That was a more recent Iron addin then when that article was written, but even then modern versions change very little. With the WebRequest Experimental API and Adblock Plus for Chrome using it in dev builds now, blocking is essential comparable (and unlike beforeLoad, the webRequest API doesn't have a really shitty success rate).

It changed barely anything, in essence; three options plainly visible and easily disabled in Chrome/Chromium's options (persistently disabled between upgrades, I might add) were removed, the rest were copyright notice changes and resource changes (e.g. "Chromium" to "SRWare Iron", icon, etc.). Calling it a true privacy fork is disingenuous when it disables three user accessible options and is otherwise just rebranded, persistently behind in version/security updates, etc.

Chrome doesn't accept toolbars, has a minimalist fixed interface (a lot of printer drivers & other shit install addons), updates Flash & such automatically, etc.

Plus advertising helps Chrome tremendously.

Most problems I've had with bloat in Firefox relate to bad plugins (Shockwave, Flash, etc.) and bad addons.

If you've updated all your plugins to their latest versions, disabling all of your addons and enabling them one by one until you find what's leaking can be helpful.

In my experience, Firebug is an awesome and flexible tool, but it leaks. I only enable it when I need to. That's one example.

SRWare Iron is a joke; go with a Chromium build if you're looking for a completely open source version of Chrome, then disable the four options SRWare codes out entirely. They'll remain persistently disabled between installs (I just use the builds of Chromium provided by Google and update occasionally).

The WebRequest API (experimental) is promising but at this time it doesn't touch what Firefox has; Chrome/Chromium simply do not permit extensions the same level of access.

There are only a few real world browsing scenarios that I have encountered with Chrome (vs. FF7) that Chrome is faster, and sometimes I have encountered the inverse. However it depends on the machine; on slower machines, Chrome is a lot faster, and Opera is great for older PCs because it'll run circles around both.

Adblock Plus for Chrome is incomplete and cannot block many elements properly, including those loaded by legitimate resources (say, a Flash player); see the many issues merged into this Chromium issue.

RequestPolicy works great in conjunction with NoScript. Don't know if it works with Firefox mobile (doubt it), but it's great for site specific permissions on the desktop.

I am confident that you can sniff wireless traffic if you're just using WPA(2) with a PSK because I've done it on my own network. If you give the neighbors your passphrase, they can sniff you.

There are options such as using multiple APs in DD-WRT, or using an enterprise WPA method where you have a login for your stuff (nerd/securepassword) and give one to the public (public/publicpass).

Unless the sync is optional, or it allows the user to use a key separate from the credentials that requires a re-sync if you lose it (like Firefox Sync) where the provider can't tell what you store on their servers (encrypted/decrypted locally), it'll bar me from buying Apple products ever again.

RTFA and you see that, as many of us already know, you can get a court order to get the exact identity of the account holder, so the problem as described by the summary quote is not the real issue. Rather, just because you know the account holder does not mean that you can prove that the account holder, or whoever you have on the stand, is the one that infringed.

Despite rear-end covering clauses in the terms of most home ISPs that state that the account holder is liable for everything that goes across their connection, most courts won't accept that. I wouldn't be willing to test it, but it's a very valid point of defense. The number of people with open Wi-Fi is staggering, and even then there are attacks which work on WEP (a ton) and WPA (GPU accelerated attacks can get passphrases in under a minute on many routers), which is the maximum security many home routers in use are capable of. That makes this point even more valid.

Giving funds to telecom companies always turns out productively, right?

Sony uses ADEPT DRM on its books (if I recall correctly. Barnes & Noble uses their own format (the decryption tool is called ignoble), I can't find any solid confirmation but the rumor is that Apple is using FairPlay on their ePUBs.

Decryption tools exist (at least for ADEPT and B&N) but I don't know if that's the case with Apple (I would guess that the answer is yes) but it is a major problem with portability.

Amazon uses their own DRM which is pretty easy to circumvent (With tools); once you do, conversion via a tool like Calibre to another format (e.x. ePUB) is trivial. Couple mouse clicks.