kyub

Well, US politics are more important than those of most other countries, because they still are a huge world-wide influence. But once enough climate change related disasters happened, everything will change anyway (for the worse). If you're young enough to experience the resulting chaos in a couple of decades, you should start preparing for that now (e.g. saving up, not buying houses near oceans, and so on), instead of worrying about more temporary and short-lived political decisions. Unless they directly and significantly affect your life in the short term already, of course. Humanity does and will not be able to fight the climate change based on past and current observations, so buckle up.

Problem is, when you don't oppose stuff like that, stuff like that gets added more and more and it's all opt-out and some day you'll have an update and something's turned on by default and you don't realize that for a year or so and then you're like "shit, was this really on all the time". Even worse when they hide settings well in the UI, or use dark patterns to annoy or trick you to enable a setting that's actually bad for you.

Opt-out stuff is just bad, even in small doses. It's always kind of a scam. I wish Mozilla wouldn't need that kind of stuff. I mean they could be the knight-in-shining-privacy-armor browser, compared to Chrome/Edge/Opera/.... But they are all similar unfortunately (by default). Yes, Firefox is still less worse than Chrome/Edge/Opera are by default. But "less worse" doesn't equal "good". Yes, you can configure Firefox to behave well, and by using a good preconfigured user.js these settings also will stick after updates. But you shouldn't have to do that in the first place. The common user doesn't do that and shouldn't have to. The Firefox forks like LibreWolf or Mullvad Browser for example do not have anything bad enabled by default. And it's likely they won't ever have anything bad enabled after updates. So it is possible. The only reason the common browser makers aren't doing it is because that gives them (or their business partners) less data/money.

MI is great, I played 1+2 when they were new (in the 90s), they were brilliant back then. These days, they're probably still good point&click adventure games. There were some special editions or remasters which probably make them play well on modern machines. They belong to a long list of awesome LucasArts point&click adventures during the 90s and early 2000s. Most of these games are great. You should definitely try them out, especially if there are remasters available. But you can also play the originals using ScummVM most likely. Ron Gilbert is like the mastermind behind the series. He still creates adventure games to this day. And they're all pretty good, but the genre is kind of niche these days. It wasn't niche back then. It was just as big as action or soulslike games are today. The Monkey Island titles were probably the most successful or popular ones of the bunch. But there are some others which are equally good. Adventure games are rare these days but basically they are like puzzle games where you have to solve certain situations by combining items, finding items in the first place, trying different approaches, and so on. You kind of know once you've overcome a challenge when you were able to progress further in the game. There's little to no handholding, but also little to no handholding needed. There's one timing-based riddle in the original Monkey Island which I never liked that much, but it's still a funny one. It's not hard but it doesn't really fit the genre well because nothing else is timing-based. It does fit the game's art, setting and humor well though. The soundtrack is nice indeed. This is probably the most well-known track: https://invidious.nerdvpn.de/watch?v=FoT5qK6hpbw

Yes.

If you still want to play such "modern" games loaded with spyware, I recommend a dedicated only-for-gaming PC (running Linux of course*) using a different IP address than your main system (probably a notebook), for example by using a VPN on one but not the other. I'd recommend using the VPN for the gaming machine, it's less of a risk there, it allows for easy circumvention of geo-blocking, etc. If you need to access some services (e.g. chat) from both machines, create a separate account for it. Don't share account credentials between machines. In fact, act as if the gaming machine is permanently infected with random stuff "required" for modern games, and isolate it accordingly. This is just an idea how to mitigate those problems and don't let them creep into to your real machine where non-game-related data could leak out as a result. But you're still going to support the developer doing this which is not recommended.

*) Why still no Windows, in this isolated case, you ask? Well, because it's important to fight MS' monopoly on gaming machines, so don't support it by running it and contributing to its marketshare. Instead, run Linux and enjoy watching Windows' sinking market share. In fact, if you can, don't support such games either by not playing them, that would be the ideal solution. But this is written under the presumption that you or your friends still want to play it and you kind of feel left out otherwise.

Yes, but my post is for the people who DO care about privacy issues. I also don't like the defeatist's attitude. You can always start making things better. My post is for those who want to make a better informed decision, that's all.

Yeah, you should use Linux regardless. ;-)

Well this whole area is mostly based on deceit. Like if they claim they MAY do something they will absolutely do it all the time, if they claim they aren't getting anything from it, it just means they aren't getting anything directly, but indirectly instead, or from a different involved party. I also like the message at the top of the page: "Under certain circumstances, you have rights under data protection laws in relation to your personal data.". Under some circumstances you have rights. Which is weirdly accurate. Because in most circumstances, they will just sh*t on data protection rights. Which is also evident by everything being opt-out, rather than opt-in. And then, most likely, even when you disable everything, data will still flow somewhere. Then again, it's an industry-wide problem. Not specific to Jagex.

