subject:"\[OT\] Google search default lang."

Re: [still OT?] Google cookie problem - was [Re: [OT] Google search default lang.]

2011-08-14 Thread Scott Ferguson


On 15/08/11 05:36, Brian wrote:

On Mon 15 Aug 2011 at 02:28:27 +1000, Scott Ferguson wrote:

[This is a blatent attempt to deflect criticism away from Google]


Put whatever paranoid spin on it that you want. I don't care who places 
the advertisements - I don't want to download or view them.





I don't know how people cope without Noscript and AdBlock Plus - that


Very easily.



Cheers

--
“We gotta come to some new ideas about life folks ok? I'm not being 
blase about abortion, it might be a real issue, it might not, doesn't 
matter to me. What matters is that if you believe in the sanctity of 
life then you believe it for life of all ages. That's what I hate about 
this child-worship syndrome going on. "Save the children! They're 
killing children! How many children were at Waco? They're killing 
children!" What does that mean? They reach a certain age and they're off 
your [beep] love-list? [beep] your children, if that's the way you think 
then [beep] you too. You either love all people of all ages or you shut 
the [beep] up.”

~ Bill Hicks


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4e487ce5.4090...@gmail.com

Re: [still OT?] Google cookie problem - was [Re: [OT] Google search default lang.]

2011-08-14 Thread Brian

On Mon 15 Aug 2011 at 02:28:27 +1000, Scott Ferguson wrote:

[This is a blatent attempt to deflect criticism away from Google]

> I don't know how people cope without Noscript and AdBlock Plus - that  

Very easily.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110814193642.GU14528@desktop

Re: [still OT?] Google cookie problem - was [Re: [OT] Google search default lang.]

2011-08-14 Thread Scott Ferguson

On 15/08/11 03:36, Walter Hurry wrote:

On Mon, 15 Aug 2011 02:28:27 +1000, Scott Ferguson wrote:

Adblock - leave the ads on the server where they belong. Unless they pay
me to view their advertising they can just go and try reproduce with
themselves.

Just to comment on a possible alternative approach:

I don't need any Firefox plugins to block unwanted advertising; I just
use a hosts file. I download the one from nightly, use dos2unix on it, and then merge it with my 'stub'
hosts file. Works very well indeed.

:-) Sometimes referred to as the APK approach (a famous troll) who
devoted his life to promoting the hosts file as a cure for everything -
more than just a filter - it's a firewall - it's an antivirus - it stops
spyware, fixes your car, and makes you look thin! Last I heard *his*
hosts files were around the 12MB mark!
Hosts files work fine I guess (they certainly keep you busy!) - though
they lack the fine grain control (wildcards, selected fileextensions,
regular expressions) of AdBlock Plus, protection against cross-site
scripting, element hiding, the ability to block flash and java elements
- and the reporting ability. And it's easy to write new extensions for it.
You could probably import the basis of a host block list from an AdBlock
subscription.
NoScript combined with AdBlock (they're both in the repositories) allow
you to remove the mouse-overs and the embedded (javascript written) ads
as well. Host files will only remove some ads, and they can't do squat
about floating divs or javascript document writes.
I haven't seen any ads in some years - it's always a wake up when I see
other peoples screens. :-(
I prefer to keep my hosts files as small, simple static DNS lists. But
another weapon against unwanted ads is a good thing. I certainly used
them for many years to block sites ads - I still use them to stop people
from loading sites the networks have banned (saves the
desktop/network/firewall department wars). It's a constant war of
escalation between Adblock and the advertisers - the outcome is certain,
so I'm just going to enjoy it while I can - there may come a time when a
hosts file may be my only choice.

Cheers

--
“We gotta come to some new ideas about life folks ok? I'm not being
blase about abortion, it might be a real issue, it might not, doesn't
matter to me. What matters is that if you believe in the sanctity of
life then you believe it for life of all ages. That's what I hate about
this child-worship syndrome going on. "Save the children! They're
killing children! How many children were at Waco? They're killing
children!" What does that mean? They reach a certain age and they're off
your [beep] love-list? [beep] your children, if that's the way you think
then [beep] you too. You either love all people of all ages or you shut
the [beep] up.”

~ Bill Hicks

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4e480f2e.9070...@gmail.com

Re: [still OT?] Google cookie problem - was [Re: [OT] Google search default lang.]

