having computer problems...can anyone help?

[chiye]

My firefox browser auto updated to version 22.0 (after I had set it to not update unless I chose to, argh) and now my page settings are messed up. When I go to view any websites the text and everything else is huge. I know ctrl+- zooms out and I have to do that a couple times before it looks normal, but its not a permanent solution. I tried installing an older version, but as soon as I went to open the browser again it auto updated. I cant figure out how to fix this and its driving me nuts. Any suggestions?

[bmlkiddo]

Why would he want to join Google's botnet.


OP:
https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/questions/963279

[chiye]

Why would he want to join Google's botnet.


OP:
https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/questions/963279

Thanks that helped ^^ It fixed the problem I was having and the config option made everything look normal again.

[bmlkiddo]

Thanks that helped ^^ It fixed the problem I was having and the config option made everything look normal again.

It's no problem OP I'm glad to be helpful.

@The Skid
Chromium is an alternative. Or Midori (What I use). Get out of here skid. Why would you want to be in Google's Botnet.

[Stapled]

Cause Chrome is the best.

[The Unintelligible]

Chromium is an alternative. Or Midori (What I use). Get out of here skid. Why would you want to be in Google's Botnet.

Can I ask if you know what a Botnet is..?

[bmlkiddo]

I was going to type up something, but I'm too lazy, so I'll just copy and paste Wikipedia.

A botnet is a collection of internet-connected programs communicating with other similar programs in order to perform tasks. This can be as mundane as keeping control of an IRC channel, or it could be used to send spam email or participate in DDoS attacks. The word botnet stems from the twrds robot and network.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Botnet

Like datamining and storing your personal information for advertisments, browsing habbits, etc.



Hence the:
RLZ tracking when Chrome is downloaded as part of marketing promotions and distribution partnerships. This transmits information in encoded form to Google, including when and from where Chrome has been downloaded. In June 2010, Google confirmed that the RLZ tracking token is not present in versions of Chrome downloaded from the Google website directly or in any version of Chromium. The RLZ source code was also made open source at the same time so that developers can confirm what it is and how it works.[11]
Chromium (web browser) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Also found here: Which of course, isn't going to show everything
Google Chrome - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Why Google Chrome is a botnet [#1498] | Techbuket

Not a viable source but still;
Google Chrome (Web Browser) - Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia

For skeptics of Google's need for more transparency and accountability, consider the latest disturbing example of Google Chrome not asking tens of millions of Internet users for their permission to gain wide open access to their computers and content -- when it clearly should ask for permission -- like every other Internet browser provider does.

Per ComputerWorld's article: "Google's Chrome now silently auto-updates Flash Player."

* "Unlike other browsers, Chrome updates itself automatically in the background without asking for permission or prompting users that security fixes or new features are available."
* "Google uses a unique approach, they don't ask users [for permission to update], they just do it" said Peter Betlem, Senior Director of Flash Player Engineering.

What this means is that unlike all other browsers or Google competitors, Google does not believe it needs permission from users to gain wide open access to users' entire computer software and all its private contents.

* The reason others ask for specific permission before adding or changing users' software is that they respect users' privacy and property, and user sanctity over their own computer and all of its contents.
* Apparently everyone but Google understands that it is no longer a user's computer or a user's private information, if no permission or authorization is required to gain access to it and use it.

In essence, Google is expanding the concept of an "open Internet" to not only mean an open "dumb" pipe of ISP bandwidth to every edge computer, but also an open "dumb" gateway that provides only Google automatic unencumbered access into the inside of every Chrome-enabled computer -- including its private contents.

* (Apparently Google has concluded that to fulfill its mission "to organize the world's information and make it universally accessible and useful" it must be able to seize access to whatever information it wants, whenever it wants, without the permission of its owners.)

Simply, Google effectively has established "master key access" to all Chrome users computers and then left them unlocked for Google's sole purposes.

Looked at yet another way, Google has created what is potentially a 30 million plus Google botnet of Chromed-computers.

* Moreover, Google has effectively constructed a Chrome botnet that is not that dissimilar in capability to bad-actor botnets that can distribute viruses, worms, trojans, spyware, spam, key-stroke logging malware, p-2-p file-sharing, etc.

The primary difference here is that Google claims its botnet is a good botnet run by good guys with good intentions.