Reasons are the data transmissions happening by default and Mozilla's questionable inclusion of add-on things like Pocket. See for example:

https://www.kuketz-blog.de/mozilla-firefox-datensendeverhalten-desktop-version-browser-check-teil20/

vs.

https://www.kuketz-blog.de/librewolf-datensendeverhalten-desktop-version-browser-check-teil8/ and https://www.kuketz-blog.de/mullvad-browser-datensendeverhalten-desktop-version-browser-check-teil22/

You might need to translate the site to English. If you compare that, you can see why it's easy to recommend the forks over the original. That said, you CAN configure Firefox to also behave well, but that takes an extra effort. It is far from there by default.

Well, they're only doing what they announced already like 1-2 years ago. So we knew it was coming. This is also accompanied by Google making YouTube more restrictive when viewed with adblockers. Google is (somewhat late, to be honest) showing its teeth against users who block ads. I always expected it to happen but it took them quite some time. Probably they wanted to play the good guys for long enough until most users are dependent on their services, and now their proprietary trap is very effective.

On the desktop, you should switch to a good Firefox fork right now. Firefox can also be used but needs configuring before it's good. The forks LibreWolf or Mullvad Browser are already very good out of the box. There's the potential issue of the forks not being updated fast enough, but so far these two have been fast. Mullvad shares a lot of configuration with the Tor Browser, so using it may break some sites. LibreWolf might be "better" for the average user because of that, but otherwise I think Mullvad is the best Firefox fork overall.

On mobile, Firefox-based browsers aren't recommended, because on Android, the sandboxing mechanism of Firefox is inferior to that of the Chromium-based browsers. And on iOS, all browsers (have to) run on Apple's proprietary Webkit engine anyway, but well this is Apple we're talking about so of course it's all locked-down and restricted. It's one of the reasons I don't even like talking about Apple that much, just be aware that as an iOS user, your choice doesn't mean as much when it comes to browsers, and your browser might not behave like you think it does on other platforms.

So on mobile, I'd suggest things like Brave, Cromite or Mull. Or Vanadium (GrapheneOS). If the browser doesn't have built-in adblocking capability which sidesteps the MV3 restrictions, make sure to use an ad-blocking DNS server, so your browser doesn't have to do it. But you still need it. Adblocking not only helps you retain your sanity when browsing the web in 2024, but it also proactively secures you against known and unknown security threats coming from ads. So adblocking is a security plus, a privacy plus, and a sanity plus. It's absolutely mandatory. As long as the ad industry is as terrible as it is, you should continue using adblocks. All the time. On every device and on every browser.

The ad industry is itself to blame for this. There could in theory be such a thing like acceptable ads, but that would require ads to be static images/text, not fed by personal data, and not dynamically generated by random scripts which could compromise your security, and not overly annoying. Since that is probably never going to happen, you should never give up using adblockers. Since they basically fight you by reducing your security and privacy, you have a right to defend yourself via technical means.

While this does seem overly restrictive and out of place there, the result of this isn't bad, because everyone should be at the most recent vesion at all times, period. If you aren't, you're exposed to more security holes and bugs. So it's weird that that program forces you to do that, but it's still not bad that you're forced to do it. If you get what I mean. For some less-caring users who'd otherwise never install updates, forced updates are actually a net positive.

"We", no. "Too many", yes. In general, hard dependencies on proprietary software or services are often overlooked or ignored as potential future problems. Recent examples of this are Microsoft and VMware. Once the vendor changes things so that you don't like anymore, or drives up prices like crazy, you'll quickly realize that you have a problem you can't solve other than switching, which you might not even be prepared to do short-term.

The Windows world now experiences this because Microsoft is no longer interested in maintaining a somewhat quality operating system, they are mostly interested in milking their user base for data, and don't hesitate to annoy or even disrupt their user base's workflows in a try to achieve that goal.

Many Windows users are currently looking at Linux because of this, but the more your whole workflow is based on dependencies to proprietary Windows-only software, the harder your time to switch will be. If you still use Windows today, you should at least start using more open source or cross platform software, which also will work on Linux, because you are on a sinking ship and there will probably be a time when you can't take MS' BS anymore and want to switch. Make it easier for you in the future by regarding Linux compatibility in the hard- and software you use today.

https://system76.com/laptops

https://www.tuxedocomputers.com/en/Linux-Hardware/Linux-Notebooks.tuxedo