2011-08-14 Thread Scott Ferguson

On 15/08/11 03:36, Walter Hurry wrote:

On Mon, 15 Aug 2011 02:28:27 +1000, Scott Ferguson wrote:

Adblock - leave the ads on the server where they belong. Unless they pay
me to view their advertising they can just go and try reproduce with
themselves.

Just to comment on a possible alternative approach:

:-) Sometimes referred to as the APK approach (a famous troll) who
devoted his life to promoting the hosts file as a cure for everything -
more than just a filter - it's a firewall - it's an antivirus - it stops
spyware, fixes your car, and makes you look thin! Last I heard *his*
hosts files were around the 12MB mark!
Hosts files work fine I guess (they certainly keep you busy!) - though
they lack the fine grain control (wildcards, selected fileextensions,
regular expressions) of AdBlock Plus, protection against cross-site
scripting, element hiding, the ability to block flash and java elements
- and the reporting ability. And it's easy to write new extensions for it.
You could probably import the basis of a host block list from an AdBlock
subscription.
NoScript combined with AdBlock (they're both in the repositories) allow
you to remove the mouse-overs and the embedded (javascript writen) ads
as well. Host files will only remove some ads, and they can't do squat
about floating divs or javascript document writes.
I haven't seen any ads in some years - it's always a wake up when I see
other peoples screens. :-(
I prefer to keep my hosts files as small, simple static DNS lists. But
another weapon against unwanted ads is a good thing. I certainly used
them for many years to block sites ads - I still use them to stop people
from loading sites the networks have banned (saves the
desktop/network/firewall department wars). It's a constant war of
escalation between Adblock and the advertisers - the outcome is certain,
so I'm just going to enjoy it while I can.

Cheers

~ Bill Hicks

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4e480eb8.4090...@gmail.com

Re: [still OT?] Google cookie problem - was [Re: [OT] Google search default lang.]

2011-08-14 Thread Walter Hurry

On Mon, 15 Aug 2011 02:28:27 +1000, Scott Ferguson wrote:

> Adblock - leave the ads on the server where they belong. Unless they pay
> me to view their advertising they can just go and try reproduce with
> themselves.

Just to comment on a possible alternative approach:

I don't need any Firefox plugins to block unwanted advertising; I just 
use a hosts file. I download the one from  nightly, use dos2unix on it, and then merge it with my 'stub' 
hosts file. Works very well indeed.

-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/j2912j$uud$1...@dough.gmane.org

Re: [still OT?] Google cookie problem - was [Re: [OT] Google search default lang.]

2011-08-14 Thread Scott Ferguson


On 15/08/11 01:32, � wrote:

On Mon, 15 Aug 2011 00:39:05 +1000, Scott Ferguson wrote:


On 14/08/11 23:31, � wrote:

  ^
You're still with the black diamond issue :-P


Yes it's a consequence of me deciding that not using UTF-8 was more 
problem than using it - occasionally I flick over to the old iso to make 
sure the black diamond is who I think it is.





Mea culpa - I thought that comment was made by Richard...


Yep, it was me.

My relation with Google is now very distant and cold. But it's not just
me who thinks in that way, the web is full of complaints about this new
Google policy of "use our services like we want to be used or fly away".


It's a natural consequence of shareholders flexing their muscles I guess 
- now they're starting to tell the point-headed gits how to do their 
job... every portfolio manager thinks they're Steve "throw a chair" 
Balmer when they're holding blocks of shares they don't own. If I hear 
Brin or Page are starting to sell shares I'd dump mine and run - it's 
those folks and the brains they brought with them that make Google 
attractive (that and the fact that without them it'd just be Microsoft 
and Apple).





Politely letting them know you miss the functionality helps - Sagar
Kamdar and Matt Dunn are very nice, , smart, responsive, and helpful
(and influential). They understand tipping points and the importance of
keeping bleeding edge adopters happy. *You* should find a friendly ear
there ;-p :-D


I will take note. But again, Google forums are full of unger users about
this:

http://www.google.com/webhp?complete=0&hl=en#sclient=psy&hl=en&complete=0&site=webhp&source=hp&q=google+disable+autocomplete&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=43b3d7638083a689&biw=1280&bih=888
http://www.google.com/webhp?complete=0&hl=en#sclient=psy&hl=en&complete=0&site=webhp&source=hp&q=google+disable+instant+preview&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=43b3d7638083a689&biw=1280&bih=888


Noted: seems many of them post on youtube too :-(
Hence my use of the word "polite".

I don't know how people cope without Noscript and AdBlock Plus - that 
they make Google more useable is just a bonus. Mainly the make pages 
load faster and give pages back to content not annoying ads, spyware, 
and bloody pop-up mouse-overs!




