How FireFox 22 Just Broke Your Browsing Experience (If It Did)

Hey, everybody. This is a public service announcement for anybody whose Firefox recently updated (this is often automatic depending on your settings, you may not have known it happened) and is now wondering why all the text and images on ErosBlog (and other websites you visit) suddenly started looking too large, and messing up page layouts.

First of all, the easy fix: any time you’re looking at a web page and the content is too large or too small, you can adjust it by holding down the control key (I think it’s the “command” key on Apples, the one with this symbol: ⌘) and hitting your plus (+) or minus (-) keys. If you get hopelessly screwed up, cntrl-0 will reset you to the default size, and then a single plus or minus will usually get you to where you want to go.

So, what in the hell happened?

This thread has all the bloody gory details. Bottom line is, it’s your typical case of open-source developer “damn the users” hubris, potentially affecting anybody running Firefox who recently got auto-updated to version 22. Apparently the developers wanted to better support high-pixel-density screens. So they put in “support” for that. Which means that if you’ve got a larger screen of normal pixel density and (like many people) you’ve got it set in Windows to display everything at 125% of normal (so that windows icons and other user interface stuff are not hopelessly tiny) FireFox is now “respecting” that setting by displaying web content 125% larger than it did before the update. Which, of course, can break the crap out of the layout of the web pages you read. Even if the pages are well-coded and don’t break, everything will now appear larger than before. Firefox developers? They don’t care, it works great on the newest niftiest Retina displays so it’s “operation success” for them!

Of course there are lots of ways for users to fix this on a computer-by-computer and website-by-website basis, starting with the “cntrl -/+” trick I highlighted above. The linked thread tells you how to dig “under the hood” in FireFox to set it back the way it was. But of course that’s useless for the vast majority who will never understand why the FireFox update broke their web experience in the first place. Yes, I’m sure there’s some beautiful ivory-tower explanation about how this is more standards-compliant and better for everybody in the long run, but meanwhile, hundreds of thousands of people around the world with legacy monitors and setups labor on, with no idea why their their web experience just got broken and no clue how to fix it. It really bothers me, sometimes, the extent to which the people who build the internet are devoid of sympathy for the masses who use it but have no conceptual toolbox for fixing it when techies callously break it for them in the name of progress.

Here’s another Mozilla support thread that has more detail on the problem and some of the potential workarounds. The takeaway for me: “Unfortunately, there’s no single setting … that will make everything look like Firefox 21 if your Windows DPI is anything other than 100%.”

Similar Sex Blogging:

• The High Priests Of WordPress

Google Glass: No Fuck For You!

Imagine if Google programmed its servers to go through all the emails you send via Gmail and replace all the cuss words with asterisks. You’d be mad, right? Well, that’s pretty much what the voice recognition engine that powers Google Glass does:

In order to write emails or text messages with Google Glass, you dictate words. The device is pleasantly reliable at transcribing things you say … unless you happen to have a foul mouth. In that case, it’ll make what you say “safe for work,” even if you don’t want to be censored.

Geek.com’s Russell Holly was among the first to notice that the voice-to-text feature on Google Glass, much like that on Android, cleans up naughty words. If you drop an f-bomb, Glass will transcribe it as “f***.” That favorite four-letter word for “excrement” becomes “s***.” A female canine becomes “b****.” There doesn’t appear to be a way to circumvent this censorship.

No big deal, you’re probably thinking. A default setting in the voice recognition engine which they were probably using for something else first, something bland and corporate where censorship was a sensible default. They’ll change it. Sure. No doubt they will.

More interesting is what this tells us about the future, a future in which everything we perceive and everything we express is transmitted through many layers of data processing, layers that are owned by entities that do not work for us and do not have our best interests at heart.

Google already routinely tweaks its search algorithm so that some things just don’t show up so well in the results. Sometimes this is for searcher benefit (nobody wants to see more machine-generated nonsense keyword pages) but sometimes it’s in response to outside legal pressure, as when they started reducing the page rank of search results from torrent sites.

What’s it going to be like, living in a world where everything you say passes through filters you can’t see and don’t control? Where, when you search for something you can’t find, you don’t know if it doesn’t exist or if it was silently filtered from your search results? When someone says something to you, did they actually say that? Or were their words edited on the fly?

I have a friend who told me at length about the absurdly reductionist version of this he encountered in a MMORPG for children. Playing with his own children, he learned that the game was “defended” from profanity by not having a chat feature of any kind. Instead, all communication was selected from menus of pre-written possible dialog. Of course these did not include any cussing. The strongest disapprobation one could express was a stiff “You stink!” But of course there were many things the players wished to communicate that were not on the menus. Like prisoners of war, they quickly evolved visual codes for communicating arbitrary sentiments; I’ve forgotten the details, but at least one approach was the old “spell out words on the ground by dropping small pieces of loot” routine.

As Violet Blue put it in her Sex Tech roundup that led me to this Google Glass story, “if we wanted to be treated like children all our lives, this would be great.”

Going the other way into dystopian horror, Charlie Stross wrote a novel called Glasshouse (the title being a British slang reference to a specific Victorian Panopticon-style prison) that features a back story in which much memory of human history has been lost because it was edited out during something called the Censorship Wars. It seems that travel and commerce had come to rely on nanotech “Assembler Gates” that disassembled you at one location, transmitted you and your data over interstellar distances, and reassembled you at your destination. During the censorship wars, sophisticated worms were used to attack this A-gate network. Corrupted gates began editing people and their data, including their memories. The result? A history with big empty holes in it.

We already live in a world where grownups understand the risks they are taking whenever they use hardware and software that isn’t open source. If it’s proprietary, you can’t see what it’s doing and you can’t force it to behave properly (work for you instead of for your adversaries). Unfortunately, when it comes to communications and social networks, closed and proprietary commercial systems are currently in dramatic ascendency. The best you can do is decide which systems you mistrust the least — or retire from the game and hide in your cave.

I do believe we’ll eventually evolve a world where we communicate and network and search via systems that are open and subject to comprehensive infosec audits (although the complexity of actually doing those audits will be so high, most of us will instead rely on deciding which set of auditors we mistrust least). Of course, that world won’t look much like this one, commercially or politically or economically. And we won’t get there until we have endured such “a long train of abuses and usurpations” that the cost of doing things any other way is universally understood to be unbearably high. Getting there? It’s going to really suck.

Similar Sex Blogging:

• Son Of "Anything Worth Doing..."
• Things Google Won't Let You Love
• Seven Things Google Doesn't Mind You Searching For
• Ning To Adult Social Networks: Bugger Off
• Penis Versus Clitoris: Google Has Decided
• Google's Secret Sexual No-Fly List
• Google's Mechanical Prude
• Google Hates Sex Blogs Now