
Re: (Score:2)
Does the hosts file allow me to very finely grainedly tune which servers are allowed or denied contact depending on the server I'm contacting that requested the contents?
Does it allow me to unblock ads on specific sites in which I [i]want[/i] ads to appear?
Does it allow me to block a specific visual area of a specific webpage only, and nothing else?
Does it allow me to block contents from a specific directory within a server, but not from other directories?
Does it allow me to completely unblock a server when
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Also, that is actually nonsensical as a DNS BL is something you are added to that the other person uses, you can't get by it by using a hosts file on either end (as a hosts file isn't anything like a DNS BL).
But that is ok, when you bring up problems with his hosts files, it is nothing but ad hominem and "I totally showed you up" when he did nothing of the sort.
Re: (Score:2)
Apparently I am dumb, as I actually know what a DNS black list is, and you don't.
http://www.dnsbl.info/ [dnsbl.info]
Blacklists are used by mail servers to automatically black hole messages from known spammers. They are not used by your web browser, so adding a BLed address to your hosts file would be 1. extraordinarily dumb, and 2. not do anything.
If you don't know what a term means, don't just assume that the name describes it, instead you should look it up and read about it.
Re: (Score:2)
The difference is, I'm not an insecure little man with a desperate need to win converts. I don't really care what other people use. I wouldn't recommend anything to them unless they bring it up first. You remind me of a religious zealot on a mission to preach to the infidels.
Re: (Score:2)
FTFY - You're just another can't code himself critic with nothing to show for himself since if you really didn't give a shit you wouldn't even reply. Thanks for projecting that much that you do give a shit.
So ... are you going to respond to anything I said, or are you going to keep acting like a spoiled child?
Re: (Score:3)
DNS Blocking isn't the same thing as DNS BL, stop backpedaling.
Re: (Score:3)
DNS Blocking isn't the same thing as DNS BL, stop backpedaling.
APK and his myrmidon supporters don't backpedal. Backpedaling when it's obvious you are wrong requires honesty, integrity, and a concern for what the truth is. It also requires the courage to admit fault and the grace to want to.
Expecting APK and his myrmidons to do that is like expecting a cockroach to appreciate opera. It's far beyond their reach.
Re: (Score:3)
Hosts files won't work in Windows 10
That's been squashed.
Use DD-WRT on your router, install auto daily blocklist update. Now no devices on network including mobile devices will never see any ads.
Re: (Score:3)
If you send me an email, and my mail server is using a DNSBL, my server will get a response such as 127.0.0.5, this would indicate that you send spam (true...), and therefore my email server would drop the email you sent. Please explain how your hosts file will get around DNSBL now, as it isn't something under your control.
The last digit in the response usually corresponds to the reason that the mail server was blacklisted in some of the DNSBL providers. The RFC calls for the reason to be in a TXT field t
Re: (Score:2)
Why's Coren22 avoiding a simple question here http://tech.slashdot.org/comme... [slashdot.org] ?
APK and his myrmidons are the masters of never answering a simple question. While congratulating themselves for being such great debators. More like master debators the way they enjoy their little circle-jerk.
Re: (Score:2)
Evade them? I can't even spell them!
Re: (Score:2)
Coren22 by ac, you still avoiding apk's question here http://tech.slashdot.org/comme... [slashdot.org] ? Yes.
The same way APK and his little fanboys are avoiding mine [slashdot.org]. And this one too [slashdot.org]. It's as though they realize that any honest answer would make them look bad.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
But these blockers and such also rely on trust. I trust older reliable stuff and am not going to jump on some new piece of unproven software just because someone on slashdot says to. Adblock works, I don't see ads, why should I change?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So the answer is "No - my HOSTS file solution can't block that".
Hell, your hosts solution can't tell the difference between:
http://content-provider.com/in... [content-provider.com]
and
http://content-provider.com/ho... [content-provider.com]
This is why people laugh at you.
Nice! (Score:2, Funny)
Now I can not only block the Kardashians but also Donald Trump and Taylor Swift.
Re:Nice! (Score:4, Funny)
I’m sorry, Taylor Swift is good and all, but Beyonce had one of the best presidencies of all time!
Other bugs (Score:5, Interesting)
When will they fix the bug that's slowly turning Firefox into a crappy clone of Chrome?
Re:Other bugs (Score:5, Interesting)
When will they fix the bug that's slowly turning Firefox into a crappy clone of Chrome?