It's hard to believe they are not aware of this>>>:-)


It's the nature of organisations - the people that build the products 
(and care about them) get promoted to positions where they spend most of 
their time in meetings, and the people on the front-line tend to be 
empty headed Outlook using (no, I'm not making that up) techno fools - 
with "people skills" - salespeople and *spit* marketers - making 
promises the engineers can't keep. Take something beautiful and make it 
ugly, mutter, mutter, mutter...





As Google has been adding more and
more services it also has started to be more and more strict to what
they services have to look like.


Some of that is understandable as the products leave beta and have to be
supported better (the Ned and Chav factor). But they could give us the
choice to between beta testing products with choices, or using the
stricter production products (closing the labs is one of my biggest
complaints).


But Google search is not in a Beta stage, right? ;-)


Google search encrypted is, and Google image comparison search, and 
Google voice search...
They announced the launch of Google psychic search at the start of April 
- it still doesn't seem to work... so I'm guessing that's a beta too ;-D





No cookies. Which don't bother me - I clear them at the start of new
sessions (and I never install flash, so flash cookies are not an
option).


Ah, okay, you are doing the same as me with the flash exception (I have
it installed, but hope the flash plugin can be finally removed from the
face of the Earth as soon as possible :-P).


Rippem down.





True is that I don't care about they track me. They provide a free
service and have to make money from "something". Google adds are annoying
but not the ones we encounter when using Google search, I find most
annoying the adds that another sites are using in their web pages because
they are not very well identified and clicking on them by mistake is very
easy.



Adblock - leave the ads on the server where they belong. Unless they pay 
me to view their advertising they can just go and try reproduce with 
themselves.



- Can you get rif off the small preview image? Nope


Do you mean those annoying mouse-over javascript pop-ups page
previews? xul-ext-noscript fixes that.


I know there are many addons to avoid that but I neither want to keep
my browser full of third-party addons... an addon to fix each of the
things Google breaks? No, thanks, better fix Google>:-)


NoScript (and that's the Debian build) is the single most useful
Iceweasel plugin (IMNSHO). AdBlock_Plus'd be the second.


I will have to review it.


What is this advertisement thing of which you speak? ;-p
NoScript and AdBlock Plus - how

Re: [still OT?] Google cookie problem - was [Re: [OT] Google search default lang.]

2011-08-14 Thread Camaleón

On Mon, 15 Aug 2011 00:39:05 +1000, Scott Ferguson wrote:

> On 14/08/11 23:31, � wrote:
 ^
You're still with the black diamond issue :-P

>> On Sun, 14 Aug 2011 23:01:55 +1000, Scott Ferguson wrote:

>>> Google has used cookies since day one.
>>
>> Not as agressively as it is doing now.
> 
> Mea culpa - I thought that comment was made by Richard...

Yep, it was me. 

My relation with Google is now very distant and cold. But it's not just 
me who thinks in that way, the web is full of complaints about this new 
Google policy of "use our services like we want to be used or fly away".
 
>> Cookies were used -and are sill used- for tracking users and displaying
>> adds (which I find it okay) but I've never had  to use a specific URI
>> for Google to look like it was used to.
> 
> It's annoying - some of the Google people are very responsive, and other
> are downright obtuse.
> 
> Politely letting them know you miss the functionality helps - Sagar
> Kamdar and Matt Dunn are very nice, , smart, responsive, and helpful
> (and influential). They understand tipping points and the importance of
> keeping bleeding edge adopters happy. *You* should find a friendly ear
> there ;-p :-D

I will take note. But again, Google forums are full of unger users about 
this:

http://www.google.com/webhp?complete=0&hl=en#sclient=psy&hl=en&complete=0&site=webhp&source=hp&q=google+disable+autocomplete&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=43b3d7638083a689&biw=1280&bih=888
http://www.google.com/webhp?complete=0&hl=en#sclient=psy&hl=en&complete=0&site=webhp&source=hp&q=google+disable+instant+preview&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=43b3d7638083a689&biw=1280&bih=888

It's hard to believe they are not aware of this >>>:-)
 
>> As Google has been adding more and
>> more services it also has started to be more and more strict to what
>> they services have to look like.
> 
> Some of that is understandable as the products leave beta and have to be
> supported better (the Ned and Chav factor). But they could give us the
> choice to between beta testing products with choices, or using the
> stricter production products (closing the labs is one of my biggest
> complaints).

