I already switched to Vivaldi some time ago, because it has a ton of cool features in addition to native vertical tabs, but for Tree Style Tab, there is a new version that is actually compatible with Firefox 57. That new version actually got automatically installed when Firefox updated itself on my Mac.

The extension is a complete rewrite, and because of security restrictions, it is no longer able to hide the regular, horizontal tab bar at the top. This is a kinda ugly and also means that you no longer get an increase in the vertical space that is available for content, which was always a nice bonus. Aside from that, the new Tree Style Tab seemed to work well in my brief test.

I'm using Opera with the Simple Vertical Tabs extension and am pretty happy with it. Opera is actually a decent option if you have realized how wonderful vertical tabs are, but also need compatibility with existing Chrome-only extensions (Tabs Outliner, in my case) and are therefore prevented from using Firefox with Tree Style Tabs.

Another option would be the Vivaldi browser, which supports vertical tabs natively. It just entered beta, so it still has some rough edges, but it does already look promising. Vivaldi also supports Chrome extensions, but unlike Opera only many but not all of them currently.

It never fails to annoy me when people take snippets of theoretical psychology and redistribute them as truth. Scientists' views of which parts of the brain are responsible for which characteristics of human life change on almost a daily basis, yet phrases such as "language centre" or "mammalian brain" are constantly being used in a way that presents them as definite fact.

Tell me about it, those mammalian brain theory advocates are getting on my nerve lately, too. I mean, the existence of so called mammals has not even been sufficiently established and here are these people talking about some kind of futuristic computational super weapon that these things are supposed to possess. What ever happened to scientific integrity?

On a more serious note, though, I fully agree with your basic point that there is not much worse than people taking concepts from a discipline they know almost nothing about (in this case cognitive neuroscience) and then throwing them around as buzz words and making theoretical claims that make you cringe if you have some basic understanding of the material.