I think that particular cancer has it has gone malignant and spread to far already. I think I am going to jump ship to sea-monkey if this keeps up, I mean, I already use Firefox and Thunderbird, and they have crammed webIDE into Firefox anyway so I may as well have it all in one piece. I will probably wait for my biannual OS version bump, But that may change to now too, as Ubuntu has jumped aboard the systemD titanic on the next LTS version.
Is is just me or has the whole software world lost its mind.
Windows is trying to go full panopticon and you pay a subscription for it. ... when previously I could just use pidgin and talk to everyone.
Linux distros are going batshit crazy and slapping a tablet UI on desktops and putting immature, kitchen sink crap-ware as their init
android is trying to kill external storage as unlimited dataplans are killed off.
Mobile has killed the idea of fallowing open standards and you need separate apps for every network so you can talk to everyone Skype, face book messenger, google hangouts/voice/chat/mail/talk, snap-chat, whatsapp,
Cloud storage everything, when storage has never been cheaper.
And Mozilla's insanity from lets clone chrome to making Firefox a catch all when it was meant to be just the browser, and wasting resources on building their own os.
what the hell.
Re:Other bugs (Score:5, Insightful)
Monetization. Ad revenue. Analytics. Corporate branding. Vendor lock-in. Cloud services. Walled gardens. Subscriptions.
Absolutely the software world has lost its mind. The software isn't the point any more; all this other crap is.
I've lost track of how many apps I've now uninstalled because they do NOTHING you can't access with a browser. But the apps want to embed themselves so they can access your data.
Re: (Score:2)
What I want to know is what these companies will do once they have the data. AFAICT it's like the underwear gnomes.
1) Get the data
2) ????
3) Profit!
So you sell the data to an aggregator. What if they've already have the data? What then? What happens when our lives are so well integrated into these feedback systems that no one wants the data anymore? Or that the data is so close to worthless it doesn't matter?
Re:Other bugs (Score:5, Insightful)
Aaah, I can tell you're a young one.... 'Tis the sign of another tech bubble, all of it. It's a replay of 1997-2000, but in a different mix. Now, google plays the part of Microsoft; Mozilla is alter-Netscape, trying to catch up; and Girls is Bizarro-Friends.
As Mark Twain famously said, "History doesn't repeat itself, but it rhymes."
Re: (Score:2)
Mobile has killed the idea of fallowing open standards and you need separate apps for every network so you can talk to everyone Skype, face book messenger, google hangouts/voice/chat/mail/talk, snap-chat, whatsapp, ... when previously I could just use pidgin and talk to everyone.
I solved this issue by refusing to 'chat' with anyone I can't reach outside of Hangouts, via either SMS or actual Hangouts messages. If someone in my already smallish circle of friends / family / acquaintances doesn't want to accommodate, then I don't need to talk to them outside of face-to-face conversations...
That said, I do prefer Hangouts messages, since they work regardless of whether I'm on cellular data or some sort of WiFi connection.
Re: (Score:2)
It's not just you.
Of all your rant, though, cloud storage is actually a legitimate convenience feature for many users, who don't otherwise have a handy way of sharing/syncing stuff between various devices.
But, yeah, almost everything seems to be going to shit for no good reason. I need to learn to be productive on BSD now - it seems to be the only place the crazy hasn't infected.
Re:Other bugs (Score:4, Interesting)
Why would you single out software ?
The whole world has lost their mind (with the US being one of the countries at the front).
Let's take the economy as an example.
You think this interest rate is normal ?:
http://www.tradingeconomics.co... [tradingeconomics.com]
You think quantitative easing is the new normal ?
Even if you agree that these are necessary measures you'd have to agree they should only be temporarily.
Re: (Score:2)
How could that possibly be avoided? Real economy works in terms of supply and demand. When demand exceeds supply, companies hire more people and we have an economic boom; when supply exceeds demand, people get fired and we have a depression. However, most people get their income in the form of wages, and wages have been falling for decades now, thus the demand necessary to keep the economy going simply isn't there anymore. The only fix would be to force thos
Re: (Score:2)
You think quantitative easing is the new normal ? ...you'd have to agree they should only be temporarily.
They're just as temporary as the patches *I* create. Until they blow up, and then they get a new temporary patch.
Than again, maybe Janet Yellen herself is temporary: one [reuters.com], Two [youtube.com]
When I watched two, at first I thought she had gotten stage fright, then I decided she was just trying to concentrate or breathe.
Re: (Score:2)
- The "systemd Titanic" has dozens of blog posts by Poettering and others explaining all of the design decisions behind it, and I can't fault anything. I've been using it since I switched to Fedora 18 from Ubuntu, and I never had a problem. git has dozen more complex integrated features in it than CVS, and I don't see anyone crying about that. I really don't understand the hatred. Do you want ext2 back, too? How about Linux kernel 2.2? Perl 4? Want to ditch vim and Emacs because they
Re: (Score:2)
Linux distros are going batshit crazy and slapping a tablet UI on desktops
Then use a different UI. There's loads of choice that isn't tablet-like, including xfce, Mate, and even KDE is still safe.