But Google search is not in a Beta stage, right? ;-)
 
>>> Edit =>  Preferences =>  Privacy =>  In the history section use the
>>> drop-down bar to select Custom =>  untick both of the cookies boxes.
>>
>> And what you get with that setting turned on?
> 
> No cookies. Which don't bother me - I clear them at the start of new
> sessions (and I never install flash, so flash cookies are not an
> option).

Ah, okay, you are doing the same as me with the flash exception (I have 
it installed, but hope the flash plugin can be finally removed from the 
face of the Earth as soon as possible :-P).

 - Can you remove auto-complete? Nope
>>>
>>> "Apparently" it's still possible in preferences - but preferences
>>> requires you to be logged into iGoogle, which counts as no (for me).
>>
>> Exactly! How in the hell would I need to "login" in a web search engine
>> for getting such option? That's no-sense.
> 
> If we could set those options in a plain text file... oh wait - that's
> like cookies :-D
> Seriously - most of the privacy concerns Google users have would
> evaporate if Google cookies were renamed Google preference and stored
> ~/.google_prefs with human readable values like:- autocomplete=off
> autosuggest=off
> etc, etc.

True is that I don't care about they track me. They provide a free 
service and have to make money from "something". Google adds are annoying 
but not the ones we encounter when using Google search, I find most 
annoying the adds that another sites are using in their web pages because 
they are not very well identified and clicking on them by mistake is very 
easy.

 - Can you get rif off the small preview image? Nope
>>>
>>> Do you mean those annoying mouse-over javascript pop-ups page
>>> previews? xul-ext-noscript fixes that.
>>
>> I know there are many addons to avoid that but I neither want to keep
>> my browser full of third-party addons... an addon to fix each of the
>> things Google breaks? No, thanks, better fix Google>:-)
> 
> NoScript (and that's the Debian build) is the single most useful
> Iceweasel plugin (IMNSHO). AdBlock_Plus'd be the second.

I will have to review it.
 
>> But I don't want to be plenty of addons! And what happens when you are
>> not in your computer or you use more than one browser? You have to care
>> about getting every addon to fix Google services just to have a happy
>> browsing? Nooope, not me. I'm not going to waste my time on that. When
>> I feel tired enough of what Google provides I will just do the same I
>> did with their webmail and use another MUA, so in this case, I'll use
>> another search engine.
> 
> I use two extensions and one search plugin - they live on a gmail
> account, so I install them where ever I use a browser. Generally I have
> access to my own machine - otherwise I've got USB keys (I pre

Re: [still OT?] Google cookie problem - was [Re: [OT] Google search default lang.]

2011-08-14 Thread Scott Ferguson


On 14/08/11 23:31, � wrote:

On Sun, 14 Aug 2011 23:01:55 +1000, Scott Ferguson wrote:


On 14/08/11 19:20, � wrote:

On Sat, 13 Aug 2011 14:10:39 -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:


Camaleón wrote:


(...)


Google is now forcing their users to use cookies


Google has used cookies since day one.


Not as agressively as it is doing now.


Mea culpa - I thought that comment was made by Richard...



Cookies were used -and are sill used- for tracking users and displaying
adds (which I find it okay) but I've never had  to use a specific URI for
Google to look like it was used to.


It's annoying - some of the Google people are very responsive, and other 
are downright obtuse.


Politely letting them know you miss the functionality helps - Sagar 
Kamdar and Matt Dunn are very nice, , smart, responsive, and helpful 
(and influential). They understand tipping points and the importance of 
keeping bleeding edge adopters happy. *You* should find a friendly ear 
there ;-p :-D



As Google has been adding more and
more services it also has started to be more and more strict to what they
services have to look like.


Some of that is understandable as the products leave beta and have to be 
supported better (the Ned and Chav factor). But they could give us the 
choice to between beta testing products with choices, or using the 
stricter production products (closing the labs is one of my biggest 
complaints).





They're not needed for searching.


Oh, of course. If I would have needed cookies for a simple search I would
have ditched Google since years :-)


Edit =>  Preferences =>  Privacy =>  In the history section use the
drop-down bar to select Custom =>  untick both of the cookies boxes.


And what you get with that setting turned on?


No cookies. Which don't bother me - I clear them at the start of new 
sessions (and I never install flash, so flash cookies are not an option).




I don't care about tracking, I allow all cookies for all of the sites, is
just that I delete them when I close the browser because I don't want my
browser get bloated in the next months.


You will need first party cookies for gmail and other services - there's
no other way to provide the functionality requires (javascript doesn't
do "back").


