In the mean time they have made it substantially more difficult to configure the rejection of cookies.
Jesus... I'm actually thinking IE is better at this point.
Pay no attention to Firefox's built-in cookie-handling interface; it's designed for Joe Kegger — not computer nerds and/or privacy control-freaks. Get whatever cookie-handling plugin(s) that'll give you the level of control you need.
Another cookie plugin I like is Self-Destructing Cookies, which provides "delete-on-tab-close;" "delete-on-browser-close;" and "never delete." Unlike CookieSafe, however, it lacks a function for viewing the complete rule-set — only the rule in use for the currently-selected tab's domain.
* If I remember correctly, there's a different version or branch of CookieSafe that's incompatible with recent versions of Firefox, plus a "Lite" version that's little better than Firefox's built-in level of control.
>You should move to a warmer city where you don't need to be so wasteful.
Typical liberal, tells everyone else how to live.
"[Telling] everyone else how to live" is authoritarianism, not liberalism. Authoritarianism comes in both left and right flavors — neither palatable, in my opinion.
Another confirmation that our idea of the internet has devolved in the hands of entrepeneurs.
I'm with you. Some people seem to have had it drilled into their heads that they've got some moral duty to download and expose themselves to corporate propaganda ((i.e., advertizements) and the malware* that frequently accompanies it), lest the Internet shrivel up and die. They forget that aside from spam, the Internet started out nearly ad-free, and that ads were scarce for a while in the beginning of the 1990s web-boom.
I don't think it'd necessarily be a bad thing if ad-dependent content disappeared; what would remain would be material that's important enough that someone's willing to ask for donations, pay out of their own pocket — or both — in order to make it freely available. Wikipedia (for instance) seems to work fine using this model, and is better for it, I think, than if it kowtowed to corporate-huckster "benefactors."
* I consider the ads themselves a form of malware — mental malware meant to manipulate peoples' purchase decisions (as manipulation is the intent behind propaganda of any type).