Re: (Score:2)
I used firefox since version 2, as my main browser. I got tired of something that looks like Chrome, but still needs Flash installed to play the free games online. So with my new computer, I simply gave in to the dark side, and installed Chrome directly. The bonus is better memory usage.
If Firefox wants users back, they have to be their own browser again, but clear up the memory issues first.
Re: (Score:2)
There's always Palemoon, which I think forked far enough back that it's missing all the stuff I'd currently call bullshit.
Re: (Score:2)
When will they fix the bug that's slowly turning Firefox into a crappy clone of Chrome?
As soon as they get their financial independence. They're working on it, by the way, there was a deal with Yahoo earlier this year.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
But is there an RPM for it?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Seamonkey + NoScript + Don't load images. Never been happier.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
That's why I use Pale Moon - which is basically the Firefox UI as it was 5 years ago, but with all the latest core updates.
Analogy of my Relationship with Firefox (Score:5, Funny)
Using Firefox has become like that relationship that used to be perfect and then out of nowhere your partner starts cheating on you and each time swears its going to be the last time.
And you keep falling for it.
New Tab (Score:5, Insightful)
Firefox 41 also removed the New Tab URL preference (browser.newtab.url) [mozilla.org], telling people to use a third-party extension instead.
The reason? Malware can change the setting. Full stop. That's it. So, because someone's computer is already compromised, and that malware changed a Firefox preference (alongside doing things like, you know, running a keylogger), Mozilla decided to cause headache and grief for everyone else. And to top it all off, if you want to continue to configure the new tab URL, you should use an extension written by some random guy.
I just don't understand the mentality. Choosing the default URL for a new tab seems like such an obvious feature, yet it's getting ripped out too, like so many others that Gavin Sharp has pissed on. Fuck Mozilla.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
How else will we get to the upsidedownternet?
https://wiki.archlinux.org/ind... [archlinux.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
LOL ... Freudian slip, or innocent typo?
These days, I'd say users are feeling pretty used.
Re: (Score:2)
Wow.
That's just plain retarded. But then again i'm not surprised.
Mozilla has a long history of not knowing what the fuck they are doing. i.e. Denial over memory leaks has been going on since FF 2.x
Re: (Score:2)
Well, apart from the fact that we spent years fixing leaks and usually have the best memory usage of any browser.
Re: (Score:2)
I just don't understand the mentality.
It's just one more step in their grand master plan to remove all web browsing functionality from their web browser, announced back in April '15.
They already approved their decision to remove HTTP support from Firefox over the next year:
https://blog.mozilla.org/secur... [mozilla.org]
After which the new tab preference will be pretty unimportant in the overall scheme of things. :P
Although to be fair, they will force-expire that random guys plugin a few dozen times between now and then no doubt
Re: (Score:3)
Wow. As if Mozilla couldn't get any more stupid.
I love that Tim Berners-Lee called them out on their bullshit:
* Web Security - "HTTPS Everywhere" harmful [w3.org]
And Andrea Ronchetti gives perfect use case that this retarded move would break:
Re:New Tab (Score:4, Insightful)
I just don't understand the mentality.
The mentality is that you can and should build your own franken-browser from whatever plug-ins fits you, it's not supposed to be a fully functional browser you can extend but more like a skeleton you can build on. It happens when you go over the top on flexibility and think people want a DIY kit instead of a product. The problem is the same as why you can't fit any car body with any chassis with any engine with any transmission with any brakes with any interior, they don't all go together. And some parts are shit, but only by hogging memory or crashing in ways that aren't easily traceable. I don't want to be the unit and integration tester in a modern day DLL hell, because Mozilla's will not take any responsibility for plug-ins trampling over each other or bringing the browser to its knees. Don't get me wrong, the basic idea that you can write an obscure plug-in without bloating the main code base and getting approval to push it out to 100+ million users is great. But it should be more of a test bed to see what functionality should be standard for the masses, rather than pushing more and more functionality out of the core. Here's an early alpha of Firefox 100, you can have HTML engine plugins, Javascript engine plugins, UI plugins, in fact any functionality you'd care to think of. It looks like this:
main()
{
loadPlugins()
}
Great, yes?
Re: (Score:2)
It's so cute how you think that the reason to eliminate the webpage for a new tab, isn't because they're now serving ads on and making money from "empty" pages.