Again, allowing cookies is not a problem for me.


I neither see "apparent problems" (if by "no apparent problems" we mean
here that it simple works :-) ) when using Google search, is just that
I can't get it to work the way I like...

- Can you remove auto-complete? Nope


"Apparently" it's still possible in preferences - but preferences
requires you to be logged into iGoogle, which counts as no (for me).


Exactly! How in the hell would I need to "login" in a web search engine
for getting such option? That's no-sense.


If we could set those options in a plain text file... oh wait - that's 
like cookies :-D
Seriously - most of the privacy concerns Google users have would 
evaporate if Google cookies were renamed Google preference and stored 
~/.google_prefs with human readable values like:-

autocomplete=off
autosuggest=off
etc, etc.




http://www.google.com/webhp?complete=0 no longer seems to work :-( Maybe
if it annoyed me sufficiently I'd work out how to kill it (it's only
javascript).


"complete=0" works for me.


When I next have time to create some more Mycroft search plugins I'll 
try embedding that.





- Can you get rif off the small preview image? Nope


Do you mean those annoying mouse-over javascript pop-ups page previews?
xul-ext-noscript fixes that.


I know there are many addons to avoid that but I neither want to keep my
browser full of third-party addons... an addon to fix each of the things
Google breaks? No, thanks, better fix Google>:-)


NoScript (and that's the Debian build) is the single most useful 
Iceweasel plugin (IMNSHO). AdBlock_Plus'd be the second.





- Can you instruct Google search to stay in the language you started
browsing with? Nope


I believe you can. Use one of the Mycroft search plugins:-
http://mycroft.mozdev.org/google-search-plugins.html

Please try one and provide some feedback. There are a few about:config
search setting in Iceweasel that include %LOCALE% in the URI, and I've
yet to fully understand all of them. If what you want is not there (in
Mycroft search plugins) - let me know what language, search locality,
and country, etc are required and I'll put one up (when I get some more
time).

Make sure you turn off geolocation in Iceweasel to rule out problems
there:- about:config =>  geo.


But I don't want to be plenty of addons! And what happens when you are
not in your computer or you use more than one browser? You have to care
about getting every addon to fix Google services just to have a happy
browsing? Nooope, not me. I'm not going to waste my time on that. When I
feel tired enough of what Google provides I will just do the same I did
with their webmail and use another MUA, so in this case, I'll use another
search engine.


I use two exte

Re: [still OT?] Google cookie problem - was [Re: [OT] Google search default lang.]

2011-08-14 Thread Camaleón

On Sun, 14 Aug 2011 23:01:55 +1000, Scott Ferguson wrote:

> On 14/08/11 19:20, � wrote:
>> On Sat, 13 Aug 2011 14:10:39 -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:
>>
>>> Camaleón wrote:
>>
>> (...)
>>
 Google is now forcing their users to use cookies
> 
> Google has used cookies since day one. 

Not as agressively as it is doing now. 

Cookies were used -and are sill used- for tracking users and displaying 
adds (which I find it okay) but I've never had  to use a specific URI for 
Google to look like it was used to. As Google has been adding more and 
more services it also has started to be more and more strict to what they 
services have to look like.

> They're not needed for searching.

Oh, of course. If I would have needed cookies for a simple search I would 
have ditched Google since years :-)

> Edit => Preferences => Privacy => In the history section use the
> drop-down bar to select Custom => untick both of the cookies boxes.

And what you get with that setting turned on? 

I don't care about tracking, I allow all cookies for all of the sites, is 
just that I delete them when I close the browser because I don't want my 
browser get bloated in the next months.

> You will need first party cookies for gmail and other services - there's
> no other way to provide the functionality requires (javascript doesn't
> do "back").

Again, allowing cookies is not a problem for me.

>> I neither see "apparent problems" (if by "no apparent problems" we mean
>> here that it simple works :-) ) when using Google search, is just that
>> I can't get it to work the way I like...
>>
>> - Can you remove auto-complete? Nope
> 
> "Apparently" it's still possible in preferences - but preferences
> requires you to be logged into iGoogle, which counts as no (for me).

Exactly! How in the hell would I need to "login" in a web search engine 
for getting such option? That's no-sense.

> http://www.google.com/webhp?complete=0 no longer seems to work :-( Maybe
> if it annoyed me sufficiently I'd work out how to kill it (it's only
> javascript).

"complete=0" works for me.

