>"Unfortunately my bank has recently decreed that customers can't log into their online banking without first authorizing it thru their app."

If any of my banks (I use 3) required that, I would complain loudly and then close the account, making sure they knew why. Seriously. I don't want to "bank" on my phone, and I don't want use some bank's stupid "app" just so I can log into a website on from my desk. If they want increased security, then they should allow standard TOTP and I will use whatever off-line/non-cloud authenticator I choose, like Stratum.

>"I think that's kind of the point behind this - to unplug from social media and information overload, but"

But for the same price, you could have a much, much better phone, run anything you want/need, and CHOOSE not to install social crap like facebook, instagram, twitter, etc. And CHOOSE not to go onto stupid time-wasting sites in the browser? T9????? Seriously?

And why would one want to block Email? How is that doomscrolling, addicting, or forever distracting?

>"I guess that's no longer possible."

I have answered this question numerous times on Slashdot (presumably for the same few people reasking it over and over for some reason). They disabled the ability to remove update notifications in the Mozilla-downloaded packages. That is very likely never going to change.

If you are using Linux with a distro package, it will get updated easily through that and there will be no notifications inside Firefox, itself. I have no idea about MS-Windows or other platforms. If you don't want to update, then set a policy to turn off updates (applies to either mainline or ESR). In Linux, put:

{
    "policies": {
                "DisableAppUpdate": true
        }
}

into $INSTALLDIR/distribution

There is something similar for MS-Windows registry stuff, I believe.

ESR is a feature freeze version. So there will be much fewer changes and, thus, fewer updates and fewer new bugs which need updating as well. However, it will get all the same security updates as mainline, if they also affect the ESR version.

So, overall, there will be fewer updates.

As for complaining about getting update notifications, if you are using Linux with a distro package, it will get updated easily through that and there will be no notifications inside Firefox, itself. I have no idea about MS-Windows or other platforms. If you don't want to update, then set a policy to turn off updates (applies to either mainline or ESR). In Linux, put:

{
  "policies": {
        "DisableAppUpdate": true
    }
}

into $INSTALLDIR/distribution

There is something similar for MS-Windows registry stuff, I believe.

Don't have any such problems on any of my Linux desktops or the hundreds I manage. I would prefer they focus more on core stuff than other stuff, however.

>"Once FireFox is outlawed, only criminals will use FireFox."

Ug, I fear a life of crime is coming...

>"A gazillion of them supporting ad blockers."

And most of them are just me-too leaches, too cheap to perform actual development and support themselves. It is not like there is a rich browser diversity anymore, we are barely hanging on to anything NOT Google-controlled:

    "This will also impact other Chromium-based browsers, though the comment notes that other browsers can continue supporting these if they so desire. Microsoft Edge and Opera are likely to follow suit [with dropping support]."

So, how many of them are willing to actually maintain the code on their own for this? (Not that I care that much, because I use Firefox exclusively). A few might, but not a "gazillion." When you hitch your wagon to the Google beast, you are being mostly led around at their direction. And their interests are generally not user's interests.

It's a good thing we all use and promote Firefox (coupled with UBO). Right?

>"Voters in Switzerland have rejected an unprecedented far-right proposal to cap the country's population at 10 million"

That isn't "far right". In the past it was even a "left" position. But I guess everything has to be framed in ridiculous polarizing left/right ways now. Nearly half the population voted in favor, so it is certainly nowhere near "far" anything (implying it is fringe).

It is true that most systems now are set up as a pyramid scheme that requires ever-increasing population growth to be sustainable. But that isn't what I think of as ideal, nor sustainable. How many people is enough? They weren't proposing DECREASING population (which has lots of issues), just trying to hold it at a fixed level, which still included significant immigration.

>"I have 40 kWh of batteries in my home, for backup and time-shifting, and I participate in a grid-stabilization program with my power company."

OK, I was thinking more like grid backup, not just stabilization.

>"The grid never draws significant energy from my batteries [...] I see an otherwise-unexplained spike of 5-10 kW flowing from my batteries and into the grid, for a period of 2-5 minutes. 10 kW for 5 minutes is ~0.8 kWh, which is 2% of my house battery storage. I see a draw that large maybe once per week; usually it's much less. "

That sounds pretty reasonable.

>"What do I get for allowing the power company to do that? For the first year of participation, I got a check for $2000. For subsequent years I'll get bill credits of up to $50/month, applied to energy charges only. I'm not sure how much that will translate to, since my net energy purchase is usually zero (thanks to solar panels). It's a great deal for the first year. Beyond that... we'll see."

Looks like you have a good setup.

Thanks for the good/informational posting!

>"Which is a problem with those individuals, not the devices, or any apps, themselves."

Correct. But there is a reason we have controlled substances that are completely illegal, require a prescription, or are limited to those 21 and over and with additional restrictions. Or services, like gambling. In all those cases, you can say the problem is with "those individuals" who misuse or abuse them. But it doesn't stop society from recognizing the great risks/issues and trying to help prevent abuse. On the soft side- warnings, labels, education, guidelines, studies; on the medium side- limits on use, age restrictions, monitoring, abuse assistance programs; on the hard side- increasingly restricted access, or complete illegality.

As for phone/screen use, especially with minors, I think we should at least be in the "soft side" of doing something productive/positive. Recognizing there are a lot of people who don't know the risks and apparently can't seem to control themselves.

>"UK Scientists funded by big tech See Little Evidence for Claims Smartphones Are Rewiring Kids' Brains"

Um, exactly what "evidence" are they looking for? Something on various brain scans? I can guarantee there are lots of thought/behavior issues that can't be "seen." I don't think most people are claiming obsessive phone use is "rewiring" brain functions. But the evidence are the BEHAVIORS that are seen before/during/after long exposures, especially when combined with social media use on them. If there aren't studies showing this, then they aren't looking very hard.

For many, there are clearly addictive behaviors that cause them to suffer from constant distraction, anxiety, inability to focus, attention disorders, and various social interaction issues, especially if denied access to their screens for extended periods of time. And this affects adults as well as children. Children just tend to be more vulnerable.

For example, one survey showed 25% of people actually interact with their phones WHILE ACTIVELY DRIVING.... Illegal and clearly an extremely dangerous endeavor. 30% while at meals with others, 38% while using the bathroom (really???), 80% while walking around outside, ignoring traffic, other people, interesting sights, being situationally completely unaware.

There is a huge difference between sitting at a computer to perform school work or paid work, and carrying around an addictive, notification-pushing-nagging device everywhere that many people can't seem to ignore or put aside.

OK, I read it. But there is no theory behind why imposing additional cycling would be "good" for the batteries. Besides, they just say "potentially disproving." I am way beyond skeptical.

>"Without a pen and paper handy, he was stuck texting the idea to himself. Eggers doesn't own a smartphone. "It takes 20 minutes to write a sentence," Eggers said... It's a funny predicament for Eggers,"

Um, if he has a "dumb" cell phone at all that is on, it is tracking his location, essentially the same as a smartphone with GPS off.

He could carry a computer tablet with no cell modem and save stuff to internal storage or SD. It will enable a large on-screen keyboard and with option to voice type/edit off-line. Or a smart phone with no SIM card/data plan and GPS off. There are options.