Re: (Score:2)
We have to live in the real world where a significant percentage of users have some kind of malware or quasi-malware (e.g. Ask toolbar or anti-virus software) installed.
It's not a bug (Score:5, Informative)
The problem was that style sheets were not being shared between pages, even if they were identical. So AdBlockPro had a copy of its style sheets shared in each tab. Apparently it uses a large style sheet?
So this change allowed for some de-duplication.
Re: (Score:2)
With the default filterset (EasyList), it uses a 40,000 line stylesheet. It took about 3 MB per tab (or actually, worse: 3 MB per document, so every iframe used another 3 MB).
I can't imagine that matching all those rules against the page as it loads is particularly fast either...
Re: (Score:3)
I can't imagine that matching all those rules against the page as it loads is particularly fast either...
I think you're probably right, but compared to actually loading the ads, it seems to be an order of magnitude faster.
Oh good (Score:2)
There is hope yet for all the bugs I've submitted.
What? (Score:3, Insightful)
I thought Firefox didn't have any memory issues? That was the party line from Mozilla for so long.
14 year old bug huh? (Score:2, Interesting)
Well, way to go Firefox! Right on top of things! But I thought Firefox has been saying for years it has no memory issues? So is this a 14 year old issue that really isn't an issue that now has been fixed? Got it.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, way to go Firefox! Right on top of things! But I thought Firefox has been saying for years it has no memory issues? So is this a 14 year old issue that really isn't an issue that now has been fixed? Got it.
Shhhhh, don't mess with Firefox's "we're lean and mean" narrative.
Re: (Score:2)
We are relatively lean and mean compared to other browsers, but that doesn't mean "no memory issues", of course. So enough with the straw men.
Re:14 year old bug huh? (Score:5, Informative)
We are relatively lean and mean compared to other browsers, but that doesn't mean "no memory issues", of course. So enough with the straw men.
FF used to be lean and mean, but honestly, there is no way I can say that with a straight face now. I still like FF, but with all the crap packed into it by default, "lean and mean" just doesn't apply.
Is it still the best browser out there? Maybe, but I feel it's gone downhill in the last 10 ~20 releases. There's no denying it, and this bullshit memory issue has been plaguing for a long, long time.
Re: (Score:2)
Memory consumption and monolithic process drove me off to Chrome and Safari years ago. I see the Electrolysis project is now targeting the end of the year, but I'm not going to hold my breath considering how long they've been promising it.
Memory hog (Score:3, Insightful)
After a few hours of use with, say, ~10 tabs open, Firefox 40.0.3 leaks memory until it's using 2.6G of RAM, at which point it randomly stops loading images, gets very, very laggy, and freezes for ~30 seconds at a time.
I hope this fixes that (I fail to see how it could make it any worse, frankly).
Re: (Score:3)
I had a problem the last time I was streaming video. There was a gap of several seconds between each item in the playlist, for reasons I could not discern. I had copied everything to a local drive (not pulling it from the NAS box) ahead of time for this exact reason, yet here it was doing it.
It turned out to be the browser -- 64-bit Pale Moon in this particular case -- using 6.5 GB of RAM, making my machine thrash swap (I have 8 GB). Now I know to close and re-start the browser before streaming if it has be
Re: (Score:2)
I have 6G installed and everything was fine up until Firefox 30 or so.....then it all started to become sucktastically bad.
Re: (Score:3)
I suppose I should put a time frame on this so people have some idea what era of Pale Moon build I'm discussing. My swap-thrash incident is a whopping 13 days old now. I was streaming to ConnectCast at the time, and getting more than my usual number of decompression burps (where everything goes gray or green until the next keyframe), but didn't think to suspect the browser until I loaded up Task Manager in desperation.
I have a feeling it wouldn't have made that much difference if I had 16 GB of RAM rather t
Re: (Score:2)
I hear you...I'm thinking it's time to find a new browser. FF used to be great, now...not so much.
Great! So now they can continue fixing ... (Score:4, Interesting)
Any idea why it took them so long?
Re: (Score:2)
That is because it has elements from previous pages cached for if/when you hit the back button or revisit your commonly visited sites. Closing and reopening it simply lets all that go. I can't imagine any other browser does anything much different. Perhaps they are better at hiding it.
Also, how much system memo
Re: (Score:2)
Such as? Please show a link to a bug that was reported 30 years ago and not fixed.
Re: (Score:3)
Such as? Please show a link to a bug that was reported 30 years ago and not fixed.