* The huge problem with that difference is that "security is Google's Achilles heel" (as I have documented in a seven-part research series).
* This means if Chrome is ever hacked, (and according to Google, the Chinese have already successfully hacked Google), Google has essentially left all Chrome users completely vulnerable to whatever the hacker wants to automatically push out to Google's 30 million-plus Chrome users.
* By blowing off the common sense, best-practice safety-net of respecting the need for permission and authorization from users before reconfiguring their software and potentially gaining access to all their information, Google has put all Chrome users at the mercy the inviolability of Google's security -- security that has already been proven by the Chinese to be porous.

In other words, Google has unwittingly enlisted Chrome users into being part of a potential auto-virus, auto spam or auto-file-sharing network, that depends entirely on Google not being hacked.

* And since Google has a well-known propensity for auto-integrating its software without users permission (like they recently did in making Google Buzz' gmail contacts automatically public), hackers could potentially spread their malware beyond Chrome users to the hundreds of millions of users of other Google free products like gmail, maps, search etc.
* Google has effectively baited hackers to hack them, because if they can, Google has given them the automatic master key to the Internet's Chrome city -- and maybe beyond.
* The most catastrophic potential problem here is if Google were to be hacked and a "zero-day threat" was unleashed on these unsuspecting and trusting Chrome users.
o (A zero-day threat is a hazard so new that no protection against it exists. To learn more, see Byron Acohido's national award-winning book on zero-day threats here.)

Unfortunately, Google has taken its "innovation without permission" PR slogan to the extreme that Google does not need anyone's permission to do just about anything as long as Google can justify to itself that it is necessary for "innovation."

* Remember Google did not see the need to ask the permission of:
o Google Buzz users to publicly share their gmail lists;
o Twelve million book authors to copy and index their copyrighted works;
o Viacom and others for YouTube's unauthorized use of tens of thousands of their copyrighted videos;
o Chrome users to gain unfettered authomatic access to their computers software and content.
* This sample list exposes a very disturbing pattern of Google behavior that too few appreciate.

I have testified before Congress twice on Google and the web 2.0 movement's disregard for users privacy or the need for meaningful consent or permission of their users.

* At the time, I charitably called this cavalier behavior a "finders keepers losers weepers" ethos.
* It now may be more appropriate to call it a "we don't need no stinking" permission ethos...

ULOP FORUM :: Topic: Google chrome is a botnet (1/1)

also;
Google on Chrome: we don't need your permission | The Precursor Blog by Scott Cleland

and;
Google Monitor
To browse around for some good reads.





Google Chrome is a botnet.

[Tree]

I am totally not reading that. Google Rewlz, they can have all my data. <5

[Vesparia]

I did not read that at all.
That looks like a nice link. Seems good. Other than that it asked me to participate in a survey. I dislike those.
I bookmarked that link for just-in-case future use.

I use to use Firefox the most, but a while back it was being really dumb.
So I just switched to chrome and used it ever since.
From time to time I go back to firefox when I feel like it.

[bmlkiddo]

I did not read that at all.
That looks like a nice link. Seems good. Other than that it asked me to participate in a survey. I dislike those.
I bookmarked that link for just-in-case future use.

I use to use Firefox the most, but a while back it was being really dumb.
So I just switched to chrome and used it ever since.
From time to time I go back to firefox when I feel like it.

I stick with midori, it's a small webkit browser, and it's lightweight. It doesn't have all the functionality people expect of browsers, but it accepts my gtk themes and it lets my WM draw it's windows, it doesn't try and take over.
I recommend chromium because it's a bit better than Chrome, it's more lightweight, less bloat, and you're not in Google's botnet (it's the same thing as chrome minus bad things.)

Firefox is good though, I don't use it, however. I stick to midori.

[Vesparia]

Hmm.

Alrighty then, I'll keep that in mind.

[The Unintelligible]

lol

[Vesparia]

lol

leedle leeee

[323]

Always used firefox, then switched to chrome for a year, now back to firefox.

Right now, Firefox's speeds are actually better than chrome's. Also, firefox works better for slower computers/people that like doing more than just browsing the web at one time, because Chrome re-loads all of it's libraries for each tab you have open (That's why each tab takes close to 100MB of RAM) where firefox only opens it's libraries once, and still has better speeds than Chrome.

Also, Firefox has way more of the extensions that I use. Stuff like Greasemonkey, ABP, FoxyProxy, DownloadThemAll, LSACookies, etc etc.