>> - Can you get rif off the small preview image? Nope
> 
> Do you mean those annoying mouse-over javascript pop-ups page previews?
> xul-ext-noscript fixes that.

I know there are many addons to avoid that but I neither want to keep my 
browser full of third-party addons... an addon to fix each of the things 
Google breaks? No, thanks, better fix Google >:-)

>> - Can you instruct Google search to stay in the language you started
>> browsing with? Nope
> 
> I believe you can. Use one of the Mycroft search plugins:-
> http://mycroft.mozdev.org/google-search-plugins.html
>
> Please try one and provide some feedback. There are a few about:config
> search setting in Iceweasel that include %LOCALE% in the URI, and I've
> yet to fully understand all of them. If what you want is not there (in
> Mycroft search plugins) - let me know what language, search locality,
> and country, etc are required and I'll put one up (when I get some more
> time).
> 
> Make sure you turn off geolocation in Iceweasel to rule out problems
> there:- about:config => geo.

But I don't want to be plenty of addons! And what happens when you are 
not in your computer or you use more than one browser? You have to care 
about getting every addon to fix Google services just to have a happy 
browsing? Nooope, not me. I'm not going to waste my time on that. When I 
feel tired enough of what Google provides I will just do the same I did 
with their webmail and use another MUA, so in this case, I'll use another 
search engine.

>> I would have ditched Google search some time ago but I like their
>> addons like Image search and News. I wish DuckDuckGo could provide a
>> similar facilities...
>>
> Try Blekko - it's pretty good too. (anything but Bling)

Looks nice and also search for images. Thanks, I will add it to my 
bookmarks, very next to the Google entry...

Greetings,

-- 
Camaleón

-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/pan.2011.08.14.13.31...@gmail.com

Re: [still OT?] Google cookie problem - was [Re: [OT] Google search default lang.]

2011-08-14 Thread Scott Ferguson


On 14/08/11 19:20, � wrote:

On Sat, 13 Aug 2011 14:10:39 -0500, Richard Owlett wrote:


Camaleón wrote:


(...)


Google is now forcing their users to use cookies


Google has used cookies since day one. They're not needed for searching.
Edit => Preferences => Privacy => In the history section use the 
drop-down bar to select Custom => untick both of the cookies boxes.


You will need first party cookies for gmail and other services - there's 
no other way to provide the functionality requires (javascript doesn't 
do "back").





IS that your experience for http://www.google.com or whatever one has to
do to access gmail?


For their search engine, yes.

(as an aside comment, I also left Gmail's webmail and always try to use
Mutt instead for accessing into my e-mail account)


I just did a Google search with both JavaScript and cookies disabled
with no apparent problems. I plead guilty to using WinXP Pro as I've yet
to find a Linux distro that meets some of my peculiar requirements (i do
now hereby duck ;)


I neither see "apparent problems" (if by "no apparent problems" we mean
here that it simple works :-) ) when using Google search, is just that I
can't get it to work the way I like...

- Can you remove auto-complete? Nope


"Apparently" it's still possible in preferences - but preferences 
requires you to be logged into iGoogle, which counts as no (for me).

http://www.google.com/webhp?complete=0 no longer seems to work :-(
Maybe if it annoyed me sufficiently I'd work out how to kill it (it's 
only javascript).




- Can you get rif off the small preview image? Nope


Do you mean those annoying mouse-over javascript pop-ups page previews?
xul-ext-noscript fixes that.


- Can you instruct Google search to stay in the language you started
browsing with? Nope


I believe you can. Use one of the Mycroft search plugins:-
http://mycroft.mozdev.org/google-search-plugins.html

Please try one and provide some feedback. There are a few about:config 
search setting in Iceweasel that include %LOCALE% in the URI, and I've 
yet to fully understand all of them. If what you want is not there (in 
Mycroft search plugins) - let me know what language, search locality, 
and country, etc are required and I'll put one up (when I get some more 
time).


Make sure you turn off geolocation in Iceweasel to rule out problems there:-
about:config => geo.


I would have ditched Google search some time ago but I like their addons
like Image search and News. I wish DuckDuckGo could provide a similar
facilities...

Greetings,



Try Blekko - it's pretty good too. (anything but Bling)

Cheers

--
“People say "Iraq had the fourth largest army in the world". Yeah, 
maybe, but you know what, after the first 3 largest armies, there's a 
REAL big [beep] drop-off. The Hare Krishnas are the 5th largest army in 
the world, and they've already got all our airports.

”
~ Bill Hicks


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4e47c743@gmail.com

40 matches

Mail list logo