There have been a number of good examples in Windows; for instance there has been a WMF bug for years, fixed in pretty much every version of Windows only to come back again. There's also equivalents of Bash ShellShock, and others. And really, if you want a link just search the /. archives as they've been mentioned in the last year or two as well.
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
We just need someone to get rid of PHP and we'll be all set.
Re: (Score:3)
I dumped FF the moment they decided to start jamming ads in, and included plugins that I'll never use as part of the feature set. Compared to Palemoon or Waterfox, Firefox has a lot of problems and they seem to be killing themselves.
Re: (Score:2)
If she was one of those non technical types, it is entirely likely that it was the way she was shown and she didn't know any better.
Re:I have seen that happen. (Score:5, Informative)
Coincidentally i just happen to have 100 tabs open, spread across 9 windows, and Firefox is currently consuming 2,871,288 K of private memory.
Close one window with 8 (graphically dense tabs). Wait 30 seconds. Now down to 2,802,295 K.
Close a window with 15 tabs of webcomics. Wait 30 seconds. Now down to 2,717,452 K
I won't bore with you with the rest of the details. Continue closing windows, then tabs, until this post is the only tab left. Still using 1,979,024 K!
The other 99 tabs were apparently just a little it's over 9000 K each, but this last tab is holding on to almost 2 GB of memory with a death grip
The incentive to close extraneous tabs and windows is pretty minuscule when it doesn't actually gain me that much. So instead i open as many tabs as i feel like, then just close everything and start over when either Firefox or the PC starts getting sluggish.
Re:I have seen that happen. (Score:5, Interesting)
So when you start Firefox has a base footprint of about 340 K + 8K per tab. (Depending on the contents of the page of course.) If it could actually _stay_ like that and recover memory properly when i close tabs then i wouldn't complain. Instead however there was about 1.6 GB of crap stuck in memory before i closed the program completely.
Re: (Score:3)
I closed Firefox, opened it again, with that post in one tab and this reply in another. 174,192K. I wonder why the difference is so big.
Viewing HTML5 video seems to make Firefox's memory usage grow fast and, more importantly, stay high even days after the video tabs have been closed.
Re: (Score:2)
I think you mean
"So when you start Firefox has a base footprint of about 340 M + 8M per tab."
Re: (Score:2)
Forget "this post." The best part is when your last tab is "about:memory" and you do a garbage purge, and the memory consumption doesn't budge... or the last tab is "about:blank" and memory doesn't budge.
Actually, the best part is all those Firefox fans that have been insisting for 10 years that this isn't actually happening, Mozilla has "made a lot of progress" even though it's never actually been a problem, and that somehow it's probably all your fault (plugins) that the browser is crashing on 32-bit sy
Re: (Score:2)
Even the latest and greatest NVMe SSD's are significantly slower than RAM in both latency and bandwidth.
Re: (Score:2)
APK's host file program fixed this bug years ago, that is why he feels he is on topic with this post.
Re: (Score:2)
Um, did you even read any of that thread APK? I never admitted you were right at all, and the reply to yours had me falling out of my seat laughing.
APK Hosts file = Unsecure garbage software
You didn't even write the majority of it, you just steal other people's lists and combine them into yours. Please tell me more about all your security chops, and how you have no freaking clue what a DNS BL is.
Re: (Score:2)
APK, you know what "P.S." means, right? In case you don't, I'll offer this common definition:
A postscript (P.S.) is an afterthought, thought of occurring after the letter has been written and signed. The term comes from the Latin post scriptum, an expression meaning "written after" (which may be interpreted in the sense of "that which comes after the writing").
Now, why in the hell does your text after the P.S. contain 39% more text than the text before the P.S.? This is Slashdot, we know you can't edit your posts to add things after the fact, so instead of putting in one or more postscripts, just finish your thought man. And what's with the little "=>" symbol? Are you trying to point out that the postscript is that text just to the right of where you write "P.S."?
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry, I was trying to find the point of your post but I got distracted by all of the random punctuation and bolding. I'm sure you have a point there, but you definitely do like to bury it in sugary fluff. Consider focusing more on the content that you want to get across and less on trying to point out what that content is. Good writing doesn't need to point out the point. Bolding half your post has the side effect of making the un-bolded parts seem unimportant.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
huh? Jira works fine (well, as fine as Jira can work) in Chrome, Safari, even Edge (well, shitty fonts aside).
Firefox is just so fucking slow all around.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
bug specific to the version of jira you use or something? My previous company used jira with 500~ engineer/product people, and almost everyone used Chrome with it no problem... Current one uses the latest version of Jira, about 80 product/engineers, and i think only 2 people use firefox. No one has issues with it.
Re: